Should posters on askaboutmoney be non-judgemental?

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
52,073
If someone asks for advice on askaboutmoney, should we simply answer the question and avoid any moralising?

A few case studies to illustrate the point.

A) A doesn't like paying tax. He is in a cash business and wants to buy a car for cash which he has not declared. But is afraid that Revenue will ask him where he got the cash. Should we tell him to say that he won it playing cards?

B) B doesn't like paying tax. He is in a cash business and has taken lots of cash out of the company. "Everyone in his line of work does it. He would get no work if he charged VAT." But he wants to buy a house now. Can we recommend an accountant to sort out a deal with the Revenue.

D) D took out a student loan 12 years ago. They didn't pay it back and left the country and did nothing about it as they hadn't intended to return to this country. The bank didn't bother chasing them. They are back in Ireland now and earning good money. When does the debt become statute barred? How do they keep it statute barred? They have the deposit to buy a house now with their partner. Will the student debt be a problem? They need a house but while, in principle, he would like to repay the student loan, he can't repay it and buy a house. Anyway, the bank should never have given so much money to students when they knew that most of them couldn't pay it back.

M) M hasn't paid their mortgage for years. The bank took legal action a few times, but he showed up in court with a sob story. The bank's legal team was incompetent and the case was always thrown out. He is in negative equity now but has decent earnings. He has just inherited €50k. He could keep the house if they wrote €100k off the mortgage and arrears. Could we recommend a good PIP who would sort out the lender which lent him the money so recklessly?

X) X bought a house with her partner 12 years ago. She was the high earner and provided the deposit. After two years they were in deep negative equity. They split up and he left the country. She came onto askaboutmoney asking how to deal with this. The lender can't restructure without his consent but he is refusing to engage telling her it's her problem. She was in financial services so keeping her credit record was critical so she borrowed from the family to make all the mortgage payments.

Y) Y bought a house with his partner 12 years ago. She was the high earner and provided the deposit. They split up and he left the country. He has now come back. The house is in positive equity and she wants to sell it as she is in a new relationship. He owns half the house. He is thinking of moving back in now as it's his house. He asks our advice on how to get the maximum from this situation. He is in a new relationship himself with a child with special needs so he really could do with the money. The law says he owns half the house so he wants to know how best to get this half, and more if possible. She is well paid, doesn't have kids and can well afford it.
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
If someone asks for advice on askaboutmoney, should we simply answer the question and avoid any moralising?
Click to expand...

I think the difficulty arises when the OP starts their own moralising and justifying their stance.

If respondents are curtailed on how they respond, I think, eventually, they'll give up responding.

Sometimes, the moral side has to be told too. If it goes into the realm of insults etc., that's what's Mods are for.

If AAM turns woke too, you might as well turn the key in the door and shut the site down Brendan.

My vote is to leave things as they are. It's working well. Why break it?
 
I think some of it is the old colonial ethos of avoiding paying taxes because the government are ruling over us. The attitude that other countries have is that paying my taxes helps all social services and makes the country better is not really present in some sectors in Ireland. So those users might think that this forum will help them wriggle around the regulations in a manner that may raise eyebrows to say the least.

But on the other-hand there are those posters who are so confused and muddled that they never realised there are ways to sort themselves out financially, and a few helpful posts really opens their eyes to how it can be financially beneficial to them to do things in a certain way.

I think the first few replies to a poster should be very non-judgemental. They rarely give all the information and may display an attitude that irritates frequent posters but they may if given a few simple facts realise where they are going wrong. Their follow up replies will usually show if they understand that people are trying to help.
 
I know this is more to do with the pile on with that guy who looked for advice on inheriting the house but that is a rare case on this forum. Generally, the advice given on this forum is non judgmental anyway and usually the major diversions are around people not paying debts and looking for advice on not paying them back. Posters are entitled to tell them that they should pay them back. Personal attacks shouldn't be allowed. "Crawl back under the rock you came out from" was one that I didn't think was appropriate. This is a well moderated site and if things get personal, take them down, otherwise, let people be judgmental, like there are in life.


Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie
 
Brendan Burgess said:
"Everyone in his line of work does it. He would get no work if he charged VAT."
Click to expand...

PaddyBloggit said:
I think the difficulty arises when the OP starts their own moralising and justifying their stance.
Click to expand...

Hi Paddy

I think you have articulated something which I was struggling with.

If someone comes along and says :
I welched on my student debts.
I have matured a lot since.
How do I resolve this?

They would get a lot of help.

Brendan
 
I think it very much depends on the attitude of the poster how they phrase and word the title and the opening post
If somebody comes on here genuinely looking for help they will get it
But if they come on here looking to cheat the system, well then open season!!!
 
I think the majority of the regular posters here are experienced enough in life and business to spot genuine cases.

Most people who come looking for advice are trying to do the right thing and pay their dues in as much as possible.

Some however show complete contempt and disregard for doing the right thing.

For what it's worth I would continue in the current set up.
 
The forum is “Askaboutmoney”, not “Castigatequestionableattitudes”.

Keep it simple and offer your advice if you have something to offer the OP.

If you disagree with their views or wish to question their attitude, say so, but refrain from insults or derogatory language. It’s a fine line, but personalising matters and joining pile-ons just detract from the quality of the thread and the opening question and any valuable advice gets lost in the mix.

I saw what happened yesterday with the returned emigrant/mortgage defaulter and found the moralising and insulting comments distasteful.

Silence is golden, sometimes.
 
Jayom75 said:
The forum is “Askaboutmoney”, not “Castigatequestionableattitudes”.

Keep it simple and offer your advice if you have something to offer the OP.

If you disagree with their views or wish to question their attitude, say so, but refrain from insults or derogatory language. It’s a fine line, but personalising matters and joining pile-ons just detract from the quality of the thread and the opening question and any valuable advice gets lost in the mix.

I saw what happened yesterday with the returned emigrant/mortgage defaulter and found the moralising and insulting comments distasteful.

Silence is golden, sometimes.
Click to expand...
I agree.
While posters yesterday may have been rightly annoyed, we shouldn't lose sight of the bigger picture
AAM offers good advice to people and people should feel welcome when if they have a stupid question.
Therefore the tone matters so we don't put others off.

I know the mods are volunteers, but the only thing I would have done differently yesterday is closed the thread a lot earlier.
 
Whenever somebody gives advice on this forum it is what the poster thinks at that point in time. The poster is entitled to a change of mind later, if she/he wishes.

Spoilers contribute here also and perhaps their query is genuine to some other reader (and perhaps not a poster here). If it ain't broken don't fix it. There are a few other things broken on the forum and nobody is fixing them so let's call a spade a spade.

I second the point made earlier; leave things as they are.
 
There was one post yesterday

Walked out (emigrated) on joint mortgage in 2014, coming into inheritance soon

which I felt was met with Trumpian Brutality by some other posters.

As LS400 stated in one replying post:
"He may not have handled the situation correctly, but we haven't lived his life these last number of years, and so we don't have the right to slaughter him out. Some of the attacking posts are absolutely disgraceful.

The original poster concerned might have been literally heart broken when his relationship broke up, it might have been the joint owner who had an affair with someone else, he could have hit the bottle, he might still be on anti-depressants etc He might currently have a child with special needs and requires a stable home etc.

Posters should be aware that people are reluctant to provide full details of their circumstances for fear of being identified, and thus they should not be judged as we do not have the full facts.

Posters should be aware that some people seeking help here may be highly stressed, and, in some cases, possibly suicidal. Attacking such posters with Trumpian Brutality is simply unjustified, and the Moderators should immediately remove offensive posts.

AAM has a good reputation for helping people. It should not become a "hate" forum for people to vent their anger and spleen. If it does become that type of forum then it should change its name to "Ask About Malice".

Jim Stafford
 
Using that recent example as a case in point, I think simply refusing to provide any advice or to help is the answer.

If someone needs advice around something genuine, great, but if it’s advice around illegal or demonstrably immoral behaviour than no.
 
How would you put all that into a guideline?

The primary function of askaboutmoney is to provide practical answers to practical questions.
If you do not approve of the behaviour or attitude of a poster, you are free to challenge it, but do not abuse the poster.
 
Jayom75 said:
The forum is “Askaboutmoney”, not “Castigatequestionableattitudes”.

Keep it simple and offer your advice if you have something to offer the OP.

If you disagree with their views or wish to question their attitude, say so, but refrain from insults or derogatory language. It’s a fine line, but personalising matters and joining pile-ons just detract from the quality of the thread and the opening question and any valuable advice gets lost in the mix.

I saw what happened yesterday with the returned emigrant/mortgage defaulter and found the moralising and insulting comments distasteful.

Silence is golden, sometimes.
Click to expand...
I would agree with this. I also followed the post in question and would concur it's not typical. However - I often get irritated by people giving their own two cents into a different question i.e. one which is essentially straightforward. One I remember from years ago went something like this - Is it legal for my neighbour to have a security camera which partially covers my property and records my movements. Cue several responses telling the OP to speak to their neighbour, how important neighbourly relations are, how unreasonable their neighbour might find the OP's personal habits etc. None of which was relevant IMO. Presumably the question has a straightforward answer, in the vein of - yes or no or maybe in certain circumstances.

Sometimes the responses are ill-informed themselves. As an example I got a sarcastic and judgmental reply from Brendan to one of my own posts in relation to the best way to tackle repayment / switching on a warehoused mortgage post PIA. Brendan assumed that I was attempting to avoid repayment even though I was now earning enough to deal with it. My new agreement didn't require me to start making payment at any point up until maturity. When I pointed this out, Brendan offered some other advices which were constructive and practical. This isn't always the case and posters can answer q's incorrectly or bring the thread off on a tangent and contribute nothing.

I would be adding a guideline to ask posters to pause and think before replying as to whether their contribution does anything to answer the original question. If you disapprove, then a bit of tumbleweed in response to a post sends its own message and if someone has already said - you should pay it back, then does adding your echo of that position really help? I don't know.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
if it’s advice around illegal or demonstrably immoral behaviour than no.
Click to expand...

That is why I put up the tax evasion example. The only answer to that is "You should get your tax affairs in order." We would delete any post which suggested a duplicate set of accounts.

But my idea of moral behaviour is probably different from yours. And it might be different again if I were struggling financially.

Brendan
 
Jim Stafford said:
There was one post yesterday

Walked out (emigrated) on joint mortgage in 2014, coming into inheritance soon

which I felt was met with Trumpian Brutality by some other posters.

As LS400 stated in one replying post:
"He may not have handled the situation correctly, but we haven't lived his life these last number of years, and so we don't have the right to slaughter him out. Some of the attacking posts are absolutely disgraceful.

The original poster concerned might have been literally heart broken when his relationship broke up, it might have been the joint owner who had an affair with someone else, he could have hit the bottle, he might still be on anti-depressants etc He might currently have a child with special needs and requires a stable home etc.

Posters should be aware that people are reluctant to provide full details of their circumstances for fear of being identified, and thus they should not be judged as we do not have the full facts.

Posters should be aware that some people seeking help here may be highly stressed, and, in some cases, possibly suicidal. Attacking such posters with Trumpian Brutality is simply unjustified, and the Moderators should immediately remove offensive posts.

AAM has a good reputation for helping people. It should not become a "hate" forum for people to vent their anger and spleen. If it does become that type of forum then it should change its name to "Ask About Malice".

Jim Stafford
Click to expand...
Jim

I was one who responded on the above thread. Looking at the details provided the poster returned to Ireland in 2019 and spent two years not dealing with the situation.

Leaving aside how or what happened in 2014 regarding the relationship etc. it appears from the poster they were only interested in the matter now because of a possible inheritance. In the main posters on this forum will help genuine people.

I don't agree with personal attacks nor using abusive language etc but in the specific thread you referenced in my opinion this person did not show any genuine remorse for the situation they were in.
 
Back
Top