Carol Vorderman Pls Stop Doing Secured Loan Ads Over 80,000 signatures!
 

This appeal is supported by the UK 's largest debt charity the Consumer Credit Counselling Service, and the money education charity Credit Action.

For nine years Carol Vord er man's adv er tised these loans. Adv er tising works, that's why companies pay for it and ov er time h er pow er ful adv er tisements will have contributed to the growing normalization of this form of borrowing. I believe this is truly worrying, as secured loans should only ev er be seen as loans of last resort. I would like h er to stop and I'd urge all who agree to sign the petition and let h er know.

This appeal is the second stage of an appeal to stop the growing normalization of secured debt following the Debt: Not in Front of the Children Appeal.

Carol Vord er man does adv er ts for Firstplus; howev er this isn't about that specific provid er , but the normalization of secured loans as a whole.

Doing an advert for a secured lender helps legitimise the whole secured loan market, turning what should be seen as loans of last resort into what look like an easy, everyday option.

These loans are not an everyday option. With secured loans, a failure to repay can result in losing your home or leave people locked into long term debts, so the overall interest cost is substantially increased. Rates are often higher than unsecured loans, and much higher than remortgaging – one of the viable alternatives.

The p er fect custom er for a debt company is someone p er petually in debt at a high rate, nev er failing to make repayments, in oth er words, someone who is constantly repaying – and that's exactly the situation with many secured loan custom er s. Our society is in dang er of gradually moving towards a system wh er e a substantial proportion of the population are p er petually in secured debt for much of their working lives.

Debt isn't bad. Bad debt is bad. Th er e's nothing wrong with making a rational decision to borrow money, provided it's planned for, budgeted, affordable, und er stood and cheap. The worry is the normalization of secured loans increases the proportion of those with bad debts.

How the ads work

We have a nation that is split between a large number of debt illiterate and a small number of the debt savvy. The use of a trusted, maths genius to sell a product many people don't fully understand is an extremely powerful concept.

One major proof the ads work is the nine year longevity of the Firstplus campaign; while for obvious reasons I have no internal data, commercial companies do not keep debt campaigns running for nine years unless they're effective. The success of these adverts means that even though it runs the risk of bad publicity, it's unlikely Firstplus will volunteer to drop the power of Carol Vorderman's brand.

Why Carol Vorderman?

Carol Vord er man is by far the most high profile figure doing secured loan adv er tising. She is also the most credible figure; h er mathematical ability is renowned and she's v er y popular – that's why the ads work. Th er e's nothing p er sonal against Carol Vord er man h er e, except that I believe she's doing ads that our society would be bett er off without if she didn't do them.

As well as discouraging Carol's adv er ts specifically, and publicising the problems with secured loans, it is my hope that this appeal will make all celebrities think v er y hard before agreeing to endorse a product and hopefully take evidence not just from the company that's employing them, but independently as to wheth er or not the product is suitable and responsible.

Many who agree to do adv er ts, do so purely to make money and it is possible they do so without fully consid er ing the nature of the product.

Did I try to contact Carol about this?

I called h er agent months before this appeal was launched requesting to speak to h er in public or in private, on or off the record, so I could talk h er through my reasons for wanting to ask h er to stop doing the adv er ts. I still have not heard from h er , though I received communication from h er advis er s, who expressed sev er e res er vations about the nature of this appeal. I want to be fair to Carol, and I do hope that p er haps aft er this appeal is in the public domain, we will be able to open a dialogue.

In the past people have expressed v er y strong views about h er adv er tisements, both to me p er sonally and on the int er net, th er efore as this appeal is potentially contentious, my legal advis er s have expressed conc er n about allowing uncontrolled discussions on the Chat Forum, so sadly and contrary to this site's normal policy, th er e will be no discussion in th er e.

What do you hope to achieve with this appeal?

It is my hope that by running this appeal I can bring the problems of secured lending to people's attentions, and that Carol Vorderman will be persuaded by the weight of public opinion that stopping doing these adverts will be of benefit to society.

If this appeal simply opens people's eyes about the nature of secured lending, how to deal with problem debts, and that celebrity endorsements don't mean a product is actually suitable for them - a great deal will have been achieved.

So at the moment I've no plans beyond asking Carol to stop and asking for assurances from secured lend er s to improve their adv er ts. Hopefully that'll work. If it doesn't I will take soundings as to what else may be done.

• It calls for Carol Vorderman to agree she will not appear in or film any more secured debt adverts.
  
  
• It calls for the secured debt firms to develop a charter of responsible advertising that only targets those limited niche individuals who would actively benefit from secured debt.
  
• It asks that lowering monthly repayments, which in fact increases the cost of the loans because the interest is spread over a longer period, is never portrayed as saving people money.

Malcolm Hurlston, chairman of the UK 's leading debt counselling charity, the Consum er Credit Counselling S er vice says the charity is supporting the appeal because, “secured loans off er an appropriate solution for about three p er cent of the ov er -indebted and these adv er ts imply that they are appropriate for the majority.”

Keith Tondeur, national director of the money education charity Credit Action, says the charity is supporting this appeal because, “by using a p er sonality renowned for h er mathematical ability, these adv er tisements suggest that secured loans off er a good solution for people with debt problems. For most people this is simply not the case.”

Secured loans are the lending of last resort. In certain circumstances, for a niche group of people who have first explored a large number of other avenues, they can be the right product.

However, these ad appeals work in the opposite direction, making secured debt look like a universally accepted product suitable for anyone and everyone.

The biggest drivers of profitability in financial services are ignorance apathy and confusion; these are targeted by the aspirational, evangelic, find-your-financial-freedom advertising that secured debt companies use.

For many secured loans don't solve a problem: they extend it over a longer period. For those who want to read about true difficulties people face when in debt see the Debt Free Wannabe Board.

• It's the lender that gets the ‘security', not you.
  
  The reason secured loans are for homeowners is that if you borrow with one, the lender gets the security that it can take your house if you can't repay. Used in debt ads, the term can sound comforting, yet the comfort isn't for the borrower. Many don't realise that unsecured is better than secured; and that when you turn credit card debts into secured debts, you have suddenly decided to risk your home on this borrowing.
  
• The rates are often more expensive than unsecured loans.
  
  Strangely enough, on top of the fact you're not getting security with a secured loan, the rates are often higher than unsecured loans too. Most good competitive unsecured loans, for those with decent credit scores, are at a much cheaper rate than secured loans.
  
• The rates are not what they seem.
  
  While often a typical rate is advertised, many people, especially those with worse credit histories, pay much higher rates, sometimes more expensive than the debts they are converting. This is a ludicrous scenario where people are paying more to have worse debts.
  
• Rates are variable not fixed.
  
  Most people are used to and understand normal bank loans, where the rate of the loan is fixed at the outset, thus you know exactly what you'll be paying over the life of the loan. With secured loans the rates are usually variable.
  
  In other words, the lender can change it and, as loans are invariably longer, it is almost impossible to have any certainty as to what you'll be paying overall. You are tying yourself into a potentially open ended cost.