3 Simple Steps to a Secured Loan

Submitting Details...
Step 1 of 3 About your loan
 
 
 
 
 
 

Step 2 of 3 About your loan

Is secured on your home. Rates depend on your circumstances; usually lower than an unsecured loan and often more flexible.

Not secured on your home. May not qualify you for the best rates. Applying to a number of lenders may affect your credit score.
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Step 2 of 3 About your loan

Based on your information we recommend you speak to a personal debt adviser.

They will offer you advice on:
  • Whether a loan is your best option
  • Consolidating your debts
  • Reducing the amount you owe
  • How to freeze your interest payments
  • Protecting you from creditors

Step 3 of 3 Your details
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

Finished


Thank you for your enquiry.

Your adviser will be in touch with you shortly.


Recent Posts
  • Bargain netbooks bite back at Apple
    There are bargains to be had for netbook shoppers on a budget, says Marc Lockley Last week’s article regarding the Apple MacBook sparked a fiery debate about affordability and the usual battle between Apple and PCs. This week we are balancing the books, looking at a few netbooks which are a fraction of the cost of

  • Caroline Mason, chief operating officer Charity Bank
    As Investing for Good merges with Charity Bank, Caroline Mason describes her conversion from career banker to champion of social investment Superheroes sparked Caroline Mason’s conversion from career banker to champion of social investment. As the chief operating officer of Charity Bank, she now spends her time convincing people to put their money to good use,

  • House prices: Heading south | Editorial
    By the turn of this year, the housing market was enjoying a very fragile recovery, but in the last few months it has begun to suffer a relapse Let us start with two propositions. First, house prices are going down. And second, that is a very good thing. The first proposition is riskier to make but rather

  • You don’t have to be rich | Julian Le Grand
    Rather than relying on billionaires why not yoke philanthropy to tax, and nudge us all into giving? Sir Francis Bacon once said that money is like muck: no use unless it is spread. This is a view presumably taken by the American billionaires who recently proposed giving away half of their fortunes to charity. But these in

  • The readers’ room: What you thought of G2 this week
    Why Blackpool rocks, ‘patronised’ teenagers answer back – and (surprise) Iron Maiden prefer cricket to Satan ? Anyone familiar with Stephen Moss may find it hard to imagine him eating candy floss at the great British seaside. The Oval is more his scene, or a bookshop in Hay. But that was where last Friday’s G2 found

Letters: Making sure the lights don’t go out

Given the long lead times for building new electricity capacity we should all be concerned that around a quarter of the UK’s electricity generating capacity must be replaced in the next 10 years (Only state intervention can keep the lights on, says Ofgem, 4 February). However, it is even more worrying that plans to replace this shortfall are so poorly advanced. Some 20 gigawatts of new capacity are “under way”, but only 8GW is actually under construction. It would not take much to go wrong for power cuts to become widespread.

However, before politicians start blaming the UK’s liberalised energy ­markets and call for a return to full government control, it is worth remembering that political indecision has contributed greatly to the possibility of an “energy crunch”. Investors in new capacity can deal with market risks, but often find the burden of political and regulatory risk more challenging. Demonising large energy companies over their pricing and threatening windfall taxes may win votes, but it will not bring new capacity on line. Delays in obtaining planning approval for new power stations do not help either.

Graeme Leach

Chief economist, Institute of Directors

• Ofgem’s Damascene conversion to state supervision of the privatised energy industry is a big step in the right direction. This is long overdue in a world of pretend competition that characterises the results of past dogmatic privatisations. However, more radical changes are needed if the new CEGB is given a proper role, including: responsibility for planning and commissioning capacity; reducing the absurd plethora of pricing schemes to a small number of national tariffs; reversing the structure of current tariffs so that low-energy users are no longer penalised; raising the 5% energy VAT to the general rate and phasing in carbon pricing; setting and enforcing energy-saving targets for the energy companies. Above all, dealing with climate change demands that the energy ­industry is controlled by the state and not just influenced by it.

Patrick Newman

Director of IT development, Energywatch 2000-02

•?Hidden deep in the appendices of Ofgem’s Project Discovery report is the unnerving admission that four of the six main energy suppliers consider the findings to be too optimistic; uSwitch warns that bills could top £4,000 a year by 2020 (£2,000-a-year fuel bill nears, 4 January). Any massive rise in the cost of energy will not just affect domestic consumers, but all industrial, commercial and public sector consumers as well. Cheap energy has been the lifeblood of our extravagant existence, and the impact of higher costs on the economy and our lifestyles could be profound.

The report focuses on the £200bn of capital investment required. I can’t see the equally vital analysis of likely future gas prices, in the context of rapidly approaching peak oil. While gas is more abundant than oil, their prices are closely linked. As we wean ourselves off fossil fuels, our appetite for electricity will grow. Ground-source heat pumps, battery charging and hydrolising water all need reliable electricity supplies.

We are told that the government will be making announcements on this issue at the time of the budget. Let’s hope that this government and the next one really get to grip with the issue.

Jeffrey Streule

Stewkley, Bedfordshire

•?It is good news that British Gas has dropped the unfair price differential on pre-payment meters, which effectively meant those customers on the least income were often paying the most (Money, 6 February). Charities such as ours have often criticised meter tariffs as aggravating fuel poverty. However, while pre-payment customers will now pay the same as customers paying with cash or cheque, they will still pay more than those able to pay via direct debit. Many poor families aren’t able to do this. Moreover, even with the cuts, there are cheaper suppliers to be found online – but the same vulnerable families are often without access to the internet. British Gas’s initiative is welcome but cannot address this problem alone.

Helen Dent

Chief executive, Family Action


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Need a Loan? Visit Secured Loans Broker.



Leave a Reply