When the allure of a holiday beckons, it’s not uncommon for friends to lend each other a helping hand to make the dream a reality. But what happens when an unexpected windfall overshadows a generous gesture?
This is the tale of how a $10,000 jackpot at the pokies turned best mates into adversaries, leaving one to ponder the true cost of friendship and the other the legalities of a personal loan.
Nate from Queensland found himself in a bind when he needed funds for a holiday he planned to take with a friend.
His mate, acting both as a benefactor and a companion unwilling to travel alone, agreed to loan him the money with a generous repayment term of one year.
But the tides of fortune are fickle, and during a casual outing at the pub, Nate’s luck turned golden as he hit a $10,000 jackpot on the pokies, with his creditor by his side.
The joy of winning was short-lived, as his friend demanded immediate repayment of the loan in full upon witnessing the stroke of luck.
Nate, who had earmarked the windfall to clear his credit card debt, felt betrayed by the request, deeming it a ‘dog act’. The situation escalated quickly, with threats of legal action now hanging over Nate’s head like a dark cloud.
Legal experts Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn shed light on the matter, explaining that the agreement between Nate and his friend is, in fact, a contract.
Despite the absence of a written document, such personal loans are enforceable under the law, with the terms of repayment being crucial.
Any form of communication outlining the agreed terms, including text messages or emails, could prove invaluable, especially if the matter reached the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).
In the face of potential legal strife, documenting all discussions regarding the repayment becomes paramount.
Nate could consider proposing a revised repayment plan, perhaps offering a partial lump sum from his winnings while maintaining the original repayment schedule for the balance. This compromise could not only appease his friend but also salvage their friendship.
Should the matter proceed to QCAT, Nate would be served with a claim document detailing the debt and the evidence supporting the claim.
Without a proper defence, the tribunal could rule against him, ordering the full debt repayment. While representation by a solicitor isn’t mandatory at QCAT, seeking advice from a local community legal centre could provide Nate with free guidance.
Have you ever lent money to a friend or borrowed from one? How did you ensure the agreement was fair and that your relationship remained intact? Share your experiences and insights in the comments below.
Also read: Driving change? Major bank cuts off loans for certain vehicles
