Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search

Results: Have you enquired about your Northern Rock CCA loan

Yes, I have been awarded compensation

3.57% • 1 votes

Yes, I have been advised there is no valid complaint

3.57% • 1 votes

Yes, I am awaiting a response from Northern Rock/NRAM

57.14% • 16 votes

No

35.71% • 10 votes

You may not vote on this poll

28 votes in total.

Page 3
  • rmart
    I understand that. I think the only chance we have is if the loans over £25k were written on the wrong paperwork. The heading should have told us the loan was unregulated and not covered by the CCA, instead it clearly states it is regulated and therefore is misleading.
    • Fizzy Fish
    • By Fizzy Fish 14th Dec 12, 9:54 AM
    • 43 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    Fizzy Fish
    I think the only chance we have is if the loans over £25k were written on the wrong paperwork. The heading should have told us the loan was unregulated and not covered by the CCA, instead it clearly states it is regulated and therefore is misleading.
    Originally posted by rmart
    That's the conclusion that I've come to as well
  • GhIFA
    And you wouldn't have agreed to the loans if you'd been aware of this?
    I am an IFA. Any comments made on this forum are provided for information only and should not be construed as advice. Should you need advice on a specific area then please consult a local IFA.
  • rmart
    GhIFA,

    whats your point ? We are in the middle of a big recession, the banks have screwed everyone over. If I spot a chance to get something back from NR I will take it for my daughters. I dont give a monkeys about the moral issues. The bank did not give a hoot did they when they were raking in profits from all their mis selling of PPI etc did they ?

    They dont care now about people who are in financial trouble do they ? In fact NR would not even discuss dropping the interest rate from almost 13% even when my daughters paid off £19k of the £27k loan.

    A taste of their own medicine may do them good.
  • rmart
    what is quite fascinating is that after all the discussion NO ONE can give an answer as to the legal position. If anyone here has a copy of the original loan agreement (i have not got ours to hand) can you tell me if the signature box where you signed states that you should only sign if you want to be regulated by the CCA ?

    Also is there anything on there that states the loan falls outside the cca ?

    I am trying to locate our copy.
  • buccaneerboy
    And you wouldn't have agreed to the loans if you'd been aware of this?
    Originally posted by GhIFA

    In my case I would hope my Solicitor would have advised against it.
  • rmart
    Yes, actually if I had been aware at the time, I would have advised my daughters to ask for the personal loan to be dropped to £24,999 and the mortgage upped by £3,000. That is of course if we had been told the future implications of the difference between the loan regulated by the CCA as stated on the paperwork and it being NON Regulated.
    • Fizzy Fish
    • By Fizzy Fish 14th Dec 12, 10:36 AM
    • 43 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    Fizzy Fish
    what is quite fascinating is that after all the discussion NO ONE can give an answer as to the legal position. If anyone here has a copy of the original loan agreement (i have not got ours to hand) can you tell me if the signature box where you signed states that you should only sign if you want to be regulated by the CCA ?

    Also is there anything on there that states the loan falls outside the cca ?

    I am trying to locate our copy.
    Originally posted by rmart
    I've gone through all of the paperwork (original agreement was in 2004), and the consistent message is that the unsecured loan is CCA regulated, with nothing specifying to the contrary:
    • Original credit agreement heading 'Credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974'
    • Credit agreement signature box 'This is a credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974. Sign it only if you want to be bound by its terms'
    • On back of initial agreement 'Your rights - The CCA covers this agreement and lays down certain requirements for your protection which must be satisfied when the agreement is made. If they are not, we cannot enforce the agreement against you without a court order. The Act also gives you a number of rights. You have the right to settle this agreement at any time by giving notice in writing and paying off all amounts payable under the agreement.'
    • Letter from NR in 2009 'The new CCA 2006 requires us to provide a statement to each customer party to the mortgage. We will now provide you with duplicate copies of your statement in the same envelope' (i.e. NR continue to believe themselves that they lent to us in a way that is bound by this legislation!)
  • GhIFA
    GhIFA,

    whats your point ? We are in the middle of a big recession, the banks have screwed everyone over. If I spot a chance to get something back from NR I will take it for my daughters. I dont give a monkeys about the moral issues. The bank did not give a hoot did they when they were raking in profits from all their mis selling of PPI etc did they ?

    They dont care now about people who are in financial trouble do they ? In fact NR would not even discuss dropping the interest rate from almost 13% even when my daughters paid off £19k of the £27k loan.

    A taste of their own medicine may do them good.
    Originally posted by rmart
    For what it's worth, NR may well have made an error in the way they have printed the documents, and we'll see how things pan out on that, and it may end up that they have to extend the payout.

    However, there are comments being made about the fact that people would never have signed up for loans had they have known it wasn't regulated - which is quite plainly rubbish as they plainly had no idea of what the CCA was until it was mentioned in the last few days.

    Nobody was forced into taking out loans well in excess of the value of the property they were buying. And I don't understand people borrowing such sums of money without fully reading and understanding the terms and conditions attached. But, as is often the way, they seem to divulge responsibility for this from anyone but themselves when problems start to occur.

    If it was a non-state owned institution then I might agree with you to a certain degree, but it isn't. This farcical situation is already going to add £270million to the deficit when no-one has been financially disadvantaged, without any additional funds from people suddenly making spurious "mis-selling" claims off the back of it. This doesn't cost NR, it costs the public purse, which we all have to pay for.

    The irony is that if more people had taken as much interest in the T&C's, wordings, and documentation headings at the time they signed up, and considered the viability of borrowing more than the value of the property in a market bubble that everyone could see was going to burst at some point, or how they might afford the repayments when it did, maybe NR wouldn't have needed bailing out.

    At least you've now had the good grace to come out and admit the real reason you're doing this rather than dressing it up as others have.
    I am an IFA. Any comments made on this forum are provided for information only and should not be construed as advice. Should you need advice on a specific area then please consult a local IFA.
    • bigbadwolf500
    • By bigbadwolf500 14th Dec 12, 10:51 AM
    • 46 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    bigbadwolf500
    For what it's worth, NR may well have made an error in the way they have printed the documents, and we'll see how things pan out on that, and it may end up that they have to extend the payout.

    However, there are comments being made about the fact that people would never have signed up for loans had they have known it wasn't regulated - which is quite plainly rubbish as they plainly had no idea of what the CCA was until it was mentioned in the last few days.

    Nobody was forced into taking out loans well in excess of the value of the property they were buying. And I don't understand people borrowing such sums of money without fully reading and understanding the terms and conditions attached. But, as is often the way, they seem to divulge responsibility for this from anyone but themselves when problems start to occur.

    If it was a non-state owned institution then I might agree with you to a certain degree, but it isn't. This farcical situation is already going to add £270million to the deficit when no-one has been financially disadvantaged, without any additional funds from people suddenly making spurious "mis-selling" claims off the back of it. This doesn't cost NR, it costs the public purse, which we all have to pay for.

    The irony is that if more people had taken as much interest in the T&C's, wordings, and documentation headings at the time they signed up, and considered the viability of borrowing more than the value of the property in a market bubble that everyone could see was going to burst at some point, or how they might afford the repayments when it did, maybe NR wouldn't have needed bailing out.

    At least you've now had the good grace to come out and admit the real reason you're doing this rather than dressing it up as others have.
    Originally posted by GhIFA
    I my financial advisor had explained that the loan was unregulated, I would have wanted more information on this.
    Being unregulated - does this mean Northern Rock can do what they like? Change interest rates when they like? Not send out statements? Demand more money?
    • Fizzy Fish
    • By Fizzy Fish 14th Dec 12, 10:56 AM
    • 43 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    Fizzy Fish

    However, there are comments being made about the fact that people would never have signed up for loans had they have known it wasn't regulated - which is quite plainly rubbish as they plainly had no idea of what the CCA was until it was mentioned in the last few days.


    The irony is that if more people had taken as much interest in the T&C's, wordings, and documentation headings at the time they signed up,
    Originally posted by GhIFA
    Re your points above, I don't pretend to have a good working knowledge of the details behind consumer/financial legislation. However like a lot of other people, I went through a professional (mortgage broker) to help make up for this fact. NR also employed probably very well-paid and qualified legal experts on these matters.

    So if they missed this, is it really that surprising that we did too? And actually I am bothered that I was given incorrect information about my rights.
  • GhIFA
    I my financial advisor had explained that the loan was unregulated, I would have wanted more information on this.
    Being unregulated - does this mean Northern Rock can do what they like? Change interest rates when they like? Not send out statements? Demand more money?
    Originally posted by bigbadwolf500
    Did people ask questions at the time about regulation, protection etc - It works both ways?. I use the services of other professionals/advisers for areas that I'm not qualified in - However, I also do my own research, know what my rights as a consumer are etc before entering into any agreement with them. I find it strange that people don't do the same in cases like this, particularly where large sums of money are involved.

    As I said earlier, NR may well have made an error here, potentially a big one, and if they have they will have to make it right.

    The point I am trying to make is that there are a good number of people here chancing their arm, claiming they were mis-sold off the back of comments they have heard the last few days. If these issues had been so important to them they would have explored them at the time, but they didn't and now at the whiff of some money (when they have not suffered any loss through this issue) suddenly cry foul play, which everyone has to pay for - It's a little distasteful if I'm honest.
    I am an IFA. Any comments made on this forum are provided for information only and should not be construed as advice. Should you need advice on a specific area then please consult a local IFA.
  • NowWhat?
    From reading both threads running the same story I think that this oversight by NRAM has really highlighted the dis-satisfaction most people have with the products they have been sold.


    The CCA is a red herring as until a few years ago most people did not have a clue what a CCA actually was for.With the advent of the PPI scandal more people want to jump on any bandwagon and try to attain a windfall.
    Through a broker we unfortunately took out a 5 year fixed rate mortgage with NRAM at 5.5% which was more than other lenders, but at the time this was a rate we were happy with.
    The financial collapse happened and mortgage rates came tumbling down - NRAM though still have higher rates than most.
    As mentioned by others when NRAM acquired the "toxic" debts the potential to look elswhere was restrictive because of the way they were set up.
    This I think is the main issue – the majority of people with NRAM are trapped and will be so for a very long time.

    It appears to me that we are in some way being punished for the financial collapse and are being used to recoup some of the losses.
    Personally I have had 3 mortgages/remortgages/loans with Northern Rock and had never had any problems.
    Since NRAM took over however we have had lots of problems such as- double payments taken out,lack of communication reply,telephone harrassment due to being 2 days late with a payment,rude unsympathetic advisers, etc etc
    We used to be able to access our account online which we now can’t do and to this day we are still not sure why our mortgage was assigned to NRAM as we have no other financial debts.
    I can fully understand why people are hoping that they receive some of the money back as they are probably just like me and want to get out of this mess as soon as they can.
  • buccaneerboy
    Did people ask questions at the time about regulation, protection etc - It works both ways?. I use the services of other professionals/advisers for areas that I'm not qualified in - However, I also do my own research, know what my rights as a consumer are etc before entering into any agreement with them. I find it strange that people don't do the same in cases like this, particularly where large sums of money are involved.

    As I said earlier, NR may well have made an error here, potentially a big one, and if they have they will have to make it right.

    The point I am trying to make is that there are a good number of people here chancing their arm, claiming they were mis-sold off the back of comments they have heard the last few days. If these issues had been so important to them they would have explored them at the time, but they didn't and now at the whiff of some money (when they have not suffered any loss through this issue) suddenly cry foul play, which everyone has to pay for - It's a little distasteful if I'm honest.
    Originally posted by GhIFA

    "Did people ask questions at the time about regulation, protection etc - It works both ways?"

    Why would they need to ask questions their paper work clearly states regulated by the CCA?

    "The point I am trying to make is that there are a good number of people here chancing their arm, claiming they were mis-sold off the back of comments they have heard the last few days. If these issues had been so important to them they would have explored them at the time,"

    Until the last few days people were under the impression their loans were regulated. It is the current situation that has highlighted the fact that perhaps they are not. I dont think it's unreasonable to ask what this actually means for people with loans over 25k supposedly regulated. Why are people chancing their arms? If you had a loan with the exact same terms as someone else and they were being an offered a refund and you not would you not question why?
  • ger_ryan22
    We got our letter yesterday so it's some good news for us as we took out a Together Mortgage in Oct 2007 and at least this little sum will go towards getting that loan down. Every little helps I suppose. Just gutted that we rushed into getting the house as it was only a couple of weeks later that the whole NR bust went public. We're in a manageable mortgage payment wise, just, but I'm not sure how long it will take to actually break even on it with regards to the house value. Zoopla's estimate is frightening
    • bigbadwolf500
    • By bigbadwolf500 14th Dec 12, 11:49 AM
    • 46 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    bigbadwolf500
    We got our letter yesterday so it's some good news for us as we took out a Together Mortgage in Oct 2007 and at least this little sum will go towards getting that loan down. Every little helps I suppose. Just gutted that we rushed into getting the house as it was only a couple of weeks later that the whole NR bust went public. We're in a manageable mortgage payment wise, just, but I'm not sure how long it will take to actually break even on it with regards to the house value. Zoopla's estimate is frightening
    Originally posted by ger_ryan22
    Is your loan over £25K?
  • GhIFA
    "Did people ask questions at the time about regulation, protection etc - It works both ways?"

    Why would they need to ask questions their paper work clearly states regulated by the CCA?

    "The point I am trying to make is that there are a good number of people here chancing their arm, claiming they were mis-sold off the back of comments they have heard the last few days. If these issues had been so important to them they would have explored them at the time,"

    Until the last few days people were under the impression their loans were regulated. It is the current situation that has highlighted the fact that perhaps they are not. I dont think it's unreasonable to ask what this actually means for people with loans over 25k supposedly regulated. Why are people chancing their arms? If you had a loan with the exact same terms as someone else and they were being an offered a refund and you not would you not question why?
    Originally posted by buccaneerboy
    But as the legislation stands you haven't got a loan with the same terms as anyone else - under £25k is regulated, over £25k is not. You have documentation that looks like it is has been put on incorrect paper, which is different. Until such point as a legal ruling has been made that this confers the terms of the regulation on you then that is the situation - and discussion of this issue previously on other forums seems to suggest that there are very few legal experts that want to get involved in challenging this.
    I am an IFA. Any comments made on this forum are provided for information only and should not be construed as advice. Should you need advice on a specific area then please consult a local IFA.
    • jimbo5661
    • By jimbo5661 14th Dec 12, 12:37 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    jimbo5661
    My loan was originally £26,400 in 2004, however by 2008 the outstanding was around £23k... Does this matter or is it just dependant on the original sum borrowed?
  • rmart
    I've gone through all of the paperwork (original agreement was in 2004), and the consistent message is that the unsecured loan is CCA regulated, with nothing specifying to the contrary:
    • Original credit agreement heading 'Credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974'
    • Credit agreement signature box 'This is a credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974. Sign it only if you want to be bound by its terms'
    • On back of initial agreement 'Your rights - The CCA covers this agreement and lays down certain requirements for your protection which must be satisfied when the agreement is made. If they are not, we cannot enforce the agreement against you without a court order. The Act also gives you a number of rights. You have the right to settle this agreement at any time by giving notice in writing and paying off all amounts payable under the agreement.'
    • Letter from NR in 2009 'The new CCA 2006 requires us to provide a statement to each customer party to the mortgage. We will now provide you with duplicate copies of your statement in the same envelope' (i.e. NR continue to believe themselves that they lent to us in a way that is bound by this legislation!)
    Originally posted by Fizzy Fish
    That's great, thanks. It seems to me like this will run and run. All of us on here will want the same treatment as those with loans under £25k as we were signed up and given protection of the CCA, it maybe that they have to give protection on the 1st £25k of the loan.
  • rmart
    Thinking about it more, I want the loan written off !.

    In an age of mis selling scandals, surely if a bank incorrectly signs someone up for a loan on CCA protected terms they would have to stand by it or cancel it ?
    Surely they cannot decide later they are not giving that protection to an unaware customer?

    If they say this to me I will say they have breached the contract and demand back all payments made to them.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

192Posts Today

1,428Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I realised I forgot in my links earlier. 1. Help to Buy ISAs, how they work and best buys...? https://t.co/BSCNPeqiVF

  • RT @whatdawndid: Thanks to uncle @MartinSLewis I just received £200 back, just like that from the student loan company! Turns out that the?

  • RT @LaraLewington: Shocked and saddened by Cheggers news. Working with him on It?s A Knockout was my 1st job in telly when I was just 19. H?

  • Follow Martin