📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Northern Rock - Complaint??

Options
Hi,

I'm one of the poor bu**ers stuck with NR after taking out a 'together' mortgage.

My 2 year deal ends in December and so payments are going sky high. Due to the current credit crunch my home is worth less than the outstanding mortgage balance so I'm stuck with the Rock.

YES, I know I didn't have to take the 'together' mortgage etc etc but surely they have to take some blame for this crisis (Sure there's 000's of others in same boat!).. irresponsible lending??

Is it worth complaining..? - no problem with staying with NR but surely people like me who simply can't go elsewhere should be offered a decent interest rate which will allow us to continue to afford our mortgage...?

Worth a complaint? - who to, likely outcome ...?

Thanks
«134

Comments

  • opinions4u
    opinions4u Posts: 19,411 Forumite
    If you'd had a similar mortgage deal with the Abbey (for example), what do you think they would be offering you now?

    It's not the Northern Rock's fault your property fell in value.

    They are under no obligation to offer anybody a 'special deal'.

    It's not that long ago that mortgage lenders only had a standard variable rate and nothing else.

    Unless you can clearly show you were mis-sold the mortgage you have nowhere to pursue a complaint.

    Sorry.
  • feisty1
    feisty1 Posts: 1,487 Forumite
    What is the split of yr mortgage against valuation ie

    Valuation
    secured
    unsecured

    You may have a couple of options stay with NR and the SVR will apply to both elements. Currently no 95% deals available best is 90%, does yr secured exceed 90% If u moved 90% and left unsecured there the interest rate would increase to 12.49% (based on current rates), you could then look around for a cheaper loan and transfer out, but remember the yrs u get new loan over will be less than the extended yrs u have with NR It is a v unfortunate position to be in & i know many like u, i have heard mutterings from the rock they're looking to offer together clients something in the future but nothing solid so far...

    Mortgage Express max clients are even more disadvantaged as it was 130% SECURED on property
  • silvercar
    silvercar Posts: 49,635 Ambassador
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Academoney Grad Name Dropper
    No one to complain to, you took the mortgage on the basis that you understood that after the fixed rate ended you would be on their variable rate. No doubt you hoped to move mortgage deals after the fixed rate end and the lack of mortgage deals together with the fall in property value has left you unable to do this.

    You could look at taking an unsecured loan to repay the together part of the loan ie the bit that isn't secured on your home. This may leave you with enough equity to switch to a better deal.

    If that doesn' help, you could go interest only for a while.
    I'm a Forum Ambassador on the housing, mortgages & student money saving boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Forum Ambassadors are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an illegal or inappropriate post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
  • I think we should cut the OP some slack here.

    I, for one, can sympathise with people who over-borrowed (or were over-lent). These mortgages should NEVER have existed.

    People (normal people like you and me) were almost FORCED to borrow ever-increasing sums to buy a house. A house that was needed for them to get on with their lives. Not everybody could wait for the house price crash. Not everybody had a crystal ball.

    Now it has all gone belly up and the Government owns Northern Rock. A banker (those who got us into this mess) has decided that NR must lose customers (to reduce its mortgage book). The better placed customers can move to other lenders.

    The others who simply got the timing wrong, who were just unlucky, are stuck with Northern Rock, HMG, you and me. While the Government can throw billions of taxpayers money at 'the system' (banker's bonuses and platinum pensions), they are unwilling to do something that would cost nothing. They seem to be hell bent on making the hapless borrowers pay for 'their' mistake.

    Yes, Joe Public must be made to suffer because he took a mortgage that was available to him. That he 'qualified' for.

    If there had been an option of a Council house I might feel differently. HMG got rid of them. Either through the Tory's right-to-buy or by encouraging Councils to pass them over to 'non-profit making Housing Associations. Non-profit making my ar5e! The only real alternative was to rent privately. However, there are not enough BTL properties to meet demand and the tenancy laws are pants - for both the tenant and the landlord.

    NR, HMG, you and me - seem to want those stuck with NR to go bankrupt, lose their homes, suffer. It must be more sensible to work together to ensure these people have a fighting chance of keeping their homes. There should be a more reasonable SVR.

    Not charity, just a fair deal.

    GG
    There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.
  • silvercar
    silvercar Posts: 49,635 Ambassador
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Academoney Grad Name Dropper
    Agree, if the government is prepared to bail out those that sent their money overseas to squeeze every last penny of interest, it should also bail out those that left their money in the UK.

    How about this, instead of rescueing people who invested over 50k and paying back the extra interest they have secured by sending the money overseas, they should restrict the Iceland bail out to the first 50k and the rate of interest available elsewhere. The extra money (the government is supposedly happy to spend) could then be used to reduce the SVR on NR unsecured loans to give people a chance to reduce that debt enabling them to get mortgages elsewhere.
    I'm a Forum Ambassador on the housing, mortgages & student money saving boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Forum Ambassadors are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an illegal or inappropriate post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
  • _Andy_
    _Andy_ Posts: 11,150 Forumite
    You agreed to going onto a standard variable rate when you took the mortgage out. There is no valid complaint.
  • _Andy_ wrote: »
    You agreed to going onto a standard variable rate when you took the mortgage out. There is no valid complaint.

    If that's the case maybe NR should raise its SVR to 30% and make up some of its lost money.

    Of course, that is nonsense - but so is imposing a puntive SVR on those who can least afford it.

    r - rate. Happy with that.
    v - variable. Again, I understand the word
    s - standard (standard = normal). A punitive rate to encourage people to move to other providers is not normal so I could argue that NR do not have a standard variable rate.

    GG
    There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.
  • feisty1
    feisty1 Posts: 1,487 Forumite
    "You agreed to going onto a standard variable rate when you took the mortgage out."
    Yes agreed, but it is a hard pill for existing customers to swallow that NR have nothing but the SVR to offer exisitng customers regardless of LTV's........However, they can offer new customers deals with free legals & vals which incurs a cost to the Rock, how does that make financial sense?
  • opinions4u
    opinions4u Posts: 19,411 Forumite
    feisty1 wrote: »
    "You agreed to going onto a standard variable rate when you took the mortgage out."
    Yes agreed, but it is a hard pill for existing customers to swallow that NR have nothing but the SVR to offer exisitng customers regardless of LTV's........However, they can offer new customers deals with free legals & vals which incurs a cost to the Rock, how does that make financial sense?
    Those new customers have a lower risk profile.

    That said, HM Government should make a commitment to hold the NR SVR at the average rate charged by Halifax, Abbey and Barclays (for example) or alternatively BofE plus 2%.

    In fact, in this age of necessary state interference, I'd say this is an absolute necessity to ensure a degree of fairness for customers.
  • feisty1
    feisty1 Posts: 1,487 Forumite
    ..........are you trying to say ALL NR existing customers are high risk RUBBISH! Many existing customers are low risk & they are being mortgaged out & the high risk (together clients) are being retained........this will increase the rock's risk on defaults, arrears and ultimately bankruptcy..........
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.