unsecured does not mean unsecured

sjrinteriors

For those that dont know, Id like to point out that an unsecured loan means absolutely nothing at all..

I found to my own hassle that even an unsecured loan does'nt stop the lender securing the debt against your property if you default..

2 years ago I was left £20k down on a contract job after the main contractor went bust, causing me endless problems meeting my bills.. After alot of hard work and negotiation on my part with bank, credit card, mortgage companies, I eventually mananged to get myself back into some sort of credit worthiness again but by this time, NORTHERN ROCK (b**tard*) had gone to court and secured an apparently unsecured loan debt against my house...

Dont be fooled into thinking unsecured means unsecured because it does'nt..

My advice: Never default on a loan... oh and dont deal with Northern Rock, they are ruthless.

iolanthe07

But surely Northern Rock cannot sell your house over your head, can they? All they can do on an unsecured loan is to put a charge on it so that you have to pay them when you eventually sell the house, AFAIK.

sjrinteriors

Yes thats right, they have a charge over the property so they get paid.. My arguement is that when taking out a personal loan this is not made clear..

Alot of people fall into the trap that unsecured means unsecured, and its not.. In my own opinion its all a bloody con.. I tried to negotiate with them to try to reduce payments for 6 months at 50% and they would not even consider... So as I said.... RUTHLESS Bas****s

regularsaver1

but not everyone defaults, and if it went to court - it went to a top stage donw the line

iolanthe07

I can see both sides of this. I understand the OP's anger at finding a charge on his house without his knowledge and consent, but I can see that the bank wants to be sure of getting its money back eventually. It does seem unreasonable for NR not to accept reduced payments for 6 months, though; what do they want - blood? I thought banks had to get a court judgement before they could put a charge on a property - anyone know?

Tootsie_Roll

iolanthe07 wrote:

I can see both sides of this. I understand the OP's anger at finding a charge on his house without his knowledge and consent, but I can see that the bank wants to be sure of getting its money back eventually. It does seem unreasonable for NR not to accept reduced payments for 6 months, though; what do they want - blood? I thought banks had to get a court judgement before they could put a charge on a property - anyone know?

He mentions it went to court before he got the charging order.

Also why should they have to accept reduced payments ? What they want is for the contract to be honoured. The courts look at the whole financial position including any equity that may be in a property - in cases like these you do whatever is necessary to repay the debt and if that means selling the house then that's what you have to do regardless of how unpleasant that is to you.

I have been saying for years that there is no such thing as an unsecured loan if you own a property.

aimingforadebtfreelife

happened to me - N Rock refused my DMP offer from CCCS - went to court - interim charging order - payment finally accepted a month but charging order went ahead. N Rock was the only one of 5 creditors. Spoke to a solicitor who said if you have your own house and they know about it a charging order will be a dead cert regardless if its unsecured.