MSE News: Northern Rock pays £270m to 150,000 after gaffe

craaaigo

drussmonkey wrote: »

Blind supposition from what I can make out. The only way the SVR or 'Special Rate' would increase would be in line with a BoE base rate increase, which I don't consider very likely at all. The new BoE chief has even mooted the possibility of negative base interest rates, so if anything the rate could go down further (assuming they keep it basically tracked).

A lenders SVR rate is not directly connected to the BoE base rate in any way.
NRAM would be under no obligation to either increase or decrease their SVR in line with any changes in the base rate. In fact, they could raise the SVR to 20% tomorrow if they wanted but its all a balancing act and such a move would be unproductive as would result in thousands of customers unable to pay their mortgage.

mcowan77

I got 2.k redress on my unsecured loan ( together mortgage)

I took out 2 further secured loans for 4k and 3k in 2006 which paid off lst yr.I've since chucked out the paperwork.

Will these be CCA regulated?.... On my old statement it's says they are Fsa regulated.


Thanks

lennonc1

Hiya, as your additional borrowing was secured and regulated by fsa then they won't be affected, I have additional loans as well and they are not affected unfortunately. Are you happy with redress added without your permission?

geeka

How can you tell if its a further advance and not a secured loan? will it be on the statement?

lennonc1

Yes. It should say next to it if cca or fsa regulated.

mcowan77

No I would rather have the money!!!!

lennonc1

mcowan77 wrote: »

No I would rather have the money!!!!

Ok well you can complain officially that you were not consulted and wish the redress to be paid directly, email customerrelations@n-ram.co.uk, give your account details and tell them it is an official complaint of redress method, you have 8 weeks for them to reply, which will be the standard no our way is best! Then can be passed to financial ombudsman service for them to investigate. There has been thousands of us complain about this matter, I have set up a new thread for action on this, I will finish and post link later on, you are not alone and I am going everything possible to clarify our rights on this, as it seems we have none, which is the main thing for me!

jimmy1000

I do not work for NRAM-in fact I have just rang NRAM Up and suggested they have people watching this website-forum-they 110% swear down they don't -which leads me too
think despite lemoncake accusing me of working for NRAM-she actually works for them-

she is giving us all false hope-hoping we all spend needless money with lawyers so then we have to accept loan dedction balalnce!!!!


i agree with tracy7 too mnay vultures around-like being at the ZOO

NRAM HAVE SAID NO CHEQUES TO WE COMPRENDO?

jimmy1000

tracy7 wrote: »

I'm going to write this argument in very simplistic terms to avoid the risk of the use of name calling, employment by NRAM or any other conspiracy theory to defer or detract from the real issues at stake here.

I don't work at NRAM, I'm not involved in government policy, I'm just an ordinary person going about my own ordinary, little life, working hard to make something of it and make it all worthwhile. I work in the NHS on the front line and I do this to make a difference to peoples lives.

As I previously stated the actual saving from having the redress applied in such a manner as to reduce the length of the loan has a significant and far higher impact on the amount of interest you pay overall than the black and white saving you will have seen on your new statement.

This is a very generous and far reaching method of redress for something which has had absolutely zero impact on your account, and which was probably the result of an oversight during the changeover from Northern Rock to NRAM at a significant time of change in policy. It is not a policy which has been mis-sold or an agreement which you have entered into blindly.

It cannot have escaped anyones attention that we are currently in the grasp of a recession, with severe cuts being made right, left and centre. It goes without saying that to fund a payout of £270 million in the current climate would be social and economic suicide, having to find this amount of money would cause deeper, harsher cuts to already pared down services and perhaps even higher rates of taxation.

It makes moral and ethical sense to benefit the customer in the long term without risking sliding further into recession and a potentially non-viable and irrecoverable situation. Whilst people may view this as effectively cooking the books it is a win-win situation which addresses the issues and does so in a responsible manner.

For people baying for interest to be paid on top, had this mistake not been uncovered we would all be none the wiser, we would be paying what we agreed. You may try to argue that it is not money you would have chosen to pay had you known but effectively by getting the redress you are getting a repayment of interest by the very fact you will be paying less interest over the term of the loan as a result.

Having to find this extra money for existing customers to be paid upfront in addition to the payments to ex NRAM customers would result in more extreme cuts to services than we are already experiencing, and already knew more cuts were to be expected over the coming years before this story even broke.

It could mean a reduction of beds or staff in our NHS hospitals, it could mean that certain operations or treatments will no longer be available on the NHS, it could mean that buildings fall into disrepair and maybe even closure of more hospitals. This will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the number of patients who are treated.

It could mean that our emergency services become even more pared down, that the fire, ambulance and police services cannot provide the level of care they do now, that lives may needlessly be put at risk and even lost.

It could mean that our armed services may not receive the funding they require to keep themselves safe, that they may not receive the aftercare they deserve should they be injured or maimed in the course of duty. It could mean that terrorism becomes a more harsh reality as a result.

It could mean that our children may be taught in bigger classes due to a reduced number of teachers or that they have fewer resources such as text books, laboratory equipment, sports equipment etc all having an impact on their ability to learn and secure a better future for themselves. It could mean that buildings fall into disrepair and eventually forced into closure.

It may mean that our councils become more stretched with their limited budgets and this could have impact on other services we rely on such as waste disposal, job centres, libraries, provision of services to the vulnerable such as the elderly and children whose families are struggling to feed them, need I go on???

You may think this is all quite dramatic but consider the cuts that have already been made, remember that there are record numbers of people who are unemployed due to redundancies as a result of the recession, that higher numbers of people out of work increases expenditure on benefit with the double whammy of reduced income due to reduced levels of tax now not earnt from those same individuals. We are already stretched beyond our limited resources, there is more demand for those resources which is increasing daily, the evidence for that is in the news of further cuts to be made.

The money has to come from somewhere.

I AGREE TRACY nram are a brilliant free lending organisation-i take my hat off to me-in the darkest hour-they admitted their mistake and PAYING OUT 270 MILLION-LEMONCAKE/COT33378 YOU ARE NOT GETTING A CHEQUE-and glasgow would you prefer milk vouchers:A

jimmy1000

on a seperate matter NRAM have told me that interest rates will be going up in the next three months by a further .35% which will hit us hard.
i respect nram for telling this in advance

lemoncakes time to give up mate!