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

geeka

Thanks, think that might be my next option. i complained to nram and they are looking into it, ive had 3 "holding" letters saying they are looking into it. i checked my original documents and it said a together mortgage and a secured loan. the agreement is a CCA one. stil not sure if i am entitled, any ideas?

cot1198 wrote: »

Financial Ombudsman Service.

cot1198

geeka wrote: »

Thanks, think that might be my next option. i complained to nram and they are looking into it, ive had 3 "holding" letters saying they are looking into it. i checked my original documents and it said a together mortgage and a secured loan. the agreement is a CCA one. stil not sure if i am entitled, any ideas?

Not sure. If your secured loan was over £25,000 and says CCA regulated on your paperwork you could have a look at the thread dedicated to that. If it was below 25,000 I don't really know.

geeka

they are under £25k (about 14k)

cot1198 wrote: »

Not sure. If your secured loan was over £25,000 and says CCA regulated on your paperwork you could have a look at the thread dedicated to that. If it was below 25,000 I don't really know.

Baliboy

Does anyone have an update with this situation? It seems to have gone very quiet?

Thanks.

lennonc1

Baliboy wrote: »

Does anyone have an update with this situation? It seems to have gone very quiet?

Thanks.

We are just waiting on word from the FOS, it seems to have been passed to specialist team, so that sounds promising!
Are you due redress?

tracy7

lennonc1 wrote: »

Similar to Ppi refunds, online loans had tick boxes for Ppi pre filled, a 'technicality' but all the same had to refund payments plus statutory interest. As NRAM have accrued interest on all our payments taken whilst in breach, it is only fair that is included. My letter before action to them will highlight this and that I would be willing to leave that additional interest if they settle by repaying all payments directly and to leave term as agreed.

This situation is totally incomparable. PPI's were in many instances mis-sold, with the sole aim of extracting additional money from people taking out loans, and which were inappropriate and/or of no benefit to the person paying for them. The resultant payout included interest because having forced these people into paying this additional amount and incurring additional costs actually resulted in a real financial loss to that person.

In my personal experience of this situation I was forced into taking out a PPI as the loan would not be agreed without it in place, this was in spite of my stating that working in the NHS I would be covered by sickness pay for a number of months should I become ill or have an accident and that my employment was unlikely to be at risk of redundancy. I successfully made a claim on this many years ago before PPI became all the rage.

I think that many people have jumped onto the bandwagon of PPI in spite of taking out this insurance to protect themselves and these are the compensation culture vultures who have created an increase in the number of opportunistic, unscrupulous claims handlers bombarding people with unsolicited text and phone calls to reclaim this cash. Well thanks to all those people we will all be subjected to an increase in costs passed on from those financial institutions whether that be fees for bank accounts, loans, credit cards or reduced interest rates or some other method. When will people understand that these financial institutions all exist to make money, otherwise what reason is there for their existence, and any losses will be recouped by other means.

In spite of various people stating that they have incurred financial loss from this technical (not deliberate or forced) error by Northern Rock this is simply untrue. This was money that you knowingly entered into an agreement to pay. Any CCJ's or fees incurred by not making payments on your mortgage were a result of your not keeping up your agreement. This could have been the result of taking out a greater financial commitment that you could not fully afford,and/or you continued to spend beyond your means taking on further debt until you could no longer afford to pay for it - YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS - STOP LOOKING FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO BLAME FOR YOUR MISTAKES.

I realise that there are many genuine people who may have lost their jobs and have despite their best efforts have been unable to get another job or others who may have become so ill that they cannot work and have become a victim of circumstances beyond their control and these are the people who should have their personal circumstances taken into consideration.

Evenfields

tracy7 wrote: »

This situation is totally incomparable. PPI's were in many instances mis-sold, with the sole aim of extracting additional money from people taking out loans, and which were inappropriate and/or of no benefit to the person paying for them. The resultant payout included interest because having forced these people into paying this additional amount and incurring additional costs actually resulted in a real financial loss to that person.

In my personal experience of this situation I was forced into taking out a PPI as the loan would not be agreed without it in place, this was in spite of my stating that working in the NHS I would be covered by sickness pay for a number of months should I become ill or have an accident and that my employment was unlikely to be at risk of redundancy. I successfully made a claim on this many years ago before PPI became all the rage.

I think that many people have jumped onto the bandwagon of PPI in spite of taking out this insurance to protect themselves and these are the compensation culture vultures who have created an increase in the number of opportunistic, unscrupulous claims handlers bombarding people with unsolicited text and phone calls to reclaim this cash. Well thanks to all those people we will all be subjected to an increase in costs passed on from those financial institutions whether that be fees for bank accounts, loans, credit cards or reduced interest rates or some other method. When will people understand that these financial institutions all exist to make money, otherwise what reason is there for their existence, and any losses will be recouped by other means.

In spite of various people stating that they have incurred financial loss from this technical (not deliberate or forced) error by Northern Rock this is simply untrue. This was money that you knowingly entered into an agreement to pay. Any CCJ's or fees incurred by not making payments on your mortgage were a result of your not keeping up your agreement. This could have been the result of taking out a greater financial commitment that you could not fully afford,and/or you continued to spend beyond your means taking on further debt until you could no longer afford to pay for it - YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS - STOP LOOKING FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO BLAME FOR YOUR MISTAKES.

I realise that there are many genuine people who may have lost their jobs and have despite their best efforts have been unable to get another job or others who may have become so ill that they cannot work and have become a victim of circumstances beyond their control and these are the people who should have their personal circumstances taken into consideration.

I don't think any of what you have said is very helpful to anyone on this thread. You seem to want to get on your soapbox about this and are not supportive of the thread, so why post on it? Do you want people to simply bow down to banks and financial institutions and simply not complain under fear? This site has a consumer rights focused ethos. This is what this is about. Do you think Martin Lewis was wrong in supporting and guiding customers to reclaim bank charges? Rather than spout about people making unscrupulous claims, why not bang on about the often unscrupulous activities of these banks and financial institutions, which helped fuel the circumstances and weight of national debt they are now all asking us to shoulder.

Ultimately, you have no idea about the circumstances of NRAM customers and to make a sweeping statement is just nonsense.

There are all sorts of different circumstances but the law is there and the CCA underwrites and supports these loans. NRAM use this law to their advantage when it suits. Simply, the boot is on the other foot now. This Mistake was totally unavoidable and actually occurred whilst the bank was state owned. They are not being generous or nice to customers. The law explicitly says that this is what they must do, this, and only this has forced their hand to cough up now before customers realise, because they know that there is no challenge and that they will have to pay up much more in the future.

NRAM have never despite their position and bailout been understanding, flexible nor sympathetic to customers plights who struggle.

This mistake was discovered in February last year. Has it occurred to anyone just what they were doing for so many months?

The money has been paid each month during that time by customers, many who might have struggled or scraped together the monthly payments not aware that NRAM knew they had no right to be demanding payment of interest within these payments. Most of these Together linked loans are over a very long period of time 20/25/30 years. They are also fixed sum loans which means that the interest is pre-calculated and is front loaded. So unless you are in the last few years of your loan, each payment in the beginning and early years of the loan is made up of mostly interest and very little capital repayment of the loan.

You should also remember that NRAM are quick to charge monies if customers miss payments and are quick to add them to the balance. Just think of the customer who has struggled to make payments and especially during this period has been a few days late and then receives a late payment charge from NRAM.

So the demand that any redress is paid directly is valid as is the 8% interest as they continued to demand payments even when they knew about the mistake many months ago and did not tell customers until December 2012.

Wasn't it only recently that they were happy to pay bonuses to NRAM staff of an average of £3,000? Will that push up charges and make things more expensive? Your argument is completely flawed.

Evenfields

geeka wrote: »

they are under £25k (about 14k)

If your loans were regulated by the CCA and were linked to the Together product, and under 25k then I believe clearly your loans would have been included in the mistake redress.

I would call them today and ask for someone to look asap and stake your claim for them to investigate. There seems to be lots of overlooked people, and suggest that this is possibly just another symptom of their poor systems.

I believe it was only the stand alone unsecured personal loans that were not involved.

Good Luck!

Evenfields

davross wrote: »

Has anyone with a secured loan got a refund yet or is it just those with unsecured loans so far?

I believe both Secured and Unsecured loans under the 25k (not stand alone unsecured personal loans) linked to Together mortgage were ALL affected. However if your loan was over 25k and your agreement states it was regulated by the CCA then take a look at the other thread on this site dedicated to this.

Good Luck!

geeka

I have a complaint in saying i think im entitled so will see what they come back with, 3 holding letters! fingers crossed but not hoping.

Thanks for the info, much appreciated. will keep people updated as to progress.

Evenfields wrote: »

If your loans were regulated by the CCA and were linked to the Together product, and under 25k then I believe clearly your loans would have been included in the mistake redress.

I would call them today and ask for someone to look asap and stake your claim for them to investigate. There seems to be lots of overlooked people, and suggest that this is possibly just another symptom of their poor systems.

I believe it was only the stand alone unsecured personal loans that were not involved.

Good Luck!