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

kazonuk

daisymay2008 wrote: »

still heard nothing they have until 21st June then I can and will complain to FOS, that will be over 6 months since I raised the issue with them, which I feel is disgraceful, something tells me they are stalling for a reason, either they are hoping ex customers will forget all about it or they are trying some kind of low baller and use some lame excuse not to pay out

I haven't heard anything either, but there is no way I'm going to forget about it, hopefully they will eventually get round to the ex-customers

whatWasWrongWithNRAM

This was posted on the NRAM site:


We have now written to the majority of existing NRAM customers, providing specific details about the impact on their loan account which may include the amount of redress, revised monthly payments and revised term end date if applicable.
We will be writing to the remaining existing NRAM customers shortly.
We are now focusing our attention on redeemed customers and will write to those who are affected before the end of June 2013.

Evenfields

whatWasWrongWithNRAM wrote: »

This was posted on the NRAM site:


We have now written to the majority of existing NRAM customers, providing specific details about the impact on their loan account which may include the amount of redress, revised monthly payments and revised term end date if applicable.
We will be writing to the remaining existing NRAM customers shortly.
We are now focusing our attention on redeemed customers and will write to those who are affected before the end of June 2013.

'REVISED TERM END DATE' and 'REVISED MONTHLY PAYMENTS'

How have UKAR been allowed to change one or more of the prescribed elements of the loan agreement the amount of payments and end date? On fixed sum loans these are just that fixed, unless the debtor pays back early and redeems the loan and therefore the Early Settlement Regulations apply. WHY do they think they can fiddle around with the key elements of customer's loans? IF customer's consented to this, they would need a fresh loan agreement. UKAR have not thought this through, is this even legal? What law or regulations have they applied in order to satisfy themselves that this is possible.

This also needs to be challenged with the OFT and get a response from them. The FOS will just look at customer's position of loss as a priority, the OFT regulate lenders and enforce (allegedly ) the CCA and associated acts and are supposed to keep their consumer credit licence holders in check.

I say a group complaint to the OFT pointing out NRAM's breaches of the CCA by altering the terms of the loans without customer's consent is the way forward and also group complaint to FOS stating that customers have not been treated fairly and also add this 'unfair' element to the complaint.

lennonc1

Good news - one of the guys we have been helping.

NRAM denied eviction warrant over contempt of court failure to prove entitlements.

In Lancashire today NRAM PLC (the UK Treasury owned toxic mortgage debt collector) were denied a warrant to evict a tax-paying mortgagor who, after falling into significant arrears became unable to pay their high interest rates and unable to move to a new mortgage deal due to his self employment status losing status after vast rivers of credit from the economic run up to 2007 dried up. This is a landmark victory and offers new hope for mortgagors up and down the country who have fallen into arrears or unable to meet payments of unprovable mortgage debt.
Initially NRAM issued the defendant a notice of eviction without a prior repossession hearing but the defendant was advised of his right that his case could be heard in court. After a second hearing, NRAM were denied the warrant to evict for failing to provide evidence of their entitlements including their rights to repossess.
The court tool a dim view of NRAM's failure to comply to the judges order. The warrant for eviction was suspended indefinitely and NRAM has been issued with a further court order to provide full evidence of their entitlements within 60 days. The suspension of eviction was indefinite and unconditional. The defendant mortgagor was also ordered to continue making "Contractual Monthly Subscription" payments for a set number of months though the nature of NRAM's claim of entitlement to CMS payments remains unclear.

This is a landmark case and the first case where a major UK lender has been stopped by a magistrate for contempt of court and failing to provide evidence of their legal entitlements. The law was changed decades ago but until now no defending case has been clear enough to prevent unscrupulous lenders from crushing mortgagors already deeply in debt and unaware of their own rights and entitlements. Today's verdict indicates a seismic shift in awareness by both courts and mortgagors and the message to the banks is clear.

NRAM have 60 days to prove their entitlement or they will have to relinquish any future claims or rights to the mortgagors property (his home for the last 10 years where he dwells with his wife and two children).

The think-tank responsible for creating the defendants case is compiling a detailed account of the two hearings and the events that led up to the indefinite suspension of eviction by the UK's largest debt collectors - NRAM PLC.

IainHL

lennonc1 wrote: »

.
.
The think-tank responsible for creating the defendants case is compiling a detailed account of the two hearings and the events that led up to the indefinite suspension of eviction by the UK's largest debt collectors - NRAM PLC.

Please do let us know when and where that is posted. I am very interested to understand what it is that NRAM have been unable to provide.

geeka

Hello,
I had a letter from nram saying no chance even though I think I have a case, they never said why they didnt agree just that they uphold their decision that i shouldnt get redress. Can they do this or should I write back and ask them to advise which part I fall down on?
I have asked for all documentation and paid them a tenner so am waiting so i can goto the ombudsman.
Would it strengthen my case by getting them to either say why they refuse it or will they just say nothing.?
Thanks
Tim

cot1198

TBH Tim I don't think it will make any difference at all. NRAM and the FOS have decided how they want this to go. All you can do is follow the same path as a lot of us have by complaining to the FOS, getting rejected. Asking for the case to be looked at by an ombudsman, getting rejected again. Now we must come together with a group complaint against NRAM and the biased FOS.

daisymay2008

geeka wrote: »

Hello,
I had a letter from nram saying no chance even though I think I have a case, they never said why they didnt agree just that they uphold their decision that i shouldnt get redress. Can they do this or should I write back and ask them to advise which part I fall down on?
I have asked for all documentation and paid them a tenner so am waiting so i can goto the ombudsman.
Would it strengthen my case by getting them to either say why they refuse it or will they just say nothing.?
Thanks
Tim

hi are you an existing customer or ex customer?

geeka

im existing.

whatWasWrongWithNRAM

Another Update from the NRAM Site:

We have now written to all existing NRAM customers, providing specific details about the impact on their loan account which may include the amount of redress, revised monthly payments and revised term end date if applicable.
We are now focusing our attention on redeemed customers and will write to those who are affected in July 2013.