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

golfmeghol

bunnygreen wrote: »

I would be surprised if it isn't taken off of the existing loan. Personally I'd prefer a payout to get rid of other debts to help my immediate money problems but I wonder if there'll be a choice.

I have had no letter yet. Still haven't dug out my paperwork but still sure we qualify. Would just be nice to have the letter to confirm.

Oh and to answer a previous poster who said "at least we're on the ladder and we can overpay, etc" I wish I could overpay but we have no spare funds. We are in a situation that we have to wait until we are no longer in negative equity to be able to sell our house and then the only option is to rent for us, so I still feel regretful and foolish for taking this together mortgage out in the first place.

Basically the letter says if the loan is still current then any payout will reduce the loan, i assume the ambiguity arises where the loan is paid off they would have no option but to send a payment to you.
I also assume if they pay a lump sum off the loan then the payments should reduce as long as the term remains the same!!!

golfmeghol

amn wrote: »

Yes it was amended which is why the refunds are from 2008 on.

sorry Pie i disagree with this.
The 2008 legislation is only used to show that the CCA changed and therefore only covers loans under £25K. If you fit in the category i.e. under 25k and covered by CCA and NRAM have failed to send out correct documentation you should get a refund from the date that NRAM sent incorrect information out to you not just from 2008. It all depends on when the incorrect information/statements were sent to you

MooFace

Northern Rock used to do a LOT of mortgages with an unsecured loan attached to it. That way they could lend you more than 100% loan to value in total. It was very popular during the boom times. It also paid a large part in Northern Rock going bust.

The refund they are discussing is related to the unsecured element of these loans. They were basically just a standard personal loan just that the interest rate was only available to customers taking a mortgage at the same time.

Tiglath wrote: »

The Beeb is saying that many (but not all) of the loans were in conjunction with mortgages, in which case no doubt they were secured. Ours definitely wasn't - 10 year unsecured taken out in 2006.

Hevs81

Surely if they owe us money through their error , we have a choice how to receive the correction of funds. I for one will be pushing to have the cash in my account so I service higher interest debts.

It doesn't seem fair that if They have taken money from me that was not owed that I can't have it back !:mad:

davross

Has anyone that has moved to another lender or paid off their loan got a letter yet? Is says on the NR website that if you are no longer a NR customer you will get a seperate letter but doesnt specify when.

Pie-rosenberg

I have just tried reading the CCA. I cant find anywhere to say that it was changed in 2008. All my loan documents before this date do not meet the specified requirements. Therefore should i be refunded from the begining? My statements have only recently changed to the new style ones where all transactions are listed and the amount of interest paid.

Still doesn't specify the original loan amount though.

luckwudaveit

DSJS08 wrote: »

At the risk of going OT slightly I'd like to share a view i'm beginning to form with regards to these mortgages.

Sure, those of us in the NRAM together mortgage in negative/equal equity feel agreed, naive and perhaps in some cases duped into this position. BUT, at least we have the opportunity to overpay and reduce the mortgage in the way that a normal repayment works, all being at a higher rate than most at this moment in time.


The crux of my point is this: Give some thought for those people now who want to buy but cannot afford to generate a deposit, especially in times where renting costs are spiralling.

As much as I curse my poor judgement, I'm certainly starting to think that maybe we were (in a perverse way) lucky to grasp that final rung of the ladder whilst it was still there.

We're in the same position as you. We always say how silly we were to believe the mortgage advisor when she said we could rely on the value of the home to move on to a repayment mortgage after a couple of years. It was just as things were going wrong and I asked what would happen if NR went bust. She said it wouldn't happen. I guess I wasn't the only naive one.

Having said all of that, if we hadn't bought when we did, we'd still be renting.

golfmeghol wrote: »

Basically the letter says if the loan is still current then any payout will reduce the loan, i assume the ambiguity arises where the loan is paid off they would have no option but to send a payment to you.
I also assume if they pay a lump sum off the loan then the payments should reduce as long as the term remains the same!!!

Our unsecured loan is paid off, so hopefully a cash payout or a credit onto the secured loan (mortgage). OH will want it one way, I will want it the other:D

GhIFA

Hevs81 wrote: »

Surely if they owe us money through their error , we have a choice how to receive the correction of funds. I for one will be pushing to have the cash in my account so I service higher interest debts.

It doesn't seem fair that if They have taken money from me that was not owed that I can't have it back !:mad:

NR's original statement included the following: "We have not received any complaints or claims as a result of this matter and as far as we are aware it has not resulted in financial loss for customers."

So it would appear that they haven't taken anything that was not owed. The repayment is coming about because of a technicality - some wordings left out of paperwork that should have been included. Therefore, I would assume they are at liberty to make these payments as they see fit.

Shellybelly.81

HI, I received a letter today to say I could be eligible. I took out an unsecured loan pre 2008 for under £25k... should hear something in 8 wks but will check statements meanwhile... fingers crossed

fermi

Pie-rosenberg wrote: »

I have just tried reading the CCA. I cant find anywhere to say that it was changed in 2008.

Section 6 of the CCA 2006 inserted s77A into the CCA 1974.

Those changes didn't come into effect until Oct 2008, under the The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 3) Order 2007

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/77A

S. 77A inserted (16.6.2006 for certain purposes and otherwise 1.10.2008) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {6}, 71(2) (with Sch. 3 para. 2); S.I. 2006/1508, art. 3(1), Sch. 1; S.I. 2007/3300, art. 3(3), Sch. 3