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

RichieP_2

IainHL wrote: »

Secured loans are covered by the CCA (subject to the limits in place at the time the loan was taken, of course!). A further advance is additional lending under the original mortgage agreement and hence is FSA regulated.

I'm very confused here!
I've got 2 secured loans of £10000 taken out on my mortgage in 2003 and 2008. Does this not constitute a further advance? However, it says on my statement that they are not FSA regulated but does that not contradict the above quote?
I've also had 2 sets of letters from NRAM saying they need more time to look into my situation.
Could someone please shed some help or guidance on this please?

cot1198

gavman99 wrote: »

I sent off an email saying I wanted redress paid by cheque, don't agree to amended terms, etc. Got a letter back saying "we've taken legal advice, it wont be a cheque, reduced balance means reduced term, etc".

Not that bothered tbh but worth a shot anyway.

I call up at 9am every morning to check my balance. Still no reduction in balance though.

That is the same response I got. They said my complaint was a query.
I told them it was a complaint and I wanted it treating that way.
If you still wanted to complain send another email with the words 'this is a complaint not a query' at the top or speak to an advisor on the phone and they will pass it on for. You should get a letter in around 5 working day confirming your complaint.

lennonc1

RichieP wrote: »

I'm very confused here!
I've got 2 secured loans of £10000 taken out on my mortgage in 2003 and 2008. Does this not constitute a further advance? However, it says on my statement that they are not FSA regulated but does that not contradict the above quote?
I've also had 2 sets of letters from NRAM saying they need more time to look into my situation.
Could someone please shed some help or guidance on this please?

I see yes if your loans were covered by cca then worth looking into, if they have knowledge of your situation you will definitely be dealt with soon. It's just a big waiting game for us all!
Hope you get some good news.

tracy7

drussmonkey wrote: »

All very well said, and echoes what I was saying earlier in this thread. The method of redress is both the most beneficial to the consumer, and to NRAM itself in the interests of wrapping up these outstanding accounts as soon as it can.

lennonc1, you really need to stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of working for NRAM. I'm sure any employees of theirs have enough going on in their own lives to bother posting on this forum.

As another 'special rate' monkey I too would be interested to learn if the pushing gets anyone anywhere.

I wonder if this information (percentage of people put on a rate just 0.01% lower than SVR before the 7 year discount period) could be requested under the freedom of information act - just an idea!!!! Would save chasing round the houses and highlight any malpractice.

tracy7

lennonc1 wrote: »

Do you work for Nram?

You are entitled to your opinion. However I knew about the problems with statements years ago along with many others on another forum and this was highlighted to nram years ago, so we did know and so did they. I would have been able to get another mortgage no problem if I didnt take this Together mortgage. I have 35 year term from the advice of nram, 29 left to go, but I want to sell soon and if I do I will carry over the unsecured loan with an interest hike almost 4x, so paying quadruple what I am now is not a good prospect for me. I know this can be paid in cash I have already consulted my lawyer and read the full 127 pages of CCA 1974 and no where does that state company have right to choose method of redress....
The fact of the matter is they are non compliant with many sections and subsections of the cca so there is more going on than you think.
I think we have the right to decide. As many of us doing so by challenging that. I will take it as far as I have to in order for my rights to be heard and not dictated to by Nram.

No I don't work for NRAM, the banking or mortgage industry, I actually work in the NHS.

I just like to make informed decisions and choose the best option. My best option at the time was this mortgage product. I knew at that time the resultant extortionate rate which would apply if I switched to another company, therefore my intention has always been to pay off that part of the loan first.

I understand one answer is not always the best option for everyone, but to be absolutely honest and without disrespect to you, you knew these terms and conditions also. I think someone actually pointed out to you and others previously that to avoid this penalty on switching to another mortgage provider it would make more sense to apply for a cheaper loan to pay off that part of your together mortgage.

If you cannot afford to either pay off that part of the loan or have the credit rating to secure a cheaper loan how exactly do you anticipate you can move to another mortgage provider since you will almost certainly have no equity built up in your current property to be able to do that.

If I could have got another mortgage no problem with another provider I would not have chosen this product in the first place. It is absolute lunacy to have done so, so forgive me if I don't really follow your argument here, particularly since you've chosen to take it over a 35 year period, that is the mentality of people who pay out for extortionate APR's on pay day loans.

I'm sorry, I apologise if that comes across as rude and yes I do not understand your circumstances but I feel a bit like banging my head against a brick wall.

tracy7

I think there are lots of potential new threads!!!!

lennonc1

drussmonkey wrote: »

All very well said, and echoes what I was saying earlier in this thread. The method of redress is both the most beneficial to the consumer, and to NRAM itself in the interests of wrapping up these outstanding accounts as soon as it can.

lennonc1, you really need to stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of working for NRAM. I'm sure any employees of theirs have enough going on in their own lives to bother posting on this forum.

As another 'special rate' monkey I too would be interested to learn if the pushing gets anyone anywhere.

I do apologise, this is only that I've been told that employees have specific roles where they try and back the company up in forums like these any try and make cutomers think it's not worth persuing.
I am only trying to get a choice in the matter, it's more the principle of it if I'm being honest.

tracy7

cot1198 wrote: »

I as I think many others who are trying to get the method of redress looked at, are well aware of the implications of having the money in our bank account as opposed to having the money taken off our balance, our terms reduced and the interest we will save in the long run.

I for one am fighting for the right to choose how we get it back, thats it. At the moment it's their way like it or lump it. I have said before for quite a lot of customers NRAM's way will be a good way of redress. But one size does not fit all.

So you actually want to make this country slide further into recession, that NRAM should effectively pay out all that cash for your quick buck? That other public services should be cut back as a result? Think about it! This is all the same compensation culture gone mad attitude that will eventually send this country down the pan, just so long as you're alright jack! What about your family, children, friends.......

lennonc1

This is not coming from the tax payers money this money is there, in fact it has been deferred for 4 years and I know this for a fact, the money essentially is being written off so people who think its coming straight from the tax payer need to know the facts!

lennonc1

tracy7 wrote: »

So you actually want to make this country slide further into recession, that NRAM should effectively pay out all that cash for your quick buck? That other public services should be cut back as a result? Think about it! This is all the same compensation culture gone mad attitude that will eventually send this country down the pan, just so long as you're alright jack! What about your family, children, friends.......

This country is already down the pan! The bankers/Tories made sure of that, the economy will not recover for a few years, I myself do not plan to buy again once I sell, I will rent! Makes more sense just now for me!
This is not a quick buck for anyone, we have paid this interest so we get it back if they don't comply with regulations. They legal team they so gainfully employ have messed it up! Is that our fault?? No we are mearly just customers with no rights that had been moved to the toxic side of their debt! Anyway I see this won't get us anywhere, so I think going forward we should stick to our discussion relating to how we can seek redress directly. I'm sure within a few weeks we will be back posting our success stories.