Northern rock loan over £25,000

carlyberyl

In all honesty though, those under £25k didn't actually suffer any financial loss either...

Chrisb80

No they didn't but their loan was CCA regulated so the paperwork wasn't correct. If our loans are not CCA regulated then the compliance issue does not stand. Misrepresentation may exist and then NRAM are forced to repay costs to people where they shouldn't have enforced legal action. The CCA is their to protect both parties. I'm guessing the bill to repay people who have lost out financially is far less than redress for 40k customers. As I said, I hope I'm wrong as a cheque for £6k would be great! I have now settled my mortgage/loan and am looking at this as a nice to have, but I'm certainly not banking on it or making plans with the windfall.

carlyberyl

Yes we're in the same position, to be honest I wouldn't put it past them to wangle their way out of it, they've been doing it for years. It bugs me though when they keep saying about the detriment it will have in the public purse, hang on, we're tax payers so in actual fact it would be like we were getting our own money back!! I sincerely hope the judges see right through them though but I won't hold my breath

Seven_of_Nine

Dear all,

Today NRAM have published their Annual Financial Report. In terms of 'redress' it states:

Annual Financial Report

Provision for customer redress

The Group defines conduct risk as the risk of treating its customers unfairly and delivering inappropriate outcomes leading to customer detriment or impacting market integrity.! We have been remediating a series of conduct issues inherited from the legacy business, including the mis-selling of Payment Protection Insurance ('PPI') by Northern Rock and the issue of non-compliant Consumer Credit Act (CCA) loan documentation to certain customers.

In December the High Court ruled that customers with loans over £25,000, who had historically been sent incorrect documentation stating that their loans were regulated under the Consumer Credit Act ('CCA'), should receive remediation in line with that provided in 2012 on CCA loans of less than £25,000.! Therefore, a charge of £268m has been recognised in the year.! However, NRAM has sought clarification of this decision through the Court of Appeal and we are waiting for the outcome to be announced.! Should this appeal be successful, this charge will be reversed.

The Group remain committed to doing the right thing for our customers and where we identify issues that have caused customer detriment, we will ensure that they are fully remediated.! Apart from the charge relating to CCA regulated loans noted above, a further charge of £16.5m for customer redress has been made during the year to address inherited issues.! We continue to receive PPI complaints although the flow has reduced considerably and a further £27.7m has been allocated to this provision to meet anticipated claims over the next three years, however, this has been partly offset by the release of provisions for other previously identified issues that had been over-estimated.

Like previous post have said - I am very grateful to all for comments. I am still hoping that common sense prevails! Fingers still crossed!

keg1keg

Good, bad or indifferent ?

NorthernRockVictim

keg1keg wrote: »

Good, bad or indifferent ?

I would say indifferent!

Welsh_spoon

..except that they do not seem to have made financial provisions for redress should the Appeal be reversed...

DJBlu

This whole process stinks.

Judge awards redress they appeal and potentially get away with a slap on the wrist and a fine for misrepresentation.

Can't believe I was naive to think my loan was regulated by the CCA. Original loan amount was less than £25k but fees pushed it over to £25,380. Oh well. Can't wait to shift this debt away from NRAM, just waiting for the outcome of this.

What else stinks is the CCA 06 removed the upper limit.

"From 6 April 2008, when the £25,000 limit will be removed, the number of consumer credit and consumer hire agreements which may be regulated will potentially greatly increase. Whether the removal of the limit will have a significant impact remains to be seen. The Business Lending Exemption effectively reintroduces it with respect to business lending to sole traders and partnerships, and high net worth individuals may also agree to waive their rights. The scope of the exemptions may depend on whether customers are offered better rates of interest or other more favourable terms if they agree to a sign a declaration that one of the two exemptions will apply. In time the market will therefore decide the impact of the removal of the limit."

NorthernRockVictim

Welsh_spoon wrote: »

..except that they do not seem to have made financial provisions for redress should the Appeal be reversed...

Yes they have (£268m) but hoping to remove the charge if the appeal goes their way.

Welsh_spoon

..I couldn't see any provision for redress for misrep if the Appeal goes their way