Northern rock loan over £25,000

Lippyx

CPR25 wrote: »

Although, as I've said previously, I don't think this case can be taken any further, however,...if....that's if...the misrepresentation argument was taken court, its not as clear cut with regards to the limitations of statute.

It would boil down to when it would be expected that someone (a reasonable person) would have known or should have known that a misrepresentation existed, Given that only now has it finally been decided in a court of law that the CCA rights aren't applicable, there's a potential argument that misrepresentation can still be used.

Saying that, what damage has occurred? .....I don't think there would be any benefit in arguing this case personally

Well, the fact that people with loans under 25k got a redress due to an admin mistake. We would have expected the same, as we were under the impression we were also covered, but as it turns out we are not, then we "missed out" on the redress, and NRAM were/are allowed to make admin mistakes and we won't be covered.


When you say reasonable person, do you mean an NRAM representative?

CPR25

Lippyx wrote: »

Well, the fact that people with loans under 25k got a redress due to an admin mistake. We would have expected the same, as we were under the impression we were also covered, but as it turns out we are not, then we "missed out" on the redress, and NRAM were/are allowed to make admin mistakes and we won't be covered.


When you say reasonable person, do you mean an NRAM representative?

No the person signing it.....the issue is what financial loss has occurred? The courts have decided that we weren't entitled to redress so we can't use that argument.....you also need to take yourself back to the time when you signed the agreement...were you aware or could you have been aware that a future claim for the redress was going to be made if your loan was below £25k? No...therefore what damages could you realistically argue.

I'm not trying to be difficult....just playing devils advocate

Lippyx

Yes, agreed, but we only found out we weren't entitled to redress because we weren't actually covered by CCA, even though we thought we were.


Its the whole "what came first, chicken or the egg!!"

CPR25

Lippyx wrote: »

Yes, agreed, but we only found out we weren't entitled to redress because we weren't actually covered by CCA, even though we thought we were.


Its the whole "what came first, chicken or the egg!!"

The redress from this case isn't a 'financial loss' in a court of law....you need to remove yourself from the situations of the<£25k's....their position is no longer relevant...the courts have determined we aren't entitled to the same rights....therefore there is no loss in this regard.

The misrepresentation argument has to be treated as a separate case.

keg1keg

Hi guys, still licking my wounds- absoulently gutted by the decision. I thought/ hoped we had it in the bag but looking back, they paid for our legal team. I'm sure they're a highly professional company but I can well imagine that their own personal team were far superior.
So, really in hindsight I should have expected nothing else !
Anyway, I think someone has proof that N.R and Richard Banks (who was paid a salary of £815k last year) were fully aware that the 25k loans were improperly executed along time ago.
Maybe something will come of this ?!?!

carlyberyl

Yes I read the same somewhere keg! I'd happily put some money into getting a legal team on this now.
I think part of the financial loss is when people were put on their ridiculous rates which were through the roof! Also if anyone had a print left on their file will have no doubt been made to take out a higher interest mortgage as they would have been deemed risky thanks to that, which was wrongly added as the contract still isn't worth the paper it's written on

NorthernRockVictim

So, could it not be said that those who are paying the hiked up rates shouldn't be because as an average lay person they did not understand the small print, and that in itself could have been considered as an error? Where does it end, when two parties sign a contract it's legally binding, end of! This whole affair stinks and the only possible way to get redress of some sort would be major media exposure, watchdog etc. Getting out of a legally binding contract like NRAM have done has widespread consequences!

CPR25

And the Lord said unto John "come forth and you will receive eternal life"....but john came fifth and won a toaster

keg1keg

Northern rock victim, are you on Twitter or Facebook. In fact are you all ?

NorthernRockVictim

keg1keg wrote: »

Northern rock victim, are you on Twitter or Facebook. In fact are you all ?

Keg - Are you all????