Northern rock loan over £25,000

Lippyx

carlyberyl wrote: »

What I don't understand is say for instance someone is taken to court for burglary...they admit they're guilty and more than likely they will go to prison/have to do community service/pay fines etc...nram admit in a court of law to being guilty...and get off scot free. How?they admitted they were at fault so how did they get off? I wonder how the previous judge feels being made a mockery of? He saw them for what they are, so what has swayed these other three after nram admitted to being at fault? Something just doesn't add up! And may I also point out...who funded nram taking themselves to court? Was our redress used instead to buy them some big shot lawyers to guarantee their win? Mmm, wonder how much that cost? I dare say quite a chunk of what should have been ours if they had just backed down after the last ruling!

They are totally covering up something!!You've hit the nail on the head... They admitted to the c*ck up, so how can it still be ruled in their favour?

worriedindebt

As much as I desperately needed us to win, I'm not surprised at all.
This is as much about taxpayers money as anything else.. There was never really any chance of joe public paying for redress, and there never will be.

I'm fully aware of how these things work in the old boys network, you only have to look at the cover ups down the years to see the strings are pulled from way up the feeding chain.
We gotta bite the bullet and accept defeat I think. For me it means debt until I retire and a very very expensive mistake but life goes on I suppose.

KID77

I have been watching this thread the last few months and want to thank you all for keeping me up to date with this situation. I am obviously very disappointed at the result, I still have £24k left to pay of this loan, I still have my mortgage with them so interest rate still at 4.78%.
Does the fact the paperwork is wrong mean the unsecured debt is unenforceable in court or am i being stupid and this is part of what the outcome was on tuesday?
I am in a dmp but chose to leave my nram loan out of it because I was scared as its kind of connected to mortgage. I now feel that maybe I should add it....why should they get preference over other creditors....Ill think more about this.

keg1keg

Lippyx wrote: »

I was going to write a letter to Mr Cameron but now I am going to write to a local MP. Apparently he is well known for taking on and looking into things like this, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
I might still write to David Cameron just to tell him how disappointed I am withthe system that's meant to protect borrows. Maybe we all should do the same!

Without sounding too negative- MPs are a waste of time. They contact F.O.S on you behalf who are another waste of time, who contact Nram ······ I'm sure you know where I'm going with this.
That's how it started really. I suppose it's better than doing nothing thou. :mad: still fuming !!!

NorthernRockVictim

keg1keg wrote: »

Without sounding too negative- MPs are a waste of time. They contact F.O.S on you behalf who are another waste of time, who contact Nram ······ I'm sure you know where I'm going with this.
That's how it started really. I suppose it's better than doing nothing thou. :mad: still fuming !!!

Keg, you're spot on, its happened to me in the past regarding an issue where I was 100% in the right!

Barny1979

It may have already been mentioned, but found it slightly laughable that MSE finally acknowledged the issue with an article on Thursday, took them long enough to acknowledge, when there was no interest previously.

fermi

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2015/05/nram-borrowers-with-loans-of-25k-may-get-compensation-if-appeal-goes-their-way

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2012/12/further-customers-call-for-northern-rock-compensation

Interest shown at least.

carlyberyl

Come on Martin, can't you get involved now?! Help us!!

IainHL

KID77 wrote: »

Does the fact the paperwork is wrong mean the unsecured debt is unenforceable in court or am i being stupid and this is part of what the outcome was on tuesday?

My (limited) understanding of this is that there is still a contract between the two parties, it's just that we (the borrowers) are not afforded the protections offered by the CCA1974. These protections are quite wide ranging, and specify a defined set of steps the lender has to go through should the borrower not keep to their side of the contract. Without these protections NRAM could resort to legal action against a borrower much sooner I believe.

KID77 wrote: »

I am in a dmp but chose to leave my nram loan out of it because I was scared as its kind of connected to mortgage. I now feel that maybe I should add it....why should they get preference over other creditors....Ill think more about this.

It could be argued that without the protections afforded by the CCA1974, and considering the sums involved would be above the threshold, that should a borrower decide to stop paying NRAM could decide to apply to make them bankrupt.

If there is someone with better legal knowledge than me reading this perhaps they could confirm this?

NorthernRockVictim

carlyberyl wrote: »

Come on Martin, can't you get involved now?! Help us!!

Too late for Martin to help I'm afraid, he can't contest a decision made by 3 of the most senior judges in the UK. Furthermore he may well agree with their decision, we just don't know!