Northern rock loan over £25,000

downhiller

I believe he's been contacted. It was mentioned earlier in the thread.

fermi

bigbadwolf500 wrote: »

Is there a way to make him aware of this thread?

downhiller wrote: »

I believe he's been contacted. It was mentioned earlier in the thread.

I'm sure that is the case.

But I've flagged it up again to the MSE team just to be on the safe side.

Chrisb80

Just seen this update on the NRAM website:

What if my original loan amount was greater than £25,000?


In the case of loans taken out before 6 April 2008, the CCA regulations only apply where the amount we agreed to lend you (the amount of credit) was £25,000 or less.

With your loan, the amount we agreed to lend you exceeded £25,000, therefore your loan is not regulated under the CCA.

This means there are no changes required to your loan, which continues to operate in the usual way, and therefore no redress is due.

What if the statements I've been sent show that my loan is regulated by the CCA?

We are aware that some customers with loans of more than £25,000 have been sent documentation in the past that contained references to the CCA.

If this applies to you, we apologise for any uncertainty this may have caused.

We will be writing to all customers with loans of more than £25,000 to explain the situation and to provide updated documentation.

Am I entitled to a refund of the interest that I've paid?

If your original loan amount was greater than £25,000, your loan is not regulated by the CCA, so the issue with non-compliant CCA documentation does not affect you.

This means you are not entitled to any redress.

What if I don't agree with this decision?

You are entitled to challenge the decision we have reached. To do so, you will need to make a complaint to NRAM. See the Q&A on 'How do I make a complaint?' at the end of this list.



Looks like we are going to have to take some legal action. Anyone got any ideas?

bigbadwolf500

Would be good to have legal advice in drafting the first letter of complaint. Something that we can all use

downhiller

Complaint to NRAM
No joy then it's straight to the ombudsman

If this isn't mis-selling then I don't know what is. I'd imagine they're hoping this goes away without a fuss.

Wrong bet...

downhiller

My complaint email

Dear Sir/ Madam,

My account details are as follows:

Blah, blah, blah

With regards to the recently announced issues concerning non-compliant paperwork on CCA regulated loans issued by Northern Rock, we have an unsecured loan as part of a Together Mortgage. The original unsecured loan amount was for £30,000. The loan papers stated this loan was regulated and covered by the CCA. The loan agreement we signed stated the loan was covered by the CCA and we only signed on the basis that the loan was regulated and covered by the CCA. The start date of the loan was XXXXX. All subsequent statements received stated this loan was covered by the CCA.

Based on the latest communications on your website regarding this CCA issue, you are stating:

• In the case of loans taken out before 6 April 2008, the CCA regulations only apply where the amount we agreed to lend you (the amount of credit) was £25,000 or less.
• With your loan, the amount we agreed to lend you exceeded £25,000, therefore your loan is not regulated under the CCA.
• We are aware that some customers with loans of more than £25,000 have been sent documentation in the past that contained references to the CCA.
• If this applies to you, we apologise for any uncertainty this may have caused.
• We will be writing to all customers with loans of more than £25,000 to explain the situation and to provide updated documentation.

So you are now stating that despite our paperwork stating the loan was regulated under the CCA, that is not the case and you "apologise for any uncertainty". This is not acceptable and I wish to lodge a formal complaint based on the following:

• The original loan paperwork was misleading as were subsequent loan statements, all of which indicated the loan was regulated under the CCA
• NRAM is in breach of contract by failing to fulfil the obligations surrounding the CCA regulations, as was promised in the loan contract
• We are suffering a financial loss as a result of this breach of contract as we are not being afforded the same protection as those with sub £25,000 loans, and we will not be receiving financial redress for interest accrued during the time the paperwork was non-compliant
• I believe we were mis-sold the loan due to fraudulent and mis-leading paperwork

As a matter of due process I am registering this complaint with NRAM in the first instance. You have seven days in which to provide a satisfactory response. If a satisfactory response is not received in that time, the complaint will be escalated to the Financial Ombudsman for resolution and legal action may be taken.

I look forward to your prompt response.

Kind regards

claret_mike

I made my complaint yesterday - was going to post this but was too busy.

---

Dear Sirs

Re: Together Mortgage reference number xxxxxxxxxx

Further to recent press coverage that you are treating loans over £25k as unregulated loans, I would like to formally raise this as a complaint.

I believe that I entered into a regulated loan agreement which prescribed to the terms and conditions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. As part of this belief, I should have been afforded certain protection, which I now no longer have.

Whilst up to date there had been no loss to me and you had run the account in line with how you ran accounts that were given the protection of the CCA 1974, it is quite clear that we are at a financial loss due to not being afforded this protection.

Having seen the issues where you have found that some loans were missing the prescribed information, I have checked my paperwork and believe that my paperwork omits this information also. However, I am now informed that I may not have any protection under the CCA 1974 even though all my paperwork for the last 5 years has led me to believe that it was.

Under treating customers fairly, I feel that I have been misled and the agreement that i was led to believe to be in place has been misrepresented. I feel that even if the loan is technically outside the scope of the CCA, I believe that the contract we have in place is what was detailed in the paperwork that was signed and therefore this is what terms and conditions both parties are contracted to adhere to?

I believe that if this is the case then these terms have been broken and that as a result you should place me in the correct position as such under the terms and conditions within our contract.

If you believe that the terms and conditions based on the signed paperwork are not those that we are contractually obliged to then I would like to refer this to the Financial Ombudsman.

---

Not perfectly written I admit but I just wanted to get my complaint registered and due to work commitments, didn't want to hang on until after xmas and find that they took the full 8 weeks to decline as it seems as though they are inviting complaints on the basis that they feel comfortable with the fact that they are in the right.

The point i am trying to make - which may be better written by someone else is that if the CCA 1974 legally states that it cannot be used for loans above 25k, there is still a contract in place which both parties agreed to the terms and conditions of that specific agreement.

I do not want to get a solicitor involved because I hope that the powers at NRAM of the FOS will agree that it's not fair on the consumer to provide misleading paperwork.

Having looked at how the FOS have viewed complaints where customers have believed to have been misled- there is clear evidence of upheld complaints for far less issues than the one here...

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/18/july-misleading.htm

principal 6 & 7 on here seems to have been well and truly broken also.

Principle 6 (customers' interests)

"A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly."

Principle 7 (communications with clients)
"A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading."

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/rules-codes.html

Think I may have to look at clarifying the points that I want to make in my complaint.

downhiller

for me it hinges on two points, namely which is the over-riding part

The £25k limit
or
The fact the loan papers state it's CCA regulated

NRAM appear to be saying it's the £25k limit which is the key thing. In that case, we were mis-sold the loans. It's undisputable.

Going back to an earlier post I made, there are two outcomes:

They give us the same protection afforded to those with sub 25k CCA regulated loans, and we get our interest refunded. This is the cheapest option for "the tax payer"/ NRAM

or

They don't give us that protection, we go after them for mis-selling and we get the loans written off, interest and payments we've paid refunded along with interest due to us ( on PPI claims I believe it was 8%?) This would be a horrendously expensive outcome for "the tax payer"/ NRAM

They simply cannot stick their necks in the sand about this and I will not be fobbed off.

claret_mike

I think you have to be clear on what you mean by mis-sold.

Did you take the product out through a broker or direct? If you took it direct, it was most likely a non-advised sale so you will probably get this pointed out to you in that it was not sold to you.

If it was a broker, my understanding from PPI mis-selling is that you will be directed to make a complaint against the broker for mis-selling you the loan.

The crux of this issue is that the paperwork was misleading, which in effect has put you in a position of expecting some form of protection when it never existed. The misleading paperwork is responsible for the issue.

Prinicpals 6 & 7 which FSA principals for business have been broken and I think if you are expecting to go down the legal arguments, you would be better going the solicitor and court avenue but if you want to go down the FOS avenue, we need to argue in a language they are more familiar with.

Luckily I have more knowledge of the industry now than I did when i took this out and have people I can talk to who can give me places to look for research.

Just a small observation but I think we need to differentiate the difference between mis-sold and misled.

I really hope that NRAM just see sense and do the right thing and we do not have to go to the FOS.

mancpickup

"The consumer credit act 1974 lays down certain requirements for your protection, which should have been complied with when this agreement was made. If they were not, we cannot enforce the agreement against you without a court order"

Northern Rock have clearly not complied with the CCA as they have issued a loan larger than the agreed sum. Does anybody else have this in their original agreement and does it matter?