Northern rock loan over £25,000

e.scrooge

I've found the following info on the web about the lead barristers in the case:

Malcolm Waters QC - NRAM
http://www.radcliffechambers.com/barrister-profile/malcolm-waters/overview

http://www.radcliffechambers.com/barrister-profile/malcolm-waters/consumer-credit

John Taylor - McAdam
http://www.fountaincourt.co.uk/people/ProfilesBatchView?bar=1159

Its clear from this information that Waters is an expert in the area in which this case is focused ie Consumer Credit Act etc. In contrast Taylor "has a broadly based commercial practice" (a quote from his cv) with comparatively little experience in this area. At least that's what it looks like to me. It doesn't seem very fair. At the end of the day the Appeal Court Judges can only make a decision based on the strength of the arguments presented to them - and based on their relative experience in this highly technical area its perhaps no surprise that the case presented by Waters ie NRAM won the day. If you read the transcript of the hearing it frequently reads to me like Waters had a much better grasp of the issues and the judges found it easier to follow (and be persuaded by) his arguments, which isn't surprising given his greater experience in this area.

I'm not sure what can be done at this stage but I agree that we should not give up. Trying to engage the press and MPs and let them know what happened here seems a sensible way forward. But we will need a high profile champion if this is going to go anywhere! And although any reasonable person would find it scandalous and distasteful we should prepare to be disappointed by the support we receive.

On possible high profile champions where exactly does Martin Lewis stand on this? He said on Twitter on 22nd July "I've raised NRAM with powers that be many times, yet got nowhere. I think you think I've more power than I do" So what exactly is his position - does he agree with the judgement by the appeal court, or with the original judgement? What is it he raises about NRAM with the powers that be? Could he please tell us? Martin is extremely influential in the UK - if you doubt that just look at his biography:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/martin-lewis-biography

Finally, another possible approach to raise the profile of the issue would be to start a petition on the UK Government and Parliament's Petition site:

https://petition.parliament.uk/

One could ask for people to agree with the very simple question "Make it law that what is written in a contract for a loan is binding on both parties" Not unreasonable I would say!

DJBlu

NorthernRockVictim wrote: »

Does his profile suggest a person who is unable to clear his unsecured loan? OH C'mon he's a millionaire, I know a lot about helicopter costs and believe me you can't own or even fly one unless you are very wealthy! I never have disrespect for self made wealth, BUT this character is seriously taking the Mickey out of us!

You know a lot about helicopter costs? That helicopter is owned and operated by Berg Helicopters in South Africa, they specialise in pleasure flights.

http://www.berghelicopter.co.za/

Take a look on the left of that site.

The guy was probably on holiday there.

Please stop speculating about stuff you don't know about as it's not helping.

The courts have decided. We lost.

If this was a big story then it would have been picked up like ppi. But frankly it's not. They made a mistake with the paperwork but the CCA stated that it doesn't include loans above £25,000. Ask yourself this.

Are we not equally responsible for not reading the CCA at the time and questioning it?

We now have the option of claiming losses from misrepresentation but we have to prove we have made a financial loss. Which is near impossible to prove.

Let it go.

carlyberyl

If you're not with us on this, why even comment? Nobody is forcing your hand. If we choose to continue the fight, that's our decision

keg1keg

Point taken 're helicopter. I have no idea about them and cannot read the wording on the side.
Regardless, I can imagine his future wasn't as dependant on a positive outcome as we were and he never shopped around for a top legal team !

nickyc1

Not active on Twitter myself but why doesn't someone tweet Martin Lewis and ask him if he could find out who appointed both sides solicitors in the appeal? Can't do any harm trying.

NorthernRockVictim

DJBlu wrote: »

You know a lot about helicopter costs? That helicopter is owned and operated by Berg Helicopters in South Africa, they specialise in pleasure flights.

http://www.berghelicopter.co.za/

Take a look on the left of that site.

The guy was probably on holiday there.

Please stop speculating about stuff you don't know about as it's not helping.

The courts have decided. We lost.

If this was a big story then it would have been picked up like ppi. But frankly it's not. They made a mistake with the paperwork but the CCA stated that it doesn't include loans above £25,000. Ask yourself this.

Are we not equally responsible for not reading the CCA at the time and questioning it?

We now have the option of claiming losses from misrepresentation but we have to prove we have made a financial loss. Which is near impossible to prove.

Let it go.

Don't be so rude, nothing worse than a keyboard warrior. I am not on LinkedIn in which means that I could only view the thumbnail which doesn't allow for detail. Yes I do know a lot about helicopters and all other aspects of aviation, but that has no relevance to this. My comments seem to have hit a sensitive chord with you, which makes me wonder why!

Please don't attempt to dictate to me with comments like 'let it go' it is my choice and I am not going to, it stinks of unfairness. May I respectfully ask you to refrain from negativity and therefore not to post here unless you're a part of the team. We're all working hard to achieve justice.

NorthernRockVictim

e.scrooge wrote: »

I've found the following info on the web about the lead barristers in the case:

Malcolm Waters QC - NRAM
http://www.radcliffechambers.com/barrister-profile/malcolm-waters/overview

http://www.radcliffechambers.com/barrister-profile/malcolm-waters/consumer-credit

John Taylor - McAdam
http://www.fountaincourt.co.uk/people/ProfilesBatchView?bar=1159

Its clear from this information that Waters is an expert in the area in which this case is focused ie Consumer Credit Act etc. In contrast Taylor "has a broadly based commercial practice" (a quote from his cv) with comparatively little experience in this area. At least that's what it looks like to me. It doesn't seem very fair. At the end of the day the Appeal Court Judges can only make a decision based on the strength of the arguments presented to them - and based on their relative experience in this highly technical area its perhaps no surprise that the case presented by Waters ie NRAM won the day. If you read the transcript of the hearing it frequently reads to me like Waters had a much better grasp of the issues and the judges found it easier to follow (and be persuaded by) his arguments, which isn't surprising given his greater experience in this area.

I'm not sure what can be done at this stage but I agree that we should not give up. Trying to engage the press and MPs and let them know what happened here seems a sensible way forward. But we will need a high profile champion if this is going to go anywhere! And although any reasonable person would find it scandalous and distasteful we should prepare to be disappointed by the support we receive.

On possible high profile champions where exactly does Martin Lewis stand on this? He said on Twitter on 22nd July "I've raised NRAM with powers that be many times, yet got nowhere. I think you think I've more power than I do" So what exactly is his position - does he agree with the judgement by the appeal court, or with the original judgement? What is it he raises about NRAM with the powers that be? Could he please tell us? Martin is extremely influential in the UK - if you doubt that just look at his biography:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/martin-lewis-biography

Finally, another possible approach to raise the profile of the issue would be to start a petition on the UK Government and Parliament's Petition site:

https://petition.parliament.uk/

One could ask for people to agree with the very simple question "Make it law that what is written in a contract for a loan is binding on both parties" Not unreasonable I would say!

Thank you so much for all that time consuming useful research, that adds a lot of weight to this if McAdam was not offered to choose his own lawyers. The petition idea is excellent too!

bumblesquat

Hi all, please be nice to me, I am on your side.

I have been reading all of your comments since the appeal decision was given. Prior to this i was just quietly hopeful and didn't realise there were so many people on here debating it. I was really hoping they would loose as, although I have just been able to get rid of the unsecured loan i had, I was stuck with paying over the odds for my Northern Rock Mortgage for nearly 5 years because if I moved it to a cheaper deal the unsecured loan would shoot up in price. I know I signed to say this was the deal but when things went tits up for them that meant that where we would usually be able to re-negotiate a better deal with Northern Rock and keep both loan and mortgage at a good rate, we were actually entirely stuck with them and their standard variable rate and had to hope and pray there were no rate rises in the meantime (I know there are many still stuck in this situation). It is for this reason I believe we are all entitled to some redress because we HAVE suffered a financial loss and being owned by the government they should have (in my opionion) allowed us to go elsewhere without such a massive penalty but they offered no help at all and until things improved we were personally hanging on by the skin of our teeth.

This article http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f8aef53d-b89a-4773-adf1-88f429d5258b did give me some hope that we could sue for misrepresentaion until I read at the bottom that ' In the circumstances of the NRAM case, most of the borrowers would also be likely to be time-barred from bringing any such claims in any event'. Does this mean there is no hope?

I have also just read this http://www.stockmarketwire.com/article/5083983/NRAM-to-release-provision-after-Appeal-Court-ruling.html which leads me to believe that there is no chance of it going to the Supreme court as they would surely still be holding onto the money put aside in case?

I do agree that just because McAdam is standing next to a helicopter it doesn't mean it's his. I have a picture of me next to a helicopter and it certainley wasn't mine. Also NRAM have always said that they took themselves to court and used 1 of their employees who had such a loan with them haven't they? I don't think (although I have no legal knowledge) that this would go anywhere as I don't think they were trying to hide anything there.

I also don't think we would get a great deal of support from your average tax payer as plenty of the headlines about this case have concentrated on the taxpayer having to pay out £260 million and we are only 41000 unlike the millions given PPI payments back by the banks.

I would love to see this overturned and us all get some redress. There are plenty of people saying we were all stupid to take out such loans and maybe we were but my financial advisor at the time seemed to think it was a wonderful idea and I believed him. I was gulible and I live and learn but 10 years ago this was an easy route to getting on the housing market and I was young(ish) and naive so i do feel I was mis-sold.

Good luck with anyone who wants to take things further. I will keep watching and if there's anyway I can be a part of taking things further I will happily join you.

NorthernRockVictim

Point taken about the helicopter, with hindsight it was totally out of order, so I unreservedly apologise openly to Mr. McAdam and all here for my remark.

carlyberyl

Sick and tired of seeing people telling us to leave it! If you want to then please feel free to do so, but why publicly comment when you can clearly see we are going to try and fight? Do you honestly think just because you tell us to we are actually going to listen?!
Here's a tip...stop trying to create an argument and cause upset, and go about your business. You do not need to comment further if you do not wish to continue this with us! Your comments are only going to stir up a backlash, so expect no other!!