Northern rock loan over £25,000

dc1777

I am afraid I cannot let Hanky Panky think he has won his argument. What part of being constantly told that a contract is one thing and then it is not doesn't look like misrepresentation. So then NRAM realise that for years they have been in breach of an act in force since 1974. They have continually failed to provide people with the docuemtns that they are obliged to do so, in exactly the same way Tesco have been found guilty. So now let me preach, I have a pension with stocks in Tesco, do I moan that my pension has reduced in value because of refunding interest, no I focus my frustration at the incompetence of Tesco for not running their company properly. PPI refunds mostly went to peolle who had not lost out financially. I had PPI that I could have claimed against, did I get a refund? yes. No doubt Hanky you would ahve sent yours back. NRAM have made a provision for this cost. Now the subject of the loophole. NRAM looked at refunding all of the interest and then thought, hang on, loans over 25k are not regulated and stuck two fingers up. They then and continue to say in all press that they mistakenly sent paperwork stating that people were in regulated agreements when they were not. This is factually incorrect. Most people were "sold", "assured" and "comforted" by suave salespeople stating that we can all sleep easily and then sent documents for six or seven years. Finally Hanky I notice you fail to acknowledge that some people have even been taken to court based on the CCA. The reason I am relived is, that when the Ombudsman sides with a state owned organisation with no real explanation then I start to smell a rat. At last and to NRAM's credit, the taking themselves to court has clarified the situation..... for now.

Lippyx

dc1777 wrote: »

I am afraid I cannot let Hanky Panky think he has won his argument. What part of being constantly told that a contract is one thing and then it is not doesn't look like misrepresentation. So then NRAM realise that for years they have been in breach of an act in force since 1974. They have continually failed to provide people with the docuemtns that they are obliged to do so, in exactly the same way Tesco have been found guilty. So now let me preach, I have a pension with stocks in Tesco, do I moan that my pension has reduced in value because of refunding interest, no I focus my frustration at the incompetence of Tesco for not running their company properly. PPI refunds mostly went to peolle who had not lost out financially. I had PPI that I could have claimed against, did I get a refund? yes. No doubt Hanky you would ahve sent yours back. NRAM have made a provision for this cost. Now the subject of the loophole. NRAM looked at refunding all of the interest and then thought, hang on, loans over 25k are not regulated and stuck two fingers up. They then and continue to say in all press that they mistakenly sent paperwork stating that people were in regulated agreements when they were not. This is factually incorrect. Most people were "sold", "assured" and "comforted" by suave salespeople stating that we can all sleep easily and then sent documents for six or seven years. Finally Hanky I notice you fail to acknowledge that some people have even been taken to court based on the CCA. The reason I am relived is, that when the Ombudsman sides with a state owned organisation with no real explanation then I start to smell a rat. At last and to NRAM's credit, the taking themselves to court has clarified the situation..... for now.

At the end of the day NR only have themselves to blame. So what if we are "jumping on the compo wagon", there is only one company to blame for and that's NRAM!! Like you say, they have sat on this "minor" misprint for years, and not mentioned it to anyone, hoping it will just fade away. You only had to look at the wording on their website about how the refund to people with loans under 25k didn't affect the loans over 25k, and we were told don't worry, its doesn't affect our loans etc.. Its all about how to word things, and if you say something in the right way, people won't take note in what words are being said, but how they are being said.


I knew from the moment I started my investigations that NRAM were hiding something, they were too secretive and their poor customer service department just didn't have a clue in what they should and shouldn't be saying to us!


NRAM need to face up to THEIR mistake and admit they have finally lost the battle, we will not go quietly!! They dragged me through the courts, cost me money in fees and legal advise, put a CCJ and an attachment of earnings on me and screwed up my credit rating and it turns out technically they should have never been able to! I will not be letting this drop!!

Hanky_Panky

Bignosher13 wrote: »

Hi Barney1979, we are in the same position as you. I'm getting a letter together to update NRAM with our new address, sooner rather than later.

The cost of the potential rebate equates to less than a tenner per person for the 29 million British taxpayers (by my maths?). I've read that the liability would not be met just from income tax. It's a High Court ruling so I've no moral guilt about a 6 grand windfall.

To our resident keyboard warrior ... I'm sure we could all meet you in person and refund you that tenner :rotfl:

When - where ?

tinystar2001

What a shame this forum is rapidly losing sight of its original purpose, and becoming a forum for justifying the outcome to Hanky Panky. Does it matter what she thinks? There will always be people in this world who disagree with others, but nobody needs justify themselves to her! As others have said, I suggest we ignore her comments and focus on the real reason for joining this forum.

NorthernRockVictim

tinystar2001 wrote: »

What a shame this forum is rapidly losing sight of its original purpose, and becoming a forum for justifying the outcome to Hanky Panky. Does it matter what she thinks? There will always be people in this world who disagree with others, but nobody needs justify themselves to her! As others have said, I suggest we ignore her comments and focus on the real reason for joining this forum.

Yes agreed, all should ignore him/her and then they will probably disappear!

Bignosher13

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

When - where ?

I quite fancy the south of France, next summer, once my 6 grand cheque has cleared. I will of course pay you a decent rate for serving me drinks poolside.

Obviously it will be done correctly with a legitimate and correctly worded contract. :beer:

jimbo5661

The above is subject to an unsuccessful appeal (don't tempt fate!)

The media have mentioned an average payout of £6k. What is this based on? I had an unsecured loan of £26,400 in 2004 and redeemes in 2012.

What refund did people with just under £25k get?

NorthernRockNewbie

Hi All,

A lot of you will have seen from my previous posts that I have been rather active on this board and been doing an awful lot of legwork and investigation (much of which I haven't reported on given the sensitivity).

I want you all to know that MSE news team have contacted me (after failing to do so on two previous occasions regarding this story) and have asked that I email them the various documents and information I have which puts some real meat on the bones of the recent news and would give Martin Lewis some real hard-ball questions to pose to Northern Rock.

I have explained to MSE that I am not simply prepared to offer up these documents on an email without certain reassurances which they seem reluctant to provide.

For this reason I'm going to now politely bow out of further posts on from here in favour of twitter.

NorthernRockVictim

Your sterling efforts are appreciated by those of us here who have a full grasp on what has been achieved by the minority.

Please don't disclose any documentation to MSE or any other media as their motivation is no more than publishing a story for their financial gain.

ALL - The judge's decision whilst favourable does not in any way signify an end to this fiasco. NRAM may appeal and whilst unlikely could win that appeal.

TonyScouser

Without searching all over the place would i be right in saying that i got a £20,000 10 years ago i'll not got anything back as it had to between £25-£30k ???