Northern Rock Hard Sell

Stonk

He then asked me what assurance I could give that I could cover the loan if anything happened

Hello...? If they don't like the idea of possibly losing out to defaults, then they should not be in the business of offering unsecured loans. You should not have been pressured so heavily - a simple "no thanks" should do, or "I can manage without" at the very most.

MarkyMarkD

Hello yourself, Stonk. Like I said, it is an FSA requirement to make the customer aware of the risks involved.

Extract from a John Tiner speech, which in full is at: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/Pages/Library/Communication/Speeches/2004/SP176.shtml

16. In my mind, these three aspects of affordability are captured in a single term – common sense. But the application of robust processes and common sense by the lender requires borrowers to properly exercise their personal responsibilities, and these perhaps also have three forms. First, does the borrower consider the type of mortgage proposed as being suitable to their own particular circumstances? Secondly, do they believe they will be able to afford the repayments and interest in all foreseeable circumstances and do they need to acquire protection against unforeseeable situations such as redundancy or long-term illness? And thirdly, have they provided accurate information to the lender on which the lending decisions will be based?

- my emphasis in bold.

pitbull

MarkyMarkD wrote:

Hello yourself, Stonk. Like I said, it is an FSA requirement to make the customer aware of the risks involved.

Extract from a John Tiner speech, which in full is at: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/Pages/Library/Communication/Speeches/2004/SP176.shtml

- my emphasis in bold.

Which quotes mortgages and not unsecured loans. Yes you could argue it's the same thing but you are talking about different sums of money and circumstances. Also I would question if the text of a speech was FSA policy, please enlighten me as to where in the FSA rules/policy this statement is supported.

Like Stonk said, a simple no thanks should be sufficient.

Xbigman

Assuming it is FSA policy to *make borrowers aware of the risks*, how does that turn into *ram overpriced insurance down their throats*.
Regards



X

MarkyMarkD

It doesn't make any difference which type of borrowing we are talking about. All lenders should make customers aware of the risks involved, and asking what they would do in the event of accident, sickness or unemployment is part of that.

I agree that no lender should force unwanted insurance down people's throats - I also say NO when offered, but I've never found the pressure too untoward to bear. I'm sorry if NR were oppressive in their offering of this cover.

Xbigman

MarkyMarkD wrote:

I agree that no lender should force unwanted insurance down people's throats - I also say NO when offered, but I've never found the pressure too untoward to bear. I'm sorry if NR were oppressive in their offering of this cover.

I can remember buying 6 electical items together in comet to equip my kitchen and the salesmen mentioned warranties, I immediately shouted NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO and he took the hint. At the counter when I paid a young couple were being sold a warranty and they looked all worried and were obviously going to say yes. 'We' might say no but its the ones who are less forcefull that this generic hard sell culture really hurts.
Regards



X

MrSmartprice

We enquired about Northern Rock's "cheap" loan too, and found that there are hidden charges. If you want the money transferred electronically to your account they want to charge £45, which is added to the first repayment.

Northern Rock used to be our mortgage provider many years ago, but we ditched them after they tried to rip us off (long story) - in a nutshell they are slippery as a bucket of eels and we shall do our business elsewhere.

pitbull

MrSmartprice wrote:

We enquired about Northern Rock's "cheap" loan too, and found that there are hidden charges. If you want the money transferred electronically to your account they want to charge £45, which is added to the first repayment.

Northern Rock used to be our mortgage provider many years ago, but we ditched them after they tried to rip us off (long story) - in a nutshell they are slippery as a bucket of eels and we shall do our business elsewhere.

I'm beginning to realise that too.

To date I have not recieved the paperwork for the loan :mad: This however is not such a big issue as I have sourced the cash from elsewhere and was going to refuse the loan anyway :cool:

sir_savealot

I'm absolutely gutted I didn't read this post before applying for a personal loan with NR. My first application 'went astray' after I linked via moneysupermarket.com. When I queried this with the advisor, he said this happens a lot and to apply via NR's website! I did this under the same conditions as pitbull and had exactly the same treatment. Unfortunately, I needed the loan ASAP having already put down a deposit on a new car so wasn't in a position to tell them where to stick their loan. However, whilst the guy gave me the hard sell on the 'gold' loan protection, I went for the bog standard 'bronze'. One saving grace for this loan though is there is no penalty for early redemption, although I shall wait to see what happens when I intend making lump sum payments towards it!
:mad:

MrSmartprice

Why must these companies be so damn devious? NR loans look good value until you see all the add-on bits which make them no more than run-of-the-mill.

Instead we checked out Nationwide. Their loans over 3 years are £30.65 per £1000. That's 6.7% APR. No extras, no hidden charges, no higher rates. ( I suppose if they aren't willing to lend on those terms, they just refuse you.) But it makes it easy to calculate your total payments whatever the loan. Why can't NR and the rest do that?