Northern Rock Hard Sell

pitbull

sir_savealot wrote:

whilst the guy gave me the hard sell on the 'gold' loan protection, I went for the bog standard 'bronze'.

Would I be right in saying that there is a 14 day cooling off period on the insurance? If that is the case, simply cancel it before the 14 days is up

nsmith_2

In response to MarkyMarKD, I cannot see why you are so suppotive of the banks. Payment Protection conditions are very restictive and are more about making money for the banks than protecting the interests of customers. The fact is that an unsecured loan can be paid off at £1 a month, if you can prove that it is all you can afford.
Also, in response to Rafter, the point is that none of what you are saying is transparent to the customer. PPI may make loans cheaper for those that do not choose it but to cynically exploit customers who do choose it because they trust banks to give sound financial advise is completely unacceptable.

Xbigman

pitbull wrote:

Would I be right in saying that there is a 14 day cooling off period on the insurance? If that is the case, simply cancel it before the 14 days is up

In the case of NR, if you cancel the PPI they cancel the loan and offer you one at a higher rate.
Regards



X

MarkyMarkD

nsmith wrote:

In response to MarkyMarKD, I cannot see why you are so suppotive of the banks. Payment Protection conditions are very restictive and are more about making money for the banks than protecting the interests of customers. The fact is that an unsecured loan can be paid off at £1 a month, if you can prove that it is all you can afford.
Also, in response to Rafter, the point is that none of what you are saying is transparent to the customer. PPI may make loans cheaper for those that do not choose it but to cynically exploit customers who do choose it because they trust banks to give sound financial advise is completely unacceptable.

Because I have lots of bank shares!

And I don't agree the conditions are restrictive. For the vast majority of people, who are in normal employment (not self-employed), PPI will pay out for the time they are unable to work due to accident, sickness or unemployment - as the cover claims.

If people buy the cover who are not eligible for it, they should read the Ts & Cs and tell the lender they were not eligible. Problem solved. Most of the whinging about PPI is from people who were NOT eligible, but didn't bother to read the Ts & Cs.

You may be able to pay £1 a month, whilst your finances are completely wrecked. But most people don't want to get to that sorry state, and don't have no money at all. Such people will lose all their savings, or whatever, if they don't purchase PPI - their choice.

I wouldn't EVER purchase PPI because I wouldn't need to - I can pay my liabilities out of my savings or do something else to resolve the situation. But that doesn't mean that lenders shouldn't offer PPI. I've already said that they should take NO as an answer, and that's what they'd get from me. But to claim lenders shouldn't even offer it is just silly.

MarkyMarkD

MrSmartprice wrote:

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?

You might suggest that Nationwide's flat price and reject approach is better. I would suggest the opposite.

If every lender took Nationwide's approach, more marginal (higher risk) customers would get rejected by any mainstream lender they attempted to borrow from. Even lenders who might have chosen to accept them, probably wouldn't, because they'd have lots of searches against their name.

Lenders don't risk price for the sake of it. They now have to accept 67% of customers, who they accept, at the advertised typical rate. So they can only risk price 33% of customers. These customers will, therefore, be those who they perceive as less attractive for whatever reason - primarily due to perceived higher risk, secondarily (or primarily if you are NR, at least from what people say) because they don't think they'll make enough money out of you.

Incidentally, if NR genuinely re-price your application if you change your mind about PPI, that is sailing extremely close to the wind with regard to advertising of APRs - in fact I would think it's the wrong side of the line.

If XBig has proof of that, he should report it to his local trading standards department.

The point here is that compulsory insurance has to be included in the advertised (or stated) APR.

TheBottomLine_2

MarkyMarkD wrote:

Most of the whinging about PPI is from people who were NOT eligible, but didn't bother to read the Ts & Cs.

Good point. However, many lenders know that the PPI is pretty worthless to these people but they don't bother saying anything at the time the loan is acquired. Swings and roundabouts, as they say...

tenbears10

I have been pressured into purchasing PPI face to face in Barclays before. I told the 'advisor' I did not want the PPI and they said that was ok but the application would have to be approved by the supervisor, this was another round of hard sell on the insurance. Only when I genuinely asked if it was a requirement to have the PPI to take out the loan did they back off and aprove the application.

Marky, your arguement that you have lots of bank shares and lots of savings to pay loans if you ever needed does not convince me that PPI is a good thing. I know people who have worked for barclays loans and they admit that the bank almost never pay out on PPI.

If people buy the cover who are not eligible for it, they should read the Ts & Cs and tell the lender they were not eligible. Problem solved. Most of the whinging about PPI is from people who were NOT eligible, but didn't bother to read the Ts & Cs.

So now they are giving the hard sell to someone who isn't even eligible for the cover.

HelenR_3

PPI makes the repayments go up so steeply , if youre secure in your employment and have other means etc then to take that out is to line the banks pockets further imo

lou_martin

I've had bad experiences with northern rock ever since i took a loan out with them a few years ago with PPI. Since then i have wanted to cancel the PPI but on the three occasions i have tried to do this they have offered a much higher interest rate if not taking out the PPI.
Plus on other loan applications with northern rock i have been given the sales pitch and heavy tactics when discussing PPI and got sick of it in the end. Plus the applications got messed up with all the wrong details on twice and i complained.

I have just recently got a nationwide loan at the advertised rate of 6.7% (without PPI) and told northern rock i wasn't happy and that's why i moved. I don't know other people's experience of nationwide loans but it was like a breath of fresh air to talk to a competent person down the phoneline and not someone trying to get even more money out of you. They were fine with me not taking out PPI, i said no thanks and that was the end of it!

Northern Rock and other similar lenders may be looking out for their interests in lining their pockets but my priority is to look after mine!! :beer:

MarkyMarkD

tenbears10 wrote:

Marky, your arguement that you have lots of bank shares and lots of savings to pay loans if you ever needed does not convince me that PPI is a good thing. I know people who have worked for barclays loans and they admit that the bank almost never pay out on PPI.

So now they are giving the hard sell to someone who isn't even eligible for the cover.

The lender will not always know whether the customer IS eligible or not. I agree that lenders should go through a basic list of questions to establish whether the borrower is eligible for cover, before even considering offering it to them. The slacker (more profit focused) lenders don't bother and just add it to the loan anyway.

That said, the Ts & Cs for the loan cover are easy enough to read and anyone who accepts a loan, doesn't read the Ts & Cs, pays the premiums and then complains when they don't get paid out, has only themselves to blame IMHO.

If your Barclays employed friends claim that they "hardly ever" pay out on personal loan protection, that suggests to me that they aren't checking the eligibility up front. I don't believe for a moment that they are rejecting valid claims, because it simply isn't worth their while - Ombudsman complaints cost far more to deal with than straightforward claims.