Northern Rock End of Mortgaged Deal (Merged Threads)

MarkyMarkD

enay73 wrote: »

Thanks Marky for your post.

So in this case NR can sell my mortgage to someone else, in this case can I ask the company who is the buyer then?
Also if NR sold our mortgages to a third party,then why the government stepped in? It doesn't make sense.
Also if they want perhaps in the future rise the SVR it wouldnt be profitable for them as almost the people are in negative equity and they couldnt even cover all the costs and capital once they repossessed the house.
The government is US and it should be fair like in any other european countries to be treated fairly and with respect.
Unfortunately it has been lot of speculations about lending money, especially people s got high debts on credit cards.
In UK credit card companies, loan companies or other financial institutes have decided to put an interest rates to different people as much they like it, even so high as in other countries would be considered as sharks.
Perhaps the government should rectify and protect people and not putting on debts with high interests rates. I wonder why we are in recessions and we feel it everyday especially with honest people who are paying every pence to survive. That's not good quality life. I would considered something else.
Sorry for my thread but this is a reality unfortunately

Enay

No, NR did not have to tell you that it had sold your mortgage on. In every case, they continued administering it, and it made no difference to you that you were not actually owned by NR but by another company.

Similarly, no lender who securitises mortgages is likely to tell you that your mortgage has been sold on - because it's (in most cases) irrelevant.

NR ran out of money. That's why it got nationalised. Basically, it stopped being able to securitise but it kept on lending and then ran out of cash. If they had run their business more sensibly, they would have been able to stop lending in a managed way, without running out of cash, and the collapse wouldn't have happened.

I've talked previously about the fact that it IS worth lenders pushing rates up, even if it causes some increase in defaults and repossessions.

MarkyMarkD

picardygirl wrote: »

You say "the selection is that if your mortgage had been securitised by NR prior to their collapse - you will end up with NRAM" but wouldnt the customers whose deals ran out last summer/autumn and were eligible for renewal mortgages have been "securitised" as well ..... please dont bombard me with insults for not understanding the "securitised" mortgages part i'm just trying to understand ......

It depends how the securitisation arrangement worked. Often the lender (NR) would buy back a mortgage from the securitisation company if the customer switched products. But they wouldn't necessarily have to do so.

utopiah

picardygirl wrote: »

Thankyou .... so it has nothing to do with LTV, affordability or anything ..... pure and simple if new NR mortgage NR plc, if older NR mortgage (ie before collapse) NRAM .....


Im not so sure about that as i took out my mortgage May 2005 before NR collapsed and my mortgage is with new NR plc

MarkyMarkD

Keith wrote: »

Yes

The new lending is not done this way and those people stay with NR.

No lending undertaken since nationalisation was securitised, so it will all stay with NR. The only marginal case is those who switched products after nationalisation - as per my post above.

enay73

Thank you Marky for your reply.
well then there is not point ask why UK is in recession. they are too greedy to make money without thinking in which positions are putting people up.
Also I am concerned about this kind of behaviour by the government. If it has been nationalised in this case the government should help people and not distroy their lives.
It doesn't make sense. they are you go its all coming in one point, politics.
We should live decently and not struggling and living with fears that someone 's trying to get a profit.
I wondered why then there are too many people without job and claiming benefits later on.
We should learn from previous lessons without making the same mistake.
That's all I can say.
Well if in the case that NRAM will raise the interest rates we should know who is behind. Too simple do that and ruin people life and make them to loose a roof above their head. Shame!!!

picardygirl

utopiah wrote: »

picardygirl wrote: »

Thankyou .... so it has nothing to do with LTV, affordability or anything ..... pure and simple if new NR mortgage NR plc, if older NR mortgage (ie before collapse) NRAM .....


Im not so sure about that as i took out my mortgage May 2005 before NR collapsed and my mortgage is with new NR plc

Now i am confused ...... so utopiah has a securitised NR mortgage which has been retained with NR plc yet NR plc have not kept any old mortgages.

Utopiah, this is by no means a dig at you .... i'm just trying to get my head round how NR separated their customers from NR and NRAM and when i think i've understood it something new comes into the equation !

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

utopiah wrote: »

picardygirl wrote: »

Thankyou .... so it has nothing to do with LTV, affordability or anything ..... pure and simple if new NR mortgage NR plc, if older NR mortgage (ie before collapse) NRAM .....


Im not so sure about that as i took out my mortgage May 2005 before NR collapsed and my mortgage is with new NR plc

My daughter took hers out in 2001 and she just got her letter and she's with NR plc too.

tonyfaestoney

I have had my mortgage with NR for 7years now and am now with NR PLC, probably 80% LTV if that makes any difference.

deefadog

Interesting, so 2 older mortgages retained on Plc.

Can i ask if you have both made overpayments? Just thinking that people who have been making overpayments look like they will clear the debt first so were put on NRAM? Just a thought...

Alisonb1975

Our mortgage is 8 years old and unfortunately we are also NRAM. 41% LTV and made overpayments of over £10,000 in the last year. Cant really understand how they have decided but we will move in a few months time when we can.