Tweet
Hi
I am just trying to understand the situation that I have found myself in with regards to the recent announcements by NRAM that there have been issues with their paperwork since 2008 which "breach"(?) the CCA 1974 and as a result they are looking to rectify those customers who have been effected. In essence there looks to be 4 years worth of interest charged when it should not have.
As a result of this, it has made me look in to this further but all the information being given by NRAM and various media sources were that it only applied to loans for £25k or below. This raised more questions for me and others as there are loans that have been given over £25k (mine being one of these) and the initial paperwork and all subsequent statements have stated that we were covered by CCA 1974. This loan dates back to 2006.
I feel that we have been misled and the loan is not what it said it was and because the paperwork stated in was regulated by CCA 1974, I took it on face value and it gave me peace of mind that I would be afforded some protection through the regulation. It would seem as though this is not the case.
What I am trying to understand/clarify is what the situation is where an unsecured loan has been represented as a CCA loan in the initial contract/paperwork and also in every statement that we have had for over 5 years. I now know that the amount clearly exceed the limits of the act and that the loan should never have been protected but the fact of the matter is that they have written and made these loans/agreements to look like they are CCA protected loans?
Ultimately, from what I have read so far - no one seems to know what the situation. Some suggest that it's a mistake that is acceptable and some suggest that it gives the right to make the loan unenforceable. My take on this is that had NRAM afforded us the same protection of the CCA and reviewed our accounts accordingly, I would have been satisfied. As it stands, I can only see that as a result of their dodgy paperwork sent in error over a period of 5 years, we have resulted in a financial loss through the fact that our contract is the same as someone who owes £25000 and they will have a lump sum reduced from their loan and we will not.
I have made a complaint to NRAM and will be looking to take to FOS if they do not offer to adhere to the T&Cs prescribed under the CCA 1974 as they have broken FSA principals of
However, I have read on a thread tonight that the FOS may not be interested because it is an unregulated loan.
Can anyone give any steer on this situation?
I am just trying to understand the situation that I have found myself in with regards to the recent announcements by NRAM that there have been issues with their paperwork since 2008 which "breach"(?) the CCA 1974 and as a result they are looking to rectify those customers who have been effected. In essence there looks to be 4 years worth of interest charged when it should not have.
As a result of this, it has made me look in to this further but all the information being given by NRAM and various media sources were that it only applied to loans for £25k or below. This raised more questions for me and others as there are loans that have been given over £25k (mine being one of these) and the initial paperwork and all subsequent statements have stated that we were covered by CCA 1974. This loan dates back to 2006.
I feel that we have been misled and the loan is not what it said it was and because the paperwork stated in was regulated by CCA 1974, I took it on face value and it gave me peace of mind that I would be afforded some protection through the regulation. It would seem as though this is not the case.
What I am trying to understand/clarify is what the situation is where an unsecured loan has been represented as a CCA loan in the initial contract/paperwork and also in every statement that we have had for over 5 years. I now know that the amount clearly exceed the limits of the act and that the loan should never have been protected but the fact of the matter is that they have written and made these loans/agreements to look like they are CCA protected loans?
Ultimately, from what I have read so far - no one seems to know what the situation. Some suggest that it's a mistake that is acceptable and some suggest that it gives the right to make the loan unenforceable. My take on this is that had NRAM afforded us the same protection of the CCA and reviewed our accounts accordingly, I would have been satisfied. As it stands, I can only see that as a result of their dodgy paperwork sent in error over a period of 5 years, we have resulted in a financial loss through the fact that our contract is the same as someone who owes £25000 and they will have a lump sum reduced from their loan and we will not.
I have made a complaint to NRAM and will be looking to take to FOS if they do not offer to adhere to the T&Cs prescribed under the CCA 1974 as they have broken FSA principals of
| "A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading." |
Can anyone give any steer on this situation?
Comment