201504 CM April
THE CICM JOURNAL FOR CONSUMER AND COMMERCIAL CREDIT PROFESSIONALS
THE CICM JOURNAL FOR CONSUMER AND COMMERCIAL CREDIT PROFESSIONALS
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
LEGAL COLUMN<br />
NORTHERN ROCK’S<br />
CONFUSING LOANS<br />
Northern Rock purported to incorporate the provisions of the<br />
Consumer Credit Act 1974 into some loans, which were not strictly<br />
regulated consumer credit agreements. Peter Walker reviews a recent<br />
case to see if the other borrowers could claim the same recompense.<br />
IN the first half of the 20th century<br />
Robert Benchley, a US humourist,<br />
would not trust a bank prepared to lend<br />
money to him, such ‘a poor risk’ he<br />
thought, but what turned out to be poor<br />
decisions by financiers, such as Northern<br />
Rock, were part of this century’s greater<br />
financial problems. A High Court judge in<br />
NRAM plc v McAdam and Hartley [2014]<br />
EWHC 4174 (Comm) considered some of<br />
Northern Rock’s problems in the light of the<br />
Consumer Credit Act 1974.<br />
The background to the litigation was<br />
that, after the nationalisation of Northern<br />
Rock, the business was split, and NRAM<br />
plc took over the pre-existing mortgages<br />
together with the pre-existing unsecured<br />
loan accounts. It has a new owner, UK<br />
Asset Resolution Limited, which has<br />
another subsidiary company owning<br />
the closed mortgage books of Bradford<br />
and Bingley. Taxpayers in the UK will be<br />
interested in the outcome, because the<br />
government has lent a lot of money to<br />
resolve the financial problems of those two<br />
financial institutions.<br />
The new companies deal with the<br />
transactions created by their predecessors,<br />
including certain unsecured credit<br />
agreements entered into by Northern<br />
Rock. Some borrowers took out secured<br />
loans of up to nine percent of the value<br />
of their homes and further unsecured<br />
loans of up to 30 percent of that value.<br />
Those unsecured loans were capped at<br />
£30,000.<br />
The two defendants in the NRAM case<br />
borrowed that full amount, but section 8(2)<br />
(since repealed by the Consumer Credit<br />
Act 2006 effective on 6 <strong>April</strong> 2008) of the<br />
Consumer Credit Act 1974 only created<br />
regulated consumer credit agreements<br />
when the credit was less than £25,000.<br />
Regulated agreements have to comply<br />
with provisions such as those relating<br />
to disclosure of information, and from 1<br />
October 2008 creditors have to supply<br />
periodic statements (s 77A of the 1974 Act).<br />
44 <strong>April</strong> 2015 www.cicm.com<br />
The recognised standard in credit management