RBS charge on house
Hi All.
I'm new on here, so please forgive me for any mistakes I may make.
I can't find a similar problem to mine, so that's why I am starting a new thread.
It's a long story, but in simplified terms, this is what has happened.
My mum had a loan with the R.B.S. My brothers and I were paying it on her behalf for a few years as it was secured on the family home, and she had since emigrated.
Sometime in 2001 my mum got a refund cheque back from the R.B.S. for approx £300 (I will look for the paperwork soon). I cease to make payments as I assume that the loan is paid.
There has been NO correspondence in the following years.
Fast forward to 2003. In the proccess of buying my mum's house from her their is a charge on it for approx £7600 the solicitors for the R.B.S say that it has to be paid before the transfer can take place. My mum lets it come out of the money due to her to let the sale complete.
I phone the R.B.S on my mums behalf, they say that as far as their records can see, it was paid off in 2001 like I said. They ask me where the witheld £7600 was sent. I phone THEIR solicitors they are not doing anything apart from trotting off well worn stock answers.
When I get anywhere, the person I have been dealing with inevitably leaves the company, goes on holiday
I get really stressed dealing with it and leave it for months at a time because I get frustrated with situation and need to get on wth life.
Anyway, the last letter I received from the Solicitors said:
26th April 2006
Dear Mr xxxxx
The Royal Bank of Scotland
We write further to your recent call to these offices and copies of correspondence sent to us.
We have now had the oppurunity of reviewing our file and the copy correspondence sent ot us. Although a refund may have been made to your mother(Mrs xxxx) in September 2001, from the statements we hold on this file this refund should have never been made as at that time the liability had not been repaid in full.
Our clients hold no information to suggest that the liability was fully repaid in or around 2001. The schedule of payments we hold on file suggests that at he period in question, substantial sums remained outstanding.
We trust the above satisfies matters. However if you have further queries please do not hesitate to contact us.
Yours faithfully
xxxx
Hope this is making sense for anyone with the patience to read it:o
I am not saying that they are wrong, but what do I do next? The solicitors ambiguous "substancial sums remained outstanding "does not instill a lot of confidence, surely they know EXACTLY how much was owed. Is it normal to owe so much money and not have the lender ask for it back after previously paying it every month for years?
I would be grateful for any help in this matter.
Thanks
Similar Threads:
Reply With Quote