this is my draft
In reply to your email on Friday the 18th of June.
Firstly today I have received a letter from Barclays informing me that my monthly mortgage payments have gone up by £143 per month that when you calculate over the remaining term of the mortgage it equates to approximately 24k which is very near to the figure which was assumed by the bank to be my arrears. There was no explanation or calculation attached which I find hard to believe. So after contacting the bank and asking the adviser he confirmed that the bank had added on the amount to cover the arrears ( that don’t exist) so in reality I am going to pay the arrears twice. This below is what the ombudsman told your clients to do but unfortunately they obviously cannot read I quote
From the ombudsman to Barclays
My final decision is that Barclays Bank UK Plc should:
· Restructure Mr A’s mortgage as if any arrears balance was added to the main balance of
the mortgage and the arrears extinguished upon the inception of the mortgage set out in
the mortgage offer dated 29 June 2019.
· Amend Mr A’s credit file and any internal records in line with the above – so that any
arrears were cleared upon inception of the new mortgage
I have asked the bank on numerous occasions for statements in relation to the so called arrears and my overpayments Which add up to a few thousand pounds so I can calculate what is also owed to me. They are refusing to give the statements to me stating that because I have missed payments they do not have to supply them , I don’t believe this is right and is not in line with the banking code of conduct.
The fact that your clients have only just woken up and instructed you is no concern of mine. It is simply a further demonstration of their poor attitude to the interests of their customers and also their disregard for decisions made by the financial ombudsman service.
You refer to a "short delay" but I notice that you are unwilling to give any kind of commitment. Your letter is littered with "as soon as possible" and "in due course". But the ombudsman's instructions are clear. So are the courts powers under the FMSA 2000. There is nothing to consider no negotiation to be had and no compromises to be made - so why the delay?
Because you have made me feel sorry for you I'll give you an extra week.
If it was simply a question of money that hadn't been paid, I would agree. There would be no question of prejudice. However, we are talking here about damage to my credit file which has gone on now for well over a year and a half. Your clients may not care about their own reputation but I certainly care about mine.
The damage to my credit reputation is totally without justification. It is unfair treatment not to mentioninaccurate data processing. It is continuing and your clients are wilfully exacerbating the problem. It's not clear to me whether they are doing this deliberately or simply because of their ineptitude. Do you know?
I'm quite happy that you share these documents with the court. Especially your admission that your clients have only just now instructed you despite the fact that this matter has been ongoing for a considerable time.
Frankly I would have thought that it would be in your client's interest not to reveal how slack their attitude and procedures are – but that's a matter for you.
And incidentally, there will be no question of costs if you simply don't try to put any response or defence.
The ombudsman's decision is binding and there'sactually no reason for you to get involved except to hold a dialogue with your client and tell them to get a move on.
If your clients instruct you to get involved, then it will be completely unnecessary. This is not a contentious matter. There will be no need for an injunction if your client simply did what they were told by the ombudsman – which they will eventually have to do anyway.
I'm preparing the form N322 to apply for an ex parte injunction as we speak.
Legal proceedings for statutory breaches of FCA regulations and also the Data Protection Act will follow once your clients have complied with the FCA direction – whether they do it voluntarily or they are forced to by the court.
So don't come back and say you didn't know about that either.