I am about t send the following letter to Attia.
Any comments, anything to add please?
Ms A. Attia
Capstone Mortgage Service
Royal London House
22-25 Finsbury Square
EC2A 1 BX
Dear Ms Attica
I am in receipt of a most concerning letter from your Collections Department dated 9th November, although what prompted them to send it is not clear as we have an agreement for the repayment of the arrears for some years now and if was not for your exorbitant charges that seem to be set against the arrears, the arrears would have been paid off by now and this is up-to-date and paid on time, although I realise that this is part of your business model that enables you to achieve 10% of all repossessions in this country and I am sure that you are justifiably proud of the fact that no company has made more people homeless each week since the blitz.
However, can you please explain to me how the arrears were £1,074.57 on the statement for 17/9/10 to 5/11/10 and on your letter of 9th November the arrears are shown as £1,392.53. Please let me know by return why the arrears have increased by £317.96.
Most concerning is the thinly veiled threat contained in the last paragraph of the letter, that asks us to think very carefully about where we should live should Eurosail -UK 2007-4BL PLC commence legal proceedings to repossess our property. This is unjustified as we are completely up to date with the agreed arrears repayments and with the monthly mortgage payments. At the moment, I would like to know what is was that prompted such a letter to be sent and for your reassurance that Eurosail are not about to try to repossess our house. Threats such as this are completely in contravention of the lending code and I will be complaining in the strongest terms to the FOS about this. I will also be contacting the OFT to make them aware of this most unprofessional way of doing business.
I will also be contacting the Richard Dyson of the Mail on Sunday who, as you undoubtedly know, has written a most unflattering article about your company and is looking for follow-up material.
With regard to the various charges your people are at great pains to detail once more,
I would like to bring your attention to the following statement by The Office of Fair Trading:
"A term in a mortgage agreement which requires the borrower to pay more for breaching the contract terms than actual costs and losses caused to the lender by the breach (or a genuine pre-estimate of that) is likely to be regarded as an unfair penalty and to be unenforceable both at common law and (in a consumer mortgage) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations“.
We believe that the charges you have levied of £2,430.00 since March 2003, far exceed any true cost to yourself as a result of our breaches and any genuine pre-estimate you could conceivably reach. If you disagree, then will you please demonstrate this by letting me have a full breakdown of the costs to which you have been put to as a result of our breaches, in order to reassure us that your charges really do reflect your costs.
I have complained to you previously about your charges and the letter you sent in response was most unsatisfactory and no attempt was made to justify your charges.
I will, therefore, be contacting the OFT about your charges and filing a complaint with the FOS about the way in which you do business and about your charges after giving you another opportunity to answer my legitimate question as to how my money is being spent on your charges.
I will be taking this further action if I do not have a satisfactory reply from you by 1st December.