I stopped them when I paid off the mortgage. It clearly *is* some kind of life policy, which rather incidentally tracks the mortgage sum remaining. When I phoned to cancel I was asked if I wanted to continue, to guarantee a payout to my (non-existent) dependents in case of death - even though there was no longer a mortgage outstanding. So it seems this was a policy solely in my name, with next of kin as beneficiaries, and the Woolwich were only involved to the extent that the paperwork for this policy was put in front of me when I signed the mortgage agreement. My partner had the same policy in place - also on a Woolwich mortgage - so we're curious about the possibility of misselling.

In fact when challenged on the phone - not very aggressively - they agreed to waive them. So one small final payment made, and credit file marked "satisfied."

I paid off my Woolwich Mortgage earlier this year, but payments to Legal and General continued. Like a lot of people I thought this was an insurance policy which would pay off the mortgage in case of death, and that it was compulsory. It turns out neither fact may be true. Apparently *some* banks require a policy *sometimes*, but I have no idea if the Woolwich was ever one of them. And the payout would be to my next of kin - an unlikely outcome, because I'm single with no dependents and no surviving blood relatives. I've made contact with L&G but the only signed document they can send me is a medical release form. They don't seem to have - or haven't been able to find - a direct debit authority, or any other application form. Apparently a capital management company was also involved, and they would have signed paperwork. (Or maybe not.) The mortgage was taken out more than ten years ago, so the traditional PPI term has expired. But I'm not sure this is traditional PPI. Has anyone been in a similar situation and had success reclaiming these payments?

Can anyone clarify the transitional rules for bailiffs? I had a debt that was passed on as a result of a liability order made before the 6th April, with a first letter sent after the 6th April. The bailiffs are - obviously - trying to claim under the new charges. Most sites seem to say 'Transitional rules apply' but I can't find a description of those rules. Looking at the legislation: The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Consequential, Transitional and Saving Provision) Order 2014, Article 4 it looks to me as if paras 3 and 4 apply, therefore the old scale of fees applies. But there's no mention of when/if the new enforcement stage fees apply. Does anyone know?

Car on HP with BH. Some way in to the agreement finances crashed and couldn't pay. Defaulted and taken to court. But BH didn't get a court order for repossession, and I avoided a CCJ. (Mostly luck, and a sympathetic judge.) Instead BH & I agreed a Tomlin order with minimum repayments, which I kept to. Final payment made recently. The Tomlin order explicitly said 'There is no order made in respect of costs.' BH have still added solicitor fees, court costs, and other legal costs adding up to a few hundred to the balance. Do these fees count as unreasonable costs? Can I reclaim them? I'm already planning to reclaim the usual BH late/returned payment fees and it would be useful to know if I can include these fees too. All help appreciated!

(Bumping for the evening shift.)

I have an ongoing claim on a card formerly with MBNA, now with one of their DCAs. (I'm deliberately not giving details at this point.) I have original correspondence from MBNA, including an invalid default notice with the usual mistakes: 1. The wrong broken term on the agreement. 2. Period of less than 14 days from service for remedy. 3. No statement of arrears, only a demand for full repayment. Also as usual, MBNA sold the debt to a DCA before the end of the remedy period. I have a letter of sale from MBNA, a copy of the comms log from a SAR, and a letter of assignment from the DCA. As usual again, the date on the letter of sale is seven days before the date of the notice of assignment. The notice of assignment is dated to match the final day of the remedy period. I believe the agreement is unenforceable for other reasons I won't state here, in addition to the usual reconstructed Ts & Cs. So I'm fairly sure my defence is strong. But I still have questions before I file my defence. 1. On what basis does a demand for a full repayment count as early termination/rescission? Is this because it implies the creditor no longer accepts that I have the right to pay arrears and bring the account up to date? Can anyone point me at the legislation that applies? 2. If I send a letter acknowledging unlawful rescission to MBNA does that leave me liable for outstanding arrears (even if they are limited to lawful arrears - i.e. no punitive late payment fees and interest on same.) Again, what legislation applies to this? 3. If the claim is wholly unenforceable, does that make claims for arrears remaining after rescission unenforceable too? I thank Caggers in advance for any help.