As for the success stories. Go onto Moneysavingexpert site and search for MSE News: Thousands of Santander mortgage holders could get payouts after blunder Got to the last page of the 2 year long thread and you will be happy and hopeful 18th Nov 15, 12:31 PM Hi there, i had a letter from the FOS about 2 weeks ago after they called me earlier that week. Essentially they have decided that Santander was at fault, and they have negotiated me a good compensation deal of £5849. I was on a fixed mortgage w Abbey National that ended in 2011, and I never received any letter at the time about the cap margin increase, even though I could have got out without an ERC. The compensation was worked out by looking at the best deal on the market at April 2011, and giving me the difference in interest between it (1.99%) and what I paid, up until 2014 when I sold the property. They agreed to waive the arrangement fee I would have paid, and also paid interest on that money I should have had, plus £250 for my troubles. Hope this helps other people.

I can't post links yet as i need 10 posts, so go on the FCA website: Search for: Fairness of changes to mortgage contracts June 2014 DP14/2 I'm trying to find out what grounds to base my letter of complaint on. I will probably need to speak to some in the FCA to get advice. But I was reading this and found.... Principle 6 2.8 Principle 6 provides that firms must pay due regard to the interests of their customers and treat them fairly. Principle 7 2.14 Principle 7 says that firms must pay due regard to the information needs of their clients and communicate information to them in a way that is clear, fair and not misleading. For example: 1. A lender may have the right to increase the interest rate applicable to its regulated mortgage contract, and the respective contract term might be fair under the UTCCRs. However, if the lender uses that right to take advantage of the fact that many of its customers are ‘trapped’ borrowers and will be unable to exit the contract and refinance, the lender may be in breach of Principle 6.16 2. A lender might comply with a contractual requirement to provide notice to its customers of a change to its regulated mortgage contract, and the term that states this requirement might be fair under the UTCCRs. However, if the notice is not clear, not fair or is misleading (for example, the relevant information about the change is not sufficiently prominent), the firm may be in breach of Principle 7 Did you receive a letter in 2008 about the SVR Cap margin increase? I only received a letter five years later; the letter with the M001 code.

Two years on the FCA investigated and found Satander was at fault. Affected mortgage customers are now getting compensated when they were fobbed off by Satander with their standard questionnaire and responses pre-FCA investigation. I know people who have successfully claim and won significant compensation with support of FOS. PM me for the links I found for FCA's findings.