Anngnig, I have just received a substantial refund via the FOS route regarding mortgage arrears fees that I felt were unfair. The FOS adjudicator saw that I was making payments regularly and stated that it was unfair of the mortgage company to debit arrears fees when I was plainly making a decent attempt to come out of arrears. They did not return specific charges like retuurned dd fees though. If you want further info I can give you the exact wording of the FOS settlement letter, it may help with your form. Cheers, BAE

Hi, 1ooMel, you may get more advice if you put your thread in the 'Mortgages' Forum. The claim form part will be quite simple,something like: This is a money claim for the return of charges and associated interest applied to the Claimant's mortgage account, number XXXXXXXXXXXX by the Defendant. Now for the Particulars of Claim: Below is a template which you can adapt to your circumstances - copy, paste, edit! I would suggest you should also add a whole new paragraph to the POC regarding the recent FSA fines etc, of which you will know more than me! IN THE XXXXXX county court BETWEEN XXXXXXXX Claimant and GE Money Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM The Agreement 1. The Claimant entered into an agreement with the Defendant on X/XX/XX, whereby the Defendant advanced a sum to the Claimant under a mortgage account, Account no XXXXXXXX Summary 2. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and / or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in the attached schedule of charges sent to the defendant on XX/X/XX ). 3. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement, which were: a). A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and or b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant. 4. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account. The Charges 5. The Charges consisted of various amounts of £XX, £XX and £XXX. For each of these charges, the defendant merely sent out one electronic letter to inform the claimant of the charge, which I estimate at costing approximately £1.00. (Add any further details here on what GE money actually ‘do’ when you’re in arrears, eg phone call, letters. You are basically attempting to prove that their costs are much lower than the charges!!!) 6. The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage that would have been suffered by the defendant in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions. This is confirmed in law in the case of Castaneda and others vs Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Company. Ltd. (1904) when the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This was confirmed in Dunlop Pneumatic Co vs New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915), which held that a penalty clause is void in its entirety and therefore unenforceable. 7. Therefore the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, 8. At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations. 9. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant. 10. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms. (a)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated. (b)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract. ©The Charges exceeded the costs which the defendant could have expected to incur in dealing with late payment or returned payment. (d) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term. (e) As the Defendant knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement. (f) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges. (g) Hence, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable. 11. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations, and will rely on the following matters: (a) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms that define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement. (b) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money). 12. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the UTCCR 1999 Regulations. 13. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges and interest to the Account, estimated at totalling some £ XX.XX between X/X/X and X/X/X. The defendant attaches a copy of the schedule of charges sent to the defendant on X/XX/XX. The claimant’s attempts to settle the dispute: 14. On, XX/X/X, XX/X/XX and X/XX/XX, the Claimant requested repayment of the sums wrongly applied. (put details of GE’s response here) In Conclusion: 15. Therefore the Claimant claims: (a) Payment of the said sum of £XXX.XX plus the amount of interest accrued between XX/XX/XX(date of first ever charge) and X/XX/XX,(date of last charge), which the claimant estimates at £XX.XX. Total £XX.XX (b) Interest of £XX.XX, pursuant to the County Courts Act 1984 (s69) at the rate of 8%, and claimed up to X/X/XX, and thereafter at the daily rate of £X.XX to the date of judgement or sooner payment. © Court costs. I believe that the facts stated in these particulars are true. Dated Charges £xxx.xx Interest on charges £xxx.xx Interest at 8%, under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 £xxx.xx *(and at a daily rate of £x.x until date of judgment) TOTAL £ xxx.xx Hope this helps.

For those uncertain of taking court action,for whatever reason, there is, of course, the route of complaining to the FOS. There is no risk attached to this method and you will not have to face a judge. For some people this will be their best route. Providing you can show that the mortgage company have been charging you whilst you have been making regular and substantial payments, (perhaps to cover arrears), you have a very high chance that the FOS will judge in your favour. However,this is just for the monthly arrears fees they add on, not for ERCs or DD return charges - they will rule against you on these. For those who are worried that their mortgage company might actually have the nous to take you on at court and claim legal fees by way of the contract you signed, you may be able to cover yourself by getting home insurance with legal fees cover. Indeed, you may already have it and don't realise! If you scan your home insurance you may find you are covered for certain legal fees - but obviously check by phone and letter first - then get something in writing before you start the claim. I know my insurance covers some legal expenses but so far I've never needed it. BAE

Hi, KGF, I couldn't find a template for specific mortgages charges so I cobbled one together using various ideas from successful threads etc. I could post it up if you like. To be honest I didn't sweat too much on the claim form because I knew they would settle - it was a fairly simple process. You can already see the the total incompetency of SPML's solicitors in the fact they are trying to use an unrelated case to warn you off! I would suggets you use their pathetic tactics against them as part of your case, and also think about a complaint to the regulatory servicesonce you have got your money back. BAE

Hi, My friend has had a credit card claim struck out by a judge on the premise that Practice Direction 2.2 was not complied with. When I've checked, the Practice Direction states that; The claim form must include an address at which the claimant resides or carries on business. This paragraph applies even though the claimant's address for service is the business address of his solicitor. Obviously, the claimant's address was on the claim form as the court have wrote to him with the order!!! It was even checked by the court staff as it was delivered by hand. Now he has to apply for the judgment to be reversed and it seems so stupid. Has anyone had experience of this sort of direction, and is it straightforward in getting it set aside, (I presume it is, surely for such a minor matter.)??? BAE

Hi, People have been known to get ccjs set aside(removed) years after they were granted. I got a ccj I knew nothing about too. I filed to have the ccj SET ASIDE by using the n244 Application Notice which you can download at hmcs.gov.uk or collect from any county court. I also signed an affadavit as part of my application, which stated I had not received any claim form or court forms. If you have any evidence that they served the claim form to the wrong address this will increase your chances too. My ccj was for a credit card default, which is different to your friends, but if you can show that: 1) Your friend did not receive the forms, and has acted speedily as soon as he realised he had a ccj, and 2) Your friend would stand a good chance of defending the claim in court, then you have some chance to get the ccj set aside. I had a strong argument in my application because I pointed to the gross amount of charges that the cc company had levied on me - I showed that the charges were more than the original claim! Hence, I was awarded the ccj immediately, then the cc company discontinued the case! BAE:lol:

Hi, You can ask politely for the ERC back and see what they say. Regarding claiming this charge through the courts, definitely don't, as several people have ended up in court and lost, suffering £1000s in barrister costs in the process. Regarding any other charges, wait till the mortgae is paid, then ask for them back. If they refuse, put a court claim in - they will waste 100s in legal costs then settle before you get to court. BAE

Hi, If your credit rating is good, could you get a credit card with a 0% offer for the first 6/9/12 months and pay off the three payday advances? Then you just have to concentrate on paying off the credit card as soon as possible. BAE

Hi, You've done well to get them to offer you half - some don't offer anything! Which mortgage company is it? And how much is your claim? I wouldn't be confident claiming back the redemption fee, though I have heard of some people getting it repaid. As for the other fees, namely monthly arrears administration charges, late payment and returned dd charges, they can all be claimed back. Only you can judge whether you want to start a court claim to do so, or accept their offer now. The other route would be to complain to the FOS, which could take a while and has no guarantees either. BAE

. . . Just thought, the asterisk*** part of the previous post should be at the bottom! Another thought - you can claim charges on your secured loan and mortgage on the same form, in case you weren't sure. Now for the Particulars of Claim: Below is a template which you can adapt to your circumstances - copy, paste, edit! I would suggest you should also add a whole new paragraph to the PoC regarding the recent FSA fines etc, of which you will know more than me! IN THE XXXXXX COUNTY COURT BETWEEN XXXXXXXX Claimant and GE Money Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM The Agreement 1. The Claimant entered into an agreement with the Defendant on X/XX/XX, whereby the Defendant advanced a sum to the Claimant under a mortgage account, Account no XXXXXXXX Summary 2. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and / or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in the attached schedule of charges sent to the defendant on XX/X/XX ). 3. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement, which were: a). A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and or b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant. 4. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account. The Charges 5. The Charges consisted of various amounts of £XX, £XX and £XXX. For each of these charges, the defendant merely sent out one electronic letter to inform the claimant of the charge, which I estimate at costing approximately £1.00. (Add any further details here on what GE money actually ‘do’ when you’re in arrears, eg phone call, letters. You are basically attempting to prove that their costs are much lower than the charges!!!) 6. The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage that would have been suffered by the defendant in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions. This is confirmed in law in the case of Castaneda and others vs Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Company. Ltd. (1904) when the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This was confirmed in Dunlop Pneumatic Co vs New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915), which held that a penalty clause is void in its entirety and therefore unenforceable. 7. Therefore the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, 8. At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations. 9. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant. 10. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms. (a)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated. (b)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract. ©The Charges exceeded the costs which the defendant could have expected to incur in dealing with late payment or returned payment. (d) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term. (e) As the Defendant knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement. (f) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges. (g) Hence, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable. 11. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations, and will rely on the following matters: (a) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms that define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement. (b) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money). 12. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the UTCCR 1999 Regulations. 13. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges and Interest to the Account, estimated at totalling some £ XX.XX between X/X/X and X/X/X. The defendant attaches a copy of the schedule of charges sent to the defendant on X/XX/XX. The claimant’s attempts to settle the dispute: 14. On, XX/X/X, XX/X/XX and X/XX/XX, the Claimant requested repayment of the sums wrongly applied. (put details of GE’s response here) In Conclusion: 15. Therefore the Claimant claims: (a) Payment of the said sum of £XXX.XX plus the amount of interest accrued between XX/XX/XX(date of first ever charge) and X/XX/XX,(date of last charge), which the claimant estimates at £XX.XX. Total £XX.XX (b) Interest of £XX.XX, pursuant to the County Courts Act 1984 (s69) at the rate of 8%, and claimed up to X/X/XX, and thereafter at the daily rate of £X.XX to the date of judgement or sooner payment. © Court costs. I believe that the facts stated in these particulars are true. Dated Signed BAE

Hi, Deli, The brief details of claim section should specify the amounts you're claiming - so you need to do an estimate of the interest they've charged, (on their charges!) too. Don't get too wrapped up in getting a precise figure; if they complain about it being too much, they will have to provide a figure themselves. Because it's at the court claim stage, you're also allowed to charge them 8% interest on the charges. Again, don't worry about getting an exact figure, just work it out as best you can. * you can get rid of this part if you like - it's simply saying that you want to also claim from now until the day of judgment any further interest that is accrued. You work this out by doing the calculation below: Amount of Claim x 0.00022 (so if amount of claim is £1200, you do £1200 x 0.00022 = £0.26 per day So, something like this will suffice: This is a money claim for the return of charges and associated interest applied to the Claimant's mortgage account, number XXXXXXXXXXXX by the Defendant. Charges £xxx.xx Interest on charges £xxx.xx Interest at 8%, under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 £xxx.xx *(and at a daily rate of £x.x until date of judgment) TOTAL £ xxx.xx BAE

Hi and thanks, I'm waiting for the cheque to come through first. I'm not sure whether they will try to attach a proviso about not revealing the deal to third parties. I'll post details as soon as I know. The charges I am being returned are monthly arrears admin fees and returned direct debit fees. BAE:)

That's great to hear, Helford, well done! I'm sure Delcarik will be pleased to hear others talk of their successes too. There is definitely a need for people to come forward with their success stories in claiming against mortgage companies to reassure those who have not yet made that leap into claiming through the courts. Cheers, BAE

Hi, Delcarik, Yes, I did ask for my court fees back - the original claim cost approx £100, then the Allocation questionnaire fee cost £35. At the time you do think, "Is it worth paying?" and I would say 100% yes every time! Once the money's paid, the ball is in motion, so to speak, and you just wait for the fireworks . . . Yes, the fees were included in our negotiations, (which were good natured phone coversations between me and their solicitor). In the end, we came to a figure we both agreed on, but it did take 2 or 3 letters and several conversations. As soon as their solicitor became involved I got the impression that they wanted to settle and avoid court, the rest is history. . . BAE

Hi, Gothicfairy, Sorry to hear about your plight. Have GE charged you any arrears charges etc over the last few years, as claiming these charges back may be a way to stave off the eviction / fight back against their pathetic attitude. BAE

Hi, Delcarik, I think you'll enjoy the process, and the result even more! Is your claim against Cap One a credit card charges claim? If so, have you got the statements for the last 6 years? BAE

Firstly, you get a N1 claim form from the HMCS.gov.uk website or direct form your nearest county court. The claim form is fairly simple. It will ask you for standard details about the amount you're claiming, the name and address of the defendant etc. The only hard part is the Particulars of Claim, which your claim rests on, and needs to include details of the Acts you're relying on etc. Once the form's done, make 2 further photocopies, including the PoC, and take them down to your county court. They will tell you the cost of making the claim, which is dependent on how much you're claiming. Pay the cash. Get a receipt. Sit back and wait . . . If you do decide to go for it, there may be others on here who will post ideas for your PoC. I will post the PoC that were successful for me if you wish, and I would also suggest you scan the site for further ideas, particularly with regard to GE and recent developments. Finally, be careful of posting too much information on here as GE may be one of the companies known to trawl the site and try to use posts against their 'valued' customers. PM (private message) a moderator if you're not sure whether to post something which may be sensitive. Good luck! BAE

HI, delcarik, You can make a claim online, through the Moneyclaim website, or apply directly to the court nearest you. My preference would be to go direct through a court as there is a word limit to your Particulars of Claim with Moneyclaim. http://redirectingat.com/?id=3236X604245&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hmcourts-service.gov.uk%2Fcourtfinder%2Fforms%2Fn1_0102.pdf&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.consumeractiongroup.co.uk%2Findex.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26task%3Dview%26id%3D138%26Itemid%3D82

Hi, If they are so confident about their charges, why will they not allow them to be assessed in court? The above response simply adds weight to your claim as it is such a nonsensical argument. When it gets to court you can ask for a court order for them to produce detailed accounts of how they calculate the £40 charge etc - and they will provide nothing. Because they lied. And you will win. BAE

Hi, Delicarik, I can't understand why you have not yet escalated your complaint to the courts to reclaim your charges. From what you say, your claim will be at least £1200, with additional interest, maybe as much as £2000? This will cost you less than £100 to claim back at the courts, (it will take a few hours to research and write the Particulars of Claim),you will receive the money back and they will have wasted £100s on having to pay a solicitor to defend. Otherwise, I can't see them past fobbing you off for another 8 months, then another . . . BAE

I've now negotiated with the defendant's solicitors and received a further increase on what they will settle at. This is their third offer. I'm happy with the figure so will be discontinuing the claim as soon as the cheque is cleared. I agree with Ellen, in that I think they would settle at the full amount just before they had to attend court. But their offer is near enough to my original claim that it makes sense to accept and avoid any further hassles. BAE:-)

Hi, Wato, I'd go for the court option now. Once you claim, they will refund you. Over a year ago I sued MBNA / All & Leic for the third time, for the refund of charges, interest they charged and compound contractual interest. Each time they have paid in full once it went to court. On the last claim we had a preliminary hearing to sort out any remaining charges which hadn't been repaid. The rep from MBNA told me and the judge that it was their policy to pay back any charges that can be shown. Their whole strategy is to fob people off and make them believe they will not win in court, thereby stopping most from putting in a claim. Once it gets to court, they cave in. Go for it! BAE

Hi, Superdryed, I take it that the £3500 costs are just a request and have not been ordered by the court? What exactly does the solicitor's letter say? Have they asked for a hearing to decide costs? I would find out by phoning the court, not the solicitor, as they don't seem that honest, (now there's a surprise). If there is to be a hearing on costs, attend it and give your side of the story. If you want to more aggressive, I suggest advising the lying solicitor that you are going to complain to the SRA,(Solicitor's Regulatory Association about his / her appalling behaviour if the claim for costs is not dropped. You'll need to write down the details of the conversation, time , date and what was said etc, and hope this puts them off. BAE

Hi, Ellen, I've started this thread to show just how simple it is to be successful in reclaiming mortgage charges through the courts, and to highlight the fact that these mortgage companies really don't want to end up in court with a verdict against them. Unfortunately, most people seem to accept being fobbed off by their mortgage company with a tiny goodwill gesture or a stern letter to say categorically they will not be paying any charges back. My mortgage company, (who will remain anonymous for the time being), said exactly that when I made the initial complaint - "We do not accept your basis for refund of charges, blah, blah, blah", then they immediately offer me a grand just because it's gone to court! Making a claim is certainly not rocket science - I cobbled together a decent Particulars of Claim statement in a few hours, by simply gathering all the info available on this site. The fact is these companies will only respond to a court claim, simple as . . . BAE

I have now received a second offer to settle - the amount has risen by £200. Hence, I am now at the stage of either carrying on negotiating for the best deal for settlement or letting the court process decide. It is obvious they don't want to attend or defend - but they could be pig headed and not settle at what I ask. I have a figure in my mind that I will settle at. If that is not accepted, it is going to court. BAE