Sorry, maybe i didn't say it right. My bank won't send me a list of the arrears charges they've applied to the account, by extracting this information from the account. They say i already have this in my yearly statement (i don't because that gives total interest, capital balance and payments made in the year). I asked the solicitor and they just sent me a statement, from which i can extract the charges amounts, but this was only for the last year. My charges go back to around 2003 and have continued since. The account's been in and out of arrears many times with repossession and eviction hearings. Every time i've then paid a lump sum to save my house and arrears charges (and i think legal fees) have been part of this balance. There are around £5,000 of charges and much more, prob £8,000 in legal fees (some capitalised). I haven't done a SAR request yet as i only want to know the arrears and legal fee amounts. I have a total fees per year statement from the solicitor in relation to how much fees they've charged and want to challenge these as well, since an agency rep was always sent with one instruction (to get the order for repossession/eviction) and could not discuss anything else. The bank won't say why they sign their letters to me with "as administrator". Though i know it's because of it being securitised but i ask "administrator for whom".

thanks, but since this happened 3 years ago, i paid the £75 fine at the time and the matter was closed.

thanks .... my bank charged me between £20 and £35 per arrears fee. It may be higher now but i don't know as they won't tell me.

My bank refused to supply me a list of all charges and the FOS has, so far, refused to ask them as it's not something they're looking at because of "outside our remit" (arrears charges). But i'll carry on with the complaint at the FOS and would raise the same issues at court, were my lender to again enforce the suspended repossession order. They threatened to just before it got passed to the FOS but haven't said anything since.

Like many others, mine is just a normal case of a consumer wanting penalty charges refunded. Why is this successful for some and so hard for me?

I'll have to wait and see. I waited many months for it to be allocated to an adjudicator and then assessed so may have to wait a while again, though of course its not my fault their adjudicator left.

I've been advised not to do that as the bank may be able to claim their legal fees, even if they concede and refund all charges, because it says so in the agreement. Unfair as it seems and possibly a clause to be assessed under UTCCR.

But what can i do about it? Thankfully i didn't get a decision in writing though the adjudicator did call me many times to discuss his assessment. When i questioned everything he was saying he went back to look at it again and again, though he seemed to know what he was talking about by quoting various things. But thanks to this and other forums I'm not so naive on the matter as well! His main statement was that the charges haven't been assessed and deemed unfair by a court so everything else doesn't apply, not the FSA, not UTCCRs, nothing. Now i find out he's left so will have to wait for it to go to another adjudicator, who may or may not use the last one's assessment.

The report is on american stuff and has no relevance to UK.

thanks caro ... there's some good advice on this over on the SPML/London thread and many are confused at the FOS's assessment and manner of handling this.

is my mortgage still 'regulated' as it was taken in August 1999 and i know after October 2004 they were? and do MCOB rules apply to my mortgage? if not, what then ....

thanks for the posts suetonius and peterjm.Good info. i've done most of what you suggest already, but at least have the chance to start again with another adjudicator. But then he/she might just follow on from the last person's assessment and agree with him. I'll have to wait and see. I've quoted FSA MCOB 12.4.1R, UTCCR, and used some of Sue's 'complaint template' along with 3 FSA reports on GMAC, Kensington and Redstone. I've also spoke with the FSA who agree that the FOS cannot call the charges 'fair' without asking the bank for a breakdown. The FOS say the FSA should enforce rule 12.4.1R, who in turn say they don't look at individual consumer complaints as that's the FOS's remit. The FOS say the FSA Handbook guides them yet won't enforce its rules? I've also quoted from the FOS's own 2009 annual report where they state that a lot of mortgage arrears fee complaints were received and most were upheld. The adjudicator didn't comment. For a previous complaint, I complained to my MP about the FOS who in turn wrote to the Treasury and the response was that, since the FOS is an independent body set up to mediate between consumers and financial companies, it is not appropriate for them to comment or intervene in anything. When i then met my MP, he said to let it go as "water under the bridge". I lost many thousands in a bundle of bad decisions. my complaint isn't against SPML/London or any other sub-prime bank but against Santander.

update .... it got passed to an adjudicator who said: 1. Mortgage arrears charges are NOT WITHIN THEIR REMIT TO INVESTIGATE, so he'll look at the overall treatment the bank handed out to me. 2. He considers arrears charges to be fair because they're set at a market rate. 3. The charges were considered fair by the test case last year (same principle). 4. He can't look at the mortgage being sold through the shadow banking system. 5. The bank treated me fairly because it's my fault i went into arrears. 6. He won't look at the legal fees or the solicitor's actions. 7. The FSA fines and report on GMAC/Kensington etc had no impact on my complaint as those companies were fined for mistreating customers and not for charging an arrears fee, and my bank (major high street bank) has not had any fines imposed or been investigated. I didn't agree with his findings and asked him to explain: 1. How he can call the charges fair without having investigated their actual cost (with a breakdown), especially if he says they're outside his remit. 2. Where it says they can't look at arrears charges (he pointed me to the FSA Handbook). 3. When did the test case look at mortgage account T's and C's or investigate their fees. 4. The solicitor was instructed by the bank as an agent and thus the bank is responsible for their actions. 5. Why does the bank sign its letters with "as administrator". And for whom? And that if the charges are outside their remit then he cannot refer to them in his decision, not a single point, since its not something he can look at and i don't want his personal opinion on these charges. That would make his decision a bit harder to write up since it all consists of arrears charges! I didn't get any answers from him. He's now left the fos and it will be allocated to another adjudicator. Any advice for me and others taking arrears charges to the FOS and faced with this sort of response?

No, i think you're/we're on the right path, i just got a bad decision. There's no other explanation for it. It's totally irrational. Would appreciate your help on how to argue it with the FOS, though i do what i can. How can they say investigating mortgage arrears charges is not within their remit and yet say they believe the charges are fair? And how can they use the test case on overdraft charges to justify these charges? Its two very different scenarios. One is for requesting an overdraft (so they say) and the other is for failing to pay an agreed instalment, much like credit card charges. With very different T's and C's. If other people have had mortgage arrears charges refunded through the FOS it might help us. And another thing the adjudicator said is that GMAC/Kensington etc were fined for mistreating their customers and not for charging arrears fees and because my mortgage provider hasn't had any fine imposed (a high street bank) then the FSA fines on others are irrelevant as it only applies to a certain bank.

my experience of the FOS in this case is very different to what you expect. i've used the extract from Sue (thanks for that) and added some bits of my own using UTCCR, FSA rules and some stuff on securitisation. it got passed to an adjudicator who said: 1. Mortgage arrears charges are NOT WITHIN THEIR REMIT TO INVESTIGATE, so he'll look at the overall treatment the bank handed out to me. 2. He considers arrears charges to be fair because they're set at a market rate. 3. The charges were considered fair by the test case last year (same principle). 4. He can't look at the mortgage being sold through the shadow banking system. 5. The bank treated me fairly because it's my fault i went into arrears. 6. He won't look at the legal fees or the solicitor's actions. I didn't agree with his findings and asked him to explain: 1. How he can call the charges fair without having investigated their actual cost (with a breakdown), especially if he says they're outside his remit. 2. Where it says they can't look at arrears charges (he pointed me to the FSA Handbook). 3. When did the test case look at mortgage account T's and C's or investigate their fees. 4. The solicitor was instructed by the bank as an agent and thus the bank is responsible for their actions. 5. Why does the bank sign its letters with "as administrator". And for whom? And that if the charges are outside their remit then he cannot refer to them in his decision, not a single point, since its not something he can look at and i don't want his personal opinion on these charges. That would make his decision a bit harder to write up since it all consists of arrears charges! I didn't get any answers from him. He's now left the FOS and it will be allocated to another adjudicator. Any advice for me and others taking arrears charges to the FOS and faced with this sort of response?

And of there's no money owed to either the bank or the debt agency (to whom the account was sold) after the consumer has paid in full (including charges/PPI and associated interest) then who receives the refund? In my case, it was the debt agency even though I showed proof of paying the debt(s) off in full. The FOS just didn't want to know. Another worrying thing i came across was that the bank can keep the refund towards its write off when it sold the debt, meaning even after i have paid the debt in full to the DCA, the bank can always show a write off balance. In my case, it was either accept the offer to send the refund to the DCA (to whom i didn't owe anything) or let the bank put it towards its write off and the Ombudsman stated that "legal assignment to the DCA does not matter to me, the bank was still left with an upaid balance". Totally unfair in my cases and i can't change the decision or take the banks to court (or even the DCA who got extra money from me because some banks sent them the refund anyway).

Now now ... i'm only saying how i see it at the moment ... i've not got further than this with the matter. Hopefully things will change and we may have another avenue to chase but at the moment it's gone dead. My bank still hasn't said why they sign their letters with "as administrator" and the FOS won't look at it as part of my complaint on unfairness and reclaiming arrears charges, which they say are not within their remit to investigate but consider them fair.

He's of the same opinion I quoted in my post above, i.e. that nothing can be done as it's all legal. It may seem unfair to the customer but doesn't seem to be unlawful.

Yep, didn't seem to get anywhere. In the UK, it all seems legit because it is an uncompleted sale and thus equitable. But doesn't the SPV/Trustee say they own the mortgages, in order to able to offer them on the market? If so, how can they own something not completed?

i've been in this situation and reclaimed all arrears charges plus some legal fees last year (totalling around £5,000). the bank refused to refund anything and I passed it to the FOS, who said they cannot investigate arrears fees as it is not within their remit but the adjudicator decided that they are fair because its a market rate. I've had many arguments with him on this matter and have even asked the FSA, who say that without a breakdown the bank can't prove the fees reflect their costs. But if the bank won't supply a breakdown and the FOS won't ask them, how can I get this? i've asked the adjudicator where it states, in their rules and guidelines, that they cannot investigate mortgage arrears fees. He pointed me to the FSA handbook which says something else in 12.4.1R (that charges must reflect costs). So he can't really show why he can't investigate these charges and also can't really explain why he thinks they are fair without having investigated them. i've asked the bank and FOS on securitisation but none will respond to this. I've asked why the bank signs its letters with "as administrator". i've asked the adjudicator not to refer to arrears charges in his decision if it is not within their remit, though i suspect he will still say they are fair. But then this would be unfair against me as its an opinion and not based on an investigation. so far i've not made any progress.

you may have a possible case against your solicitors .... start with a complaint and then take it to the SRA, LCS or Ombudsman.

This happened to me. The hearing was about how much I should pay per month and the final CO and they already had an interim charging order. Their agency rep came and said he has no instructions about making a payment arrangement and is there for the CO only. Judge said OK, there you are. They then threatened a Sale unless I paid (or borrowed to pay) the balance. They even put me in touch with a loan company. Nearly 6 years now and they haven't done anything, though this last year they have been passing it to various DCAs for collection (they're a DCA themselves). Maybe because they know that soon it will fall off the credit records and they'll then have to show why they haven't been paid (or taken any action) in the 6 years. By the way, I haven't avoided paying any instalments, after the CO they wanted much (10x) more than I could afford. And they took it to a CO even though I was paying my agreed instalments after the CCJ.

I wouldn't count on it ....

i've had a few biased decisions (in favour of the bank) where the same Ombudsman has stated (on 3 different accounts and banks) that legal assignment to a debt agency does not matter, the bank was still left with an unpaid balance and hence has used this as a decision to (1) send my refund to the debt agency or (2) let the bank put it towards their write off. the problem with me accepting either offer was that i'd settled the whole balances at the debt agencies and was fully entitled to the refund but in each case the bank offered to repay to the account at the agency. The FOS didn't check whether there was a balance or not and accepted what the bank offered. the FOS have no power to include a third party into a complaint (I asked them to write to the DCA for info) but seem to have the power to pay them my refund, with no investigation into whether they're entitled to it. this was in 2008 and since then i haven't been able to budge the banks in each case. They refer to the FOS decision (because it favoured them) and say they cannot look into it any more. what can i do with these accounts (with the FOS) as i don't want to take the banks to court (charges/PPI are over 6 years now) and i am losing thousands in total.

yes, the report gives a lot of statistical info 2009 here http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ar09/ar09.pdf and 2010 here http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ar10/ar10.pdf