Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Acenden capstone spml pml lmc sppl

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3053 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 469
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Sounds like a fantastic piece of software. As it can determine if someone has a claim against a lender, claim management companies must be falling over themselves to get their hands on it.


Do you have any further info...


Does the solicitor have to provide the new lender with any form of indemnity, just in case the case isn't as sound as considered by the solicitor ?


I wonder how this would work in practice given the vast number of different outcomes.. I wonder how this would impact upon a lenders decision to lend.


I also wonder if this lender(s) charges some form of higher administration / product fee for accepting the solicitors judgement on a possible claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, the full details are not in front of me so I can't comment on the efficacy, or otherwise, of any of it.


Being the eternal cynical so and so that I am I will not promote anything I wouldn't take up myself.


If it is a bag 'o****e I will say so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Suetonius, thanks for that info. I find it amusing that they give a 2 week deadline and then another and another, where I work a deadline is a deadline, it would be lovely if we got given all of those extensions!!!! I think I will hold out for a few weeks and see what happens, should it go to an Ombudsman, I think I will be asking for help re a court case against them.


Thanks again for all your help, I am sure most of the information I used that I gained from you has really helped my case and thats is hugely appreciated :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received this in an email from CAG so am posting it here just in case anyone has overlooked it.


Now is really the time to inundate Acenden with your claim , fill in personal details ,email it and keep emailing until you get a reply or simply print off and send recorded.


Hot news for anyone who has suffered mortgage arrears charges, irresponsible lending or other unfair lender conduct


The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.


It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.


Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.


Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.


You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.


Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.


We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.


It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.

You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.


However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.


Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also put you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.


If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.


You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.


You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.


You must make your complaint through the county court for a rapid and effective remedy.

What next


Follow the links to the FSA website and read the four articles. Two of them are FSA summaries and two of them are the FSA final notices in the case of Deutschebank and also in the case of Redstone.

Redstone Mortgages Limited fined £630,000 for unfair treatment of some customers in arrears

FSA Final Notice: Redstone

DB Mortgages to compensate customers in arrears for unfair treatment

FSA Final Notice: DB Mortgages


They are not difficult to follow although Deutschebank is 20 pages and Redstone is 15 pages. It is really quite essential that you understand the FSA's reasoning in both of these decisions. It will give you a lot of confidence about what you are doing.


Follow any discussions on recovering mortgage arrears in the forum. If there are things that you are not certain about, then ask questions on the forum.


Before sending off the letter below, you should have already assembled all of your mortgage statements and be certain of the amount of money that you are reclaiming. If you have not done this, then you need to send your mortgage lender an SAR in order to find out exactly how much they have taken from you.


Additionally if you have been charged for counsellor visits – which either have not occurred at all – or to which you have not agreed, then you should claim that money back as well. If you have been charged anything between £50-£100 or more for counsellor visits, then it may be that those charges are unlawful because it is clear from the Redstone case that your lender is only entitled to charge the actual cost. In that case, the entire charge is invalidated – not just the excessive part. In that case you should also proceed to reclaim all of that as well.


You will have to bring a county court action. It is not complicated and it should not be frightening to you.


Do not imagine that sending the letter below is suddenly going to produce your money.Financial institutions generally have shown themselves to be greedy and stupid as well as bullying and unfair.


We can help you deal with them so you don't need to worry too much. However if you are simply trying to bluff them into paying you your money and you have no real intention to go to court, then do not send the letter. It will be a waste of your time. It will undermine the efforts of others who are really serious about recovering their money.

============================ ============================

Your name

Your address





Dear Sir/Madam


Mortgage account number
– request for repayment of charges



I am writing to you to request the refund of
arrears charges which you have levied against me in respect of my account.


These charges had been levied against me unlawfully because they are excessive and therefore unfair.


I am sure that you are aware of the recent decisions by the Financial Services Authority in Deutschebank and also in Redstone. The Financial Services Authority made it very clear that mortgage arrears charges should reflect the actual cost of dealing with the arrears. It is very clear that your charges are calculated to produce a high margin of profit for you.


Furthermore your charges are unfair and therefore unlawful under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. Although a test case in 2009 decided that overdraft charges for personal bank accounts could not be assessed for fairness, this decision from the Supreme Court was limited to charges which form part of the core revenue of the banks. Your charges are not part of your core revenue. They are incidental to your main business and therefore they fall to be assessed for fairness. This means that they must be proportionate and that they must truly reflect your administrative costs.


I am prepared to sue you in the County Court if you will not repay me. If I do sue you in the County Court I shall be seeking an order for restitutionary damages and this means that you will be obliged to hand over to me all the benefit that you have had from the money that you have taken from me unlawfully.


If you are prepared to act quickly and to refund me my money without any trouble, then I will be prepared to accept the return of my money +8% interest which is the amount which would be awarded in normal circumstances by County Court or by the Financial


Please note that I am not prepared to wait for your normal eight week delay. This is an industry time period which has been agreed with the FSA. I don't think that I would be prepared to accept your violations of FSA rules on one hand while you then attempt to rely on some FSA guideline on the other.


If I do not hear from you within 14 days of this letter then I will begin proceedings in the County Court and without any further notice.


Yours faithfully



Sign the letter (You can't imagine how many people forget!!}

============================ ============================



Particulars of Claim


Don't forget that there are other matters which you might want to include in your claim. For instance if you have received negative entries on your credit file which relate to unlawful charges then you should claim to have these removed as well.

Here is a template Particulars of Claim:

============================ ============================

In the XXX County Court

Claim number XXXXX






XXX (claimant)






XXX (defendant)









Particulars of Claim

Unlawful Charges


  1. The claimant had a mortgage agreement with the defendant dated XXXdateXXXX concerning a secured loan of £XXXXXX
  2. The said loan is subject to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCR)
  3. The defendant is statutorily bound by Financial Services Authority regulations – Mortgage: Conduct of Business rules (MCOB) contained in the FSA Handbook, implemented under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000
  4. The mortgage fell into arrears after the claimant fell into difficulty and was unable to keep up the repayments as required by the mortgage agreement.
  5. The defendant levied mortgage arrears charges against the claimant.
  6. The defendants also levied further interest upon the said unlawful charges
  7. The mortgage arrears charges were levied at a rate which exceeded their administrative costs.
  8. The level of the charges were unfair because they breach the requirement of fairness contained in UTCCR
  9. The level of the charges is also unfair because they are the result of unfair treatment by the defendant and therefore levied in breach of the defendant's statutory duty to treat their customers fairly contained in MCOB
  10. For these reasons the interest charged on the unlawful charges is also unlawful


Other Unfair Treatment



  1. The defendant has also levied charges in respect of counsellor visits.
  2. The said counsellor visits [did not take place as claimed by the defendant or at all]
  3. The fees for the said counsellor visits were levied at a rate which exceeded the actual costs of the visits
  4. By virtue of the above, the defendant has treated the claimant unfairly and in breach of their obligations under MCOB


The claimant seeks the return of unlawfully levied charges plus associated interest– £XXXXXX


The return of unlawfully levied counsellor visit fees – £XXXXXX

============================ ============================

Do you have a mortage arrears claim to make?

Then post your story on the forum here

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Suetonius, thanks for that info. I find it amusing that they give a 2 week deadline and then another and another, where I work a deadline is a deadline, it would be lovely if we got given all of those extensions!!!! I think I will hold out for a few weeks and see what happens, should it go to an Ombudsman, I think I will be asking for help re a court case against them.


Thanks again for all your help, I am sure most of the information I used that I gained from you has really helped my case and thats is hugely appreciated :)


After speaking to my friend I think the extensions are the lesser of two evils.


If Ascenden don't respond to the adjudicator, all he or she can do is pass it onto an Ombudsman which means you could be waiting months for an outcome. If your lucky they will respond and you will have an answer in a matter of weeks failing that it could be several months for an Ombudsman.


You might be better off depending on your circumstances, following the advice in the email from CAG and subsequently posted by PeterJM and start a claim in court. You will find lots of advice and support here on CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could use the words (slightly amended) of Margaret Cole, director of enforcement and financial crime in your complaint with the FOS.




With an amended version stating:


Many of Ascenden's customers were and are in a vulnerable position, having fallen into arrears on their mortgage payments and it should not charge such customers excessive and unfair fees. This is not how the FSA expects lenders to treat customers in arrears.


Rather than assessing each customer’s personal and financial circumstances on an individual basis, Ascenden appear to apply a one size fits all approach by aiming to reduce arrears.


The FSA is committed to clamping down on mortgage lenders who fail to adhere to treating customers fairly rules. It is crystal clear about the standards it expects and it states it will take tough actions against firms who breach these rules.


The above is just a quick rewrite but I am sure you get my drift. Use the words of the FSA to support and strengthen your complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

see this:

Key repossession ruling opens door to mortgage mis-selling complaints


Ombudsman's verdict offers hope for homeowners who are battling to keep a roof over their heads. Neasa MacErlean reports





  • Neasa MacErlean
  • The Observer, Sunday 22 March 2009
  • Article history A remarkable ombudsman victory for a householder who had his home repossessed after being mis-sold a hefty mortgage could set a precedent, preventing others from losing their properties as the recession bites, lawyers say.
    This year an estimated 75,000 families - against 40,000 last year - will lose their homes, according to the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML).
    But many who face handing back the keys could be helped by rules covering "suitable advice" for borrowers, buried in the handbook of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the City regulator.
    Andrew Brown (not his real name) struggled to repay his mortgage but subsequently took his mis-selling case to the Financial Ombudsman Service, and has now won. Despite turning to the FOS late on and being repossessed, he will receive compensation - while other borrowers who begin cases at an earlier stage than he did might well be able to save their homes too.
    A housing association tenant, Brown had the valuable promise of a rent fixed for life. However, a mortgage adviser persuaded him to buy the property and failed to consider "what would happen when the attractive discounted rate [set up on that mortgage] ended", according to an FOS spokeswoman.
    Brown was repossessed and had to move; he then lodged a complaint with his mortgage adviser and ultimately brought the case to the FOS.
    Industry specialists believe more claims of this kind are now likely to emerge. The main source of optimism for those in a similar position lies deep within the FSA's rulebook for mortgage advisers, Mortgage and Home Finance: Conduct of Business (MCOB).
    This states mortgage advice must be "suitable for that customer" and that advisers "must make and retain a record" of it being suitable; this is known, crucially (and rather technically), as complying with section 4.7. Breaches of the MCOB rules are "actionable at the suit of a private person who suffers loss as a result", under section 150 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
    "Undoubtedly, such cases would succeed," says professional negligence barrister John Virgo of Guildhall Chambers in Bristol. "There is a fundamental obligation under MCOB [rules] and I'm sure there will be a pretty big increase in this sort of litigation."
    Philip Ryley, head of financial services and markets at solicitor Michelmores, is more cautious. He says: "It really depends on each individual case as to whether they have received a service which would breach MCOB rules. It is an issue that may be raised before district judges [deciding repossession cases].
    "If it develops wholesale, it devalues the meritous cases that exist. The courts will soon become familiar with these arguments and will then require the borrowers to produce evidence at an early stage. to root out frivolous or unsubstantiated allegations."
    Though there may be concern some borrowers might try to exploit the MCOB rule without good cause, there appear to be many cases of people being mis-sold mortgages they could not afford.
    A Citizens Advice report entitled Set Up to Fail, on the sub-prime lending market in 2007, found the charity's repossession clients had often found themselves with "inappropriate and unaffordable" mortgages and secured loans, and that people buying council houses received "particularly poor advice".
    One case it highlighted concerned a couple with a disabled child in south-east Wales who were persuaded to take a second mortgage on their home. The loan wiped out their equity and meant £1,300 - 87% - of their £1,500 monthly income went on mortgage repayments.
    The CML accepts the rulebook can be invoked by consumers. "The MCOB rules are there for a reason: to protect consumers," says spokeswoman Sue Anderson. "Consumers have 'the ability and right' to rely on these regulations if they believe they have not been dealt with correctly," she says.
    In 2007, Cash highlighted how cold-callers were using dodgy selling tactics to convince social housing tenants to exercise their "right to buy" and saddle these low-income homes with inappropriate mortgages.
    Although the ombudsman found in Brown's favour, the issue remains complicated. The FOS is charged with restoring people, as far as possible, to the situation they would otherwise have been in - and that is not straightforward in circumstances such as these.
    "Historically, you may not have been worse off," says the FOS spokeswoman, referring to the fact that when house prices were rising - until 2007 - people who had been mis-sold an unsuitable mortgage might not have lost out if the price of their house was rising. They would not have won compensation.
    Now, the ombudsman is having to work out how to compensate someone who has not been protected by the rise in property values.
    Have you got a claim for mis-selling?
    • If you are in financial difficulty, first try all other steps to resolve your crisis: talk to the lender as early as possible about arrears; seek advice from a debt charity; curb spending and draw up a tight budget; and try to boost your income.
    • Be brutally honest: if you've been in any way economical with the truth in your mortgage application, such as overstating your income (whether unwittingly or not), your case will be much weaker.
    • You could have a case if your mortgage adviser never explored affordability with you, or dealt with you in a superficial way. Advisers should rely on past figures for income and outgoings, says Philip Ryley of Michelmores. If they don't have them, then you're off to a strong start.
    • You might have extra grounds for a case of mis-selling if your mortgage stretched beyond your retirement date and your adviser did not explore that as an affordability issue.
    • A case based on what's known as mortgage "misrepresentation" might also be feasible. According to Ryley, this might be arguable if you were "given a very hard sell, or told everything good about the product and given no information about what would happen when interest rates went up". If misrepresentation is argued successfully, the contract can be rescinded - as a case in 1991 proved.
    • To avoid the expense of lawyers' fees, a homeowner can make a claim with the individual who advised on the mortgage, and if the response is unsatisfactory take the case to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The FOS would probably request that your repossession proceedings are put on hold during any investigation.
    • Even if your mortgage began before the MCOB was ushered in on 31 October 2004, the rules could still apply, says one lawyer who wishes not to be named. "It makes no difference as to when the loan was entered in to, for the purposes of the arrears rules," he says.
    • Publicity about such cases will take time to filter out, as they are likely to be settled informally. But if people do start making claims in significant numbers, it could snowball, says one unnamed financial services lawyer. "What would be interesting would be a group action," he said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been advised by the adjudicator of my case at FOS, Acenden have not responded and he has given them to 5th May now and then it will be passed to an Ombudsman. I know I can take the court route at any time, but what would you guys do in my situation, wait for the FOS or hit them with a court case?

Help and advice would be appreciated, dealing with FOS is easy as they pretty much deal with everything for you, I am concerned that if I go the court route, I will mess it all up!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sue


Ask the Adjudicator for a copy of the letter that he/she has sent to them ? They can email it to you...


You need to know what it is the FOS have asked them to do, so that you can make an informed choice about your next step..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am trying to get as much information about miss selling of mortgages so if anyone has any information I will be very grateful as I can then help any others to do the same.

Has anyone actually brought a case for miss-selling and has it been successful ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jasperpad, I’m also looking into this. My SPPL loan was without a doubt mis-sold, the broker lied through his teeth…... Along with the mis-sold PPI, problem is it was back in 2003, pre Jan 14th 2005. My complaint is currently with the FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can I find out if my mortgage is on a libor rate?


If you are on LIBOR then it has gone up a bit. My rate is 3. something above LIBOR so it's still below what the average High St. rate is now on their increasing margins.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of LIBOR...i've been overcharged for the last 2yrs...I just can't help but laugh at these morons.

Carry on trying to cover your asses...but for me your about to be a busted flush very soon!!


25 days & counting I won't hold my breath though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jasper all loans with this crew are subject to libor rate which I believe varies according to your risk assessment.

How can I find out if my mortgage is on a libor rate?
Link to post
Share on other sites



The fos through a pm recently received are following the agenda that they cannot consider the amount of the charges for arrears themselves as being unfair as these will have been clearly set out in the contract documentation (exactly where?) they can only consider complaint where they have been unsympathetically and unfairly applied.

This seems to fly in the face of recent FSA findings in that charges must be a true cost of administration that cost being crystallised by Northern Rock albeit some time ago as about £25.

Are the FOS actually taking the FSA directives and case findings on board ie gmac,Redstone DB etc?

How many people are complaining and getting the brush off with these sort of decisions?

I am currently hoping to get a conclusive argument to counter this ridiculous agenda which completely ignores the recent fsa findings,is the borrower giving acenden a licence to apply whatever charges they want to? any input or/and corrections welcome.

It was all gone through at length on the old spml thread so these arguments need collating and putting together into a solid argument for submission to the fos ,will attempt to dig out and transfer here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from the above.

How are the FOS implementing the points made in this article re arrears fees reflecting the true cost of administration?

If the FSA's own regulatory arm is not implementing its own findings and directives the regulatory system becomes a bloody farce.

An industry insider said: “It’s a question of when, not if, this will apply to other lenders.

We're still waiting 12 months on what an indictment,how many have lost their homes through in the main unfairly added arrears fees to swing the courts against them.










Lenders face being forced to hand back millions of pounds in fees



Monday January 25,2010


By Sarah O'Grady



HUNDREDS of thousands of home owners could be in line to collect hefty refunds for unfair mortgage charges.



Lenders face being forced to hand back millions of pounds in fees imposed on customers who missed their monthly loan payments.

One firm has been fined £2.8million and made to return £7.7million to borrowers when it was found to have acted unfairly.

The crackdown by watchdog the *Financial Services Authority is likely to lead to claims by hundreds of thousands of home owners who believe they have been harshly penalised.

Terry Balfour, of insolvency *specialist IVA.com, said: “It’s good to see the financial watchdog stepping in on the side of the thousands of borrowers in *arrears with their mortgage.

“Banks and other mortgage lenders all too often impose punitive charges when their customers get into trouble with repayments.

“It is understandable that a modest fee for additional administration may be *imposed, but piling substantial penalties on to households which are clearly struggling is unnecessary and will only serve to further line the bulging coffers of many lenders.

“When people are in trouble with their mortgage they need help and advice and a bit of a breathing space – not to be hounded for even more money which they cannot repay.”


The FSA fined lender Gmac-RFC for how it treated customers between October 2004 and November 2008.


The fine was partly due to the £45 a month levied on borrowers who went into arrears.

The watchdog said this was “excessive” and did not reflect administration costs.


However as many as 30 lenders – including Bradford & Bingley, the Derbyshire and Cheshire Building Societies and specialist lenders like


Kensington and Morgan Stanley – have a similar charging structure.




According to the Council of Mortgage Lenders 195,000 borrowers are currently in arrears and this figure is expected to rise to 205,000 this year.

High street banks, particularly those in receipt of government bailout funds, have been forced to adopt a more tolerant approach to struggling borrowers. But many non-mainstream lenders like Gmac-RFC outsource the administration of their loan books to companies that are not so sympathetic.


Outsourcing firm Homeloan Management (HML), part of the Skipton group, processes loans for more than 400,000 other borrowers, including customers of the Derbyshire and Cheshire Building Societies.

Although HML refuses to publish statistics on arrears, a similar pool of 400,000 loans from Gmac-RFC shows that 20 per cent of borrowers are behind with payments.

This suggests that as many as 80,000 customers with loans processed by HML are being charged a monthly fee that the FSA deems unfair.

An industry insider said: “It’s a question of when, not if, this will apply to other lenders.




“It is causing a mighty problem as lenders and HML do not have the staff to look at individuals on a case-by-case basis.”

The FSA is set to release a report later this week and five more mortgage lenders are in line for fines.

Cerris Tavinor, an FSA spokeswoman, said: “We completed our investigation into Gmac and published the results of that case.

“We have made the point publicly that we have referred other lenders to enforcement, so other work is carrying on.”

Neil Warman, the chief commercial and finance officer at HML, said: “We are not able to comment on specific client *circumstances but we work closely with a number of lenders, managing their customer mortgage accounts in line with their lending and administration policies.

“In the event of one of our *clients wanting to make a *retrospective adjustment to the mortgage accounts we manage for them, then we would work with them to help this to take place effectively.”





Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...#ixzz1EyBPuNyD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All


just a quick note to let you know that Acenden sent me a letter today and as I have been trying to get them to change my payment day to the end of the month and they would not "allow me to" I sent a court request (N1 I think it was) to make the change and the letter i got yesterday tells me that they have now agreed to "allow"me to change to that day. so another win for us Caggers.


it just goes to prove that if you keep on at them they do give in so no charges (hopefully) for me.


All strength to the Caggers!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, guys. Didn't realise this thread was here so I started my own in the wrong forum. dx100uk very kindly moved it for me and I noticed this thread so I'm copying it here.


Posted by me on 5th May:


I have just received a letter from Acenden stating that after the last BBR change in March 2009, my monthly payment was incorrectly set owing to "fees and interestlink3.gif" applied to my account not having been included in the payment amount. This will apparently result in a shortfall on my mortgage of £1155.51 over the term of the mortgage.


They say my options are to increase my payment by £10.41 a month over the term (9 years and 3 months remaining = £1155.51, seems OK) OR make a lump sum payment of £109.58 How does that work?:???:


My payment has only been at the current amount since October 2009 anyway, not March.


Has anyone had a similar letter, or know what this is about? Obviously I don't want to be left with a shortfall, but an alarm bell is ringing in my head which says the numbers don't add up. I am just about to go trawling back through all my mortgage letters, statements and other papers to see if I can shed any light on it that way, prior to a telephone calllink3.gif later today. Wish me luck!


I made the call and it transpired that they had left out the form you sign to say you have read and understood and agree to the payment - that made it clear why they'd sent me a reply-paid envelope! That finally arrived on on Monday, three days before their deadline for assuming that I want Option A and will have another £10.41 a month stuck on my mortgage. I have read the letter, but I don't understand what these fees and interest are for, so I'm going to ask them to break it down for me and put it in writing for HRMC (as it is my belief that this may affect my tax position).

C1 - letter requesting refund of PPI (£2875.60 before interest, £3281.38 with interest) 16/08/07

C1 - letter requesting refund of charges (£48.00 before interest, £54.11 with interest) 16/08/07

C1 - £48.00 credit to card account as 'goodwill gesture'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Celtic


There is another option, which Acenden did not mention in the letter sent to you. That option being that as Acenden incorrectly calculated your payments and that you subsequently made the payments in good faith, Acedenden is wholly responsible for the mistake and therefore it should writeoff the shortfall balance, in this instance £1,155.51...


Now this may sound too good to be true. However, as published in the Financial Ombudsman Service News publication (issue 88 ) in August/September 2010:




You should make a complaint to Acenden, making reference to the view of the Financial Ombudsman Service. If after 8 weeks Acenden has not agreed to write off the short fall balance or has not responded to your complaint, you should then make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, providing a copy of your letter and again making reference to issue 88 of the Financial Ombudsman News.


You might find these articles very interesting:





Edited by Suetonius
Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes you wonder if this is yet another device to rake in more funds , has anyone else received similar?

They don't seem to quantify the error in the account and as posted above there are certainly precedents set for not paying.

Hi, guys. Didn't realise this thread was here so I started my own in the wrong forum. dx100uk very kindly moved it for me and I noticed this thread so I'm copying it here.


Posted by me on 5th May:




I made the call and it transpired that they had left out the form you sign to say you have read and understood and agree to the payment - that made it clear why they'd sent me a reply-paid envelope! That finally arrived on on Monday, three days before their deadline for assuming that I want Option A and will have another £10.41 a month stuck on my mortgage. I have read the letter, but I don't understand what these fees and interest are for, so I'm going to ask them to break it down for me and put it in writing for HRMC (as it is my belief that this may affect my tax position).

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, many thanks for all the good advice - much appreciated and V useful.


I am getting really tired of these turkeys, and I think I will follow Suetonius' good advice, as a further re-read of the documentation gives me two options, one to pay the extra amount for the rest or the term, and two to pay the lump sum. The lump sum does not add up to what I allegedly owe them, but the inference from the letter is that paying the lump sum will clear the shortfall. This is incorrect, as after paying the lump sum I would still be liable for the increased payment.


I have good, written evidence that they have calculated incorrectly and if there's a spreadsheet out there that can calculate mortgage payments and interest (like the bank charges one?) then can you point me at it, as if I can work it out then surely 'professionals' can.


The thing that's worrying me is that this company has a DD on my bank account and can help themselves to any amount (provided they inform me first). If I cancel the DD then I will be in default, arrears and subject to their charges and the threat of reposession - which frankly scares me.


Thank you all for the moral support - I think I'm going to need it!

C1 - letter requesting refund of PPI (£2875.60 before interest, £3281.38 with interest) 16/08/07

C1 - letter requesting refund of charges (£48.00 before interest, £54.11 with interest) 16/08/07

C1 - £48.00 credit to card account as 'goodwill gesture'

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...