cause and effect of refusal

[davdel]

Please help me,

 

In 2003 I took out consolidation loan with the HSBC.

I made most of payments on time through direct debit.

On some occasions I was forced to cancel a payment, only to pay it later.

This was fine and the bank always sought ways to help me, as I was a contractor and there were times I was out of work.

 

Howevert things drastically changed when the recession hit.

I was out of work and no prospects in sight,

 

I contacted the bank and explained the situation, I had sufficient funds in my account to clear my debt.

I made an extra payment against the loan, this was returned to me informing me that I could not make extra payments under the loan agreement.

I then offered to pay off the loan including the interest up to the term of the contract.

This was also turned down.

I made a further phone call, and explained to the bank, that I wanted to clear my loan debt to them, to prevent any form of default, as I was not able to find work.

No matter how hard I explained it to them they refused.

The consequence of the refusal, was that I eventually had no more funds to make the payments.

They had also refused to pay on the PPI against unemployment.

Since this my wife and I have parted company.

The divorce settlement gave me 40% ofthe marital home.

This however did not culminate in funds as the property is under a life time mortgage for equity.

 

I was contacted by the metropolitan collections agency demanding full payment of the debt £12,000 plus costs.

I had by this time employed a debt management agency to handle my affairs.

The handling my debts by the DMA, was not very good, and they confused my accounts and failed to make the payments of off my loan account.

When it was eventually sorted out, metropolitan had employed a firm of solicitors, who were taking me to court.

I was eventually taken to county court.

The court ruled that the debt be put against my share of the house, to be paid if the house was sold,

or I was in receipt of a cash settlement from my ex wife.

 

The bank put me in this situation on the grounds of their refusal to accept payment in full.

I have since won a claim against them for the failure to honour my PPI cover.

Metropolitan have said that they are keeping it to reduce my debt.

If they keep this then they are only putting me further into debt and creating a greater hardship for me, as I am only on a state pension.

I have however made an offer for them to retain £1,500 of the settlement,

as I have topay the company who worked on my behalf, to make the refund claim.

At this moment in time I have not heard from

[rdm2006]

I think that i have read on here somewhere that they are required to put you back in a position that you would have been in had they not mis-sold the PPI. Had they not done this then the monies would have been in your hands to do with as you choose. Therefore, this is the situation in which you should be returned.

 

I am sure someone will come along and confirm or correct this soon.

 

You would be better off in the PPI forum so i have asked for this to be moved for you

[dx100uk]

i'm a bit confused by the whole story here.....however ....

 

you took a consol loan out

 

who were the debts with that were consul'd

 

you need to SAR whomever those debts were with as if

there were PPI or PENALTY charges in the debts before the loan

you'll need to reclaim those too.

 

it appears the loan was then sold to metro?

and they got a CCJ - did you know about that?

did you get ever get a claim form?

 

they then got a CO - did you know about that too?

 

as for the DMP - did the debt ever go down?

 

what does your CRA file say about this debt too?

 

dx