Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My WS as I intend to send it... any problems anyone can spot?         In the county court at Middlesbrough Claim No:  Between Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant) V   (Defendant) Witness Statement Introduction It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of XXnn XXX   Locus standi/bye-laws and Relevant land Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 (PoFA) allows recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. However, the first paragraph 1 (1) (a) states that it only applies “in respect of parking of the vehicle on relevant land:”. The definition of “relevant land” is given in paragraph 3 (1) where subsection (c) excludes “any land ... on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control”.  The bus stop is not on relevant land because the public road on which that stand is on is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  Notwithstanding that the claimant claims that " the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site", the claimant has not given any contractual licence whatsoever. This is a road leading to/from the airport which is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  A list of highways on the Highways act 1980 does not even exist. The defendant brings the attention of the court that VCS is using this non existent document issue as a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. While it is true that landowners can bring in their own terms, it is also true that whatever terms they bring  cannot overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and neither is the specious argument about First Great Western Ltd. Is the claimant ignorant of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012? The road outside of Doncaster Sheffield Airport is not relevant land and is not covered by the Protection of Freedoms Act. That makes the charge against the claimant tantamount to fraud or extortion. The claimant mentions a couple occasions where they have won such cases. It is brought to the attention of the court that none of those cited cases were on airport land. VCS actually has also lost a lot more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs.  Airport land is covered by Bye Laws and hence the claim by VCS is not applicable in this instance. The remit of VCS ends in the car park and does not extend to the bus stops on public roads or land which they have no jurisdiction over. All classes of people go to the airport. This includes travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers and buses with passengers. It is therefore absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS with any sort of permissions. The defendant submits that VCS should not confuse a major thoroughfare with a car park and presume to act as land owners and usurp the control of any land which is not relevant to them.   Protection of Freedoms Act The clearest point on section 4.1 of the Protection of Freedoms act is that “The provisions in Schedule 4 are intended to apply only on private land in England and Wales. Public highways are excluded as well as any parking places on public land which are either provided or controlled by a local authority (or other government body). Any land which already has statutory controls in relation to the parking of vehicles (such as byelaws applying to airports, ports and some railway station car parks) is also excluded.” Therefore, as this case pertains to an airport, the claimant unlawfully obtained the registered keeper’s details against the defendant’s vehicle. Thus, on this basis alone, the defendant implores the court to throw out this case. Notwithstanding the above point, if perchance Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 were to apply, the claimant is put to strict proof that they complied with the requirements of section 7 stating, “(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. The notice must — (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;” Without such proof the court must of necessity throw out this case forthwith.   Deceit, Intimidation and Extortion The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim include £50 legal costs, yet in the letter dated  03/06/2021, the Claimant stated that they were no longer represented by Elms Legal and all further correspondence should be sent to the VCS in-house litigation department. Why should the Claimant be asking the Defendant to contribute to their employee’s salary?  Furthermore, as per another letter dated 30th July 2021, the Claimant wrote, ‘Should you fail to accept our offer of settlement then we will proceed to Trial and bring this letter to the Court’s attention upon question of costs in order seek further costs of £220 incurred in having to instruct a local Solicitor to attend the hearing in conjunction with the amount claimed on the Claim Form.’ I find this an extraordinary statement given the Claimant knows legal costs are capped at £50 in Small Claims Court. I cannot think of any reason why the Claimant would write this letter other than to intimidate the opposing party with the threat of an extortionate sum of money, hoping they would be able to take advantage of someone not knowing the Small Claims Court rules. Given that this letter came from the Claimant’s in-house litigation department, clearly well-versed in the law, this cannot be anything but deceitful and disingenuous behaviour which the court should never tolerate.    Contractual costs / debt recovery charge  In addition to the £50 legal costs, the Claimant is seeking recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 which is described as ‘debt collection costs’. In the Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 18 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated, ‘Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones-Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates […] in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court in Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law. It is hereby declared […] the claim be struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.’  In Claim number F0DP806M and F0DP201T, Britannia v Crosby went further in a landmark judgement in November 2019 which followed several parking charge claims being struck out in the area overseen by His Honour Judge Iain Hamilton-Douglas Hughes GC, the Designated Civil Judge for Dorset, Hampshire, Isle of White & Wiltshire. District Judge Taylor echoed the earlier General Judgement or Orders of District Judge Grand stating, ‘It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedom Acts 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998…’ Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 19 51. Moreover, the addition of costs not specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.  It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).  The Defendant is of the view that the Claimant knew, or should have known, that to claim in excess of £100 for a parking charge on private lands is disallowed under the Civil Procedure Rules, the Beavis Case, the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 and Consumer Rights Act 2015, and that relief from sanctions should be refused.   Alleged contract The court should consider if there is any contract to start with and if the alleged offence is on relevant land. The consideration will inevitably lead the court to conclude that there is no contract.  Also the court should note that there is no valid contract that exists between VCS and Peel. Under the Companies Act, a contract should be signed by the directors of both companies and witnessed by two independent individuals. This alleged contract, which makes no mention of pursuing registered keepers of vehicles to court, makes its first appearance as a Witness Statement. Thus the alleged contract is null and void.  The Beavis case referred to by the claimant is about parking in a car park. The claimant is here attempting to equate that case to stopping, not parking, in a bus stop and on a road that is covered by the Road Traffic Act. The defendant submits that there can be no contract as there is no offer but there is only a prohibition. Again, it is not relevant land and VCS has absolutely no rights over it. Further, the defendant would like to point out that motorists NEVER accept any contract just by entering the land. First they must read it and understand it and then, and only then can they realise that "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract.   Bus stop signage The signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the “No Stopping” signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and that the creditor should be identified. Nothing on the signs around the bus stop that says “NO Stopping” mentions VCS or Peel Investments who are now purporting to be the land owners of a public road. As the signage should identify the creditor, since it does not, this is a breach of the CoP.   The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 does not prohibit stopping in a restricted bus stop or stand, it prohibits stopping in a clearway. The defendant would like to ask the court to consider if any clause of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 that the claimant alleges has been violated by the defendant. There is no mention of permits on the signage. If there were, would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on “No Stopping” roads? Notwithstanding what the claimant calls it, the mentioned signage is NOT a contractual clause. A “No stopping” sign is not an offer of parking terms.  Since the signage around the bus stop is prohibitive, it is as such is incapable of forming a contract. Further, the defendant would like to point out that the prohibitive sign is not actually at the bus stop but a few metres before the stand itself. There is no mention of a £100 charge for breaching the “No stopping” request, or if there is one then it is far too small to read, even for a pedestrian. As already stated, a Witness Statement between VCS and Peel Investments is not a valid document. It will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant regardless of who was driving. There is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employee relationship. VCS cannot transfer the driver's liability to the registered keeper. There can be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. This is a totally fatuous analogy which cannot be applied to this case.  As stated in the defence, it is denied the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all. The nefarious parking charge notice given for a vehicle on a public road bus stop was ill advised to start with.   Conclusions:   VCS has failed to present ANY reasonable and valid cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. VCS has failed to provide ANY valid  contract with the landowners. “No stopping” is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for any motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP and hence the signage is not valid the WS contract does not authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land. The Defendant wishes to bring to the attention of the court that the Claimant cites an irrelevant case of a car park and tries to apply its merits to a bus stop. That in itself invalidates the entire fallacious claim. Accordingly, this case is totally without merit. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. All the false information presented as a statement of truth could have been stated using half the words and without all the repetition which appears to be trying to build a strong case where there is none at all. One particularly bad example of misdirection is in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.   47. Lastly I wish to bring to the attention of the court, a systematic pattern of the Claimant’s court action behaviour in several of their cases. They tend to have a VCS paralegal writing a Witness Statement, then mentioning in the last paragraph of the Witness Statement that they may be unable to attend court and subsequently the paralegals never turn up to be cross examined. In the event that Mohammed Wali is unable to attend court to be asked about his claims, then I would like to know why he is not able to attend when the hearing has been scheduled months in advance, is during working hours and as a result of covid, is online, meaning there is no travel involved. Ambreen Arshad, the other paralegal employed by VCS, does exactly the same. 
    • Hang on. don't panic!   You sent the snotty letter which has told the fleecers to put up or shut up.  So far they've haven't taken you to court.  This might change, but so far you're in the driving seat.  You don't have to deal with them any more.  It's up to them if they have the gonads to start court action or not.   Regarding DCBL, they are not representing their client in the normal way that a solicitor represents a client, because the sums of money involved are too low for that.  They are just chucked a few quid to send a couple of "threatening" letters.  There is no point in dealing with them.   If you want the original PCN send a SAR to UKPCM only.  For the SAR letter simply click on "SAR".   However, the SAR has nothing to do with the 30 days, you've already dealt with that with the snotty letter.  You need to read lots of similar threads and familiarise yourself with the legal process.  CAG is a superb free library.    
    • Hi again, so I will send a SAR to UKPC because I don't remember seeing the  NTK.  Then should I let DCBL know otherwise they will probably issue the court papers but they might hold off if i tell them about the SAR?   what do you think?  I need to do it this weekend or it will be beyond the 30 days.  Otherwise to let it run will definitely lead to a court case perhaps??   Can I get a copy of a SAR letter on here? thanks
    • 👍   One thing, write "unlawful", not "illegal".   Sorry to be pernickety, but "illegal" = "a crime".   "unlawful" = "not in accordance with the law".    They've lied to the DVLA but that's not actually a crime, it's misuse of your personal data which is a civil matter, and you can sue the idiots once your case is over for breach of GDPR, but it's not a criminal offence.
    • Just added also paragraph 11 stating " Notwithstanding the above point, if perchance Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 were to apply, VCS should prove that they complied with the requirements of section 7 stating, “(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. The notice must — (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;” Without such proof the court must of necessity throw out this case forthwith."
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Engage Credit SAR request ignored


 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 910 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

need some serious advice here with the mortgage.

 

Situation as we stand today:

Mortgage company named (A)

it was a 100% mortgage issued to me for a flat

– back in 2007

– back then I had no real financial constrains since I had a high income job.

 

part of 2008 and part of 2009

– I was let off my job due to the recession,

I nearly spent a year making reduced payments to the mortgage company until I could secure a better job.

 

I have found a slightly better job so I increased the amount I was paying but I’m not still paying the full amount since I can’t afford it, it would mean detracting away from the basic needs of utilities, travel to work and so forth.

 

the mortgage company has been adding the arrears separately from the mortgage which now total a substantial amount,

now with the situation as it is the property is in neg equity as well, so even a sale of it would not get me out of the situation since I got the flat valued and it came at 20k short of what I needed to break even (assuming that is that you find the person that will pay the value of the evaluation)

 

Advice pls ;

How on earth do I turn this ship around?

I have gone down the re-mortgage route but no bank will touch me thanks to my mortgage company that have added a flurry of defaults to my credit file since I had my difficulties and continue to do so every month until I start to pay the full amount of the mortgage account is considered in arrears.

 

I feel as if I’m in a box here with no way out – the more I talk to the mortgage people the more they don’t listen.

 

the current deal I have with them for the fixed term interest only expires in august 2011,

I had serious running’s with the mortgage provider

– as they have been not helpful at all,

 

I had raised complains with the relevant institutions that are supposed to offer us advice on how to take on these people and try to keep you home,

but so far its been really tough since they keep sending me letters with regards to the arrears and also they keep charging me for 50 to 100 pounds for administration costs ( this to sent a sodding letter!!)

 

I’m at my wits end here stressed by this,

trying to keep the current job as you can appreciate with the current climate, we can’t take the job for granted.

 

If anyone can assist or offer any advice here it would be much appreciated.

 

ps one last point if i am forced to sale the property

- and left with the short fall i'm i responsible for that?

 

since i was told by the mortgage company that they would move for a bankrupcy order if any short falls are not taken care of.

in essence its like adding the cherry onto of the cake!!

Edited by red11
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Good Morning red11, sorry to hear of your troubles. There is a mortgage expert on here and her name is Ell-enn, I am sure she will be able to give you some good advice as to what to do next aswell as many others on here.

 

Hopefully someone will be along soon to help you, sorry I cannot be of much help, but wish you the best of luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok.. have you been communicating with the lender by phone only, or also sending in letters?

 

..always best to go down the letter route and, by all means, talk to them if they call but keep it to niceties only as much as possible..

 

..it's difficult to provide a definitive approach to dealing with such problems and I've felt it best to explore negotiations/arrangements with them in writing, whilst also making the usual complaints re: penalty charges/admin charges etc.. a polite request for them to stop applying these charges so as not to unnecessarily increase your indebtedness can sometimes have an effect..

 

..have you tried contacting Shelter?

 

..when writing to your lender it can also help to explain a little about the local property market being considerably depressed in terms of actual sale price realised for primary residential areas and that the situation for secondary area properties in need of refurbishment is much worse.. given that you're already in a position of negative equity, a substantial shortfall would result in your bankruptcy as you have no other assets.. could any of this apply to your situation perhaps?

 

..but get in there with some kind of suitable (ie affordable for you and leaving enough cash for your other priorities & a bit left over) offer/arrangement in writing.. they must reply in 10 business days either accepting your proposals or explaining why they won't.. keep repeating this process as politely as possible.. if they keep stonewalling you, then continually state a counter to that in the form of something like I am doing my best to come to a mutually suitable arrangement and can you please advise as to an arrangement that would satisfy them given current circumstances..

 

..definitely wait and see what other Caggers on here think too before doing anything though!!

 

..I don't intend to alarm or make you feel worse, but I fear that if you don't resolve this before the end of the fixed rate period then you are likely to face a very sharp increase in interest rate too..

 

..do you have any other options available such as renting your property out in order to meet the repayments?

 

ZillaK :)

Edited by ZillaK
correction..
Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for the advice offered so far.. lets see what other caggers have to offer in terms of advice.

Also Zillak i did look into renting the property but you see the rent would not as much as i need to pay these sods.. i suppose i could rent it out and add ontop, but that would present me with a second issue..where do i live? Meaning renting which really defeats the purpose since a cheap rent here in London.. for a very basic place u are looking at 600 per month without the bills..

 

what is really a travesty here, is that the mortgage company has little to gain from all of this as well as me, its surely worth it having at list someone that is paying a very good part of the Mortgage. Instead they are keen to destroy me, with a repossession, which ok fine they are entitled to do so, but i had the flat valued and if they find a buyer ad the valuation price of the estate agent, it will not be enough to cover it the short falls - what does that achieve?? i mean good grief we've been and possibly still are in the grip of the worse recession seen in by mankind here, and instead of working with us jo bloggs in keeping us in our homes, they are hell-bent in ruining a person

 

I could see their view if i was just saying look, i'm not going to pay anything so tough.. but i'm physically doing all i can, and i see no compassion no understanding no grasp of the gravity of the situation.

that leaves me with a bitter taste in the mouth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

..actually, they can still gain by the time you consider mortgage indemnity insurance, offsetting losses against tax as well as possible sneaky accounting, bleeding you dry and selling off your organs, selling the debt on etc etc..

 

..recessions are very profitable indeed unfortunately.. boom and bust by design..

 

..hopefully there's some helpful suggestions from other posters later..

 

ZillaK :)

Edited by ZillaK
making addition..
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, it must be a very worrying situation for you to be in and frustrating that the lender won't come to some arrangement. What interest rate are you on at the moment? what does it say in your agreement regarding the interest rate that will apply at the end of the fixed rate? you might find (as I did) that your monthly payment will reduce in line with the lower interest rates.

 

Another thing to consider if you have a spare room - what about taking a lodger? is there a work colleague, friend or family member who might want to share.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks for your reply on my Thread here,

ok well - the current interest is 4.3% considering that its interest only, the mistake on my part was to take out a 100% deal with them since i thought at the time i'm making enough money stick with it then change the mortgage provider at the end of the fixed interest only term. once this expires in August 2011, i will come down to a fixed 4% but that includes capital payments as well. As for a lodger - indeed but its a one bed property. I'm not sure if anyone has pasted experiences here but the company in question is Future Mortgages, a child of Citi group, my previous employer.

 

Sorry I forgot to add that in my latest communications with the Mortgage Company,

they have had the cheek to say that I’m not a client any longer and I should liaise with their legal department.

 

This solicitor is based in the north east of England as are the offices of the mortgage company.

Now I have written to this solicitor and provided the facts as they where put forward to their client.

I have raised complains all over the place

– the Office of fair trading

– FOB – and every other organization that I could possibly think of to try to highlight the plight here.

Edited by red11
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have made the decision that you cannot afford it, then it is best you stay in control and sell the property yourself.

 

Once the banks repossess, they are in control and I would be concerned that they will sell it below market value and then add administration costs.

 

Unfortunately you are responsible for the shortfall either way, but it should be a lesser shortfall if you sell it. As an aside in the US you are not liable for the shortfall, maybe we will go that way, like we seem to with everything else.

 

Do not expect compassion or understanding from you lender, they have procedures to follow when you default and you are just a number to them.

Edited by GuidoT

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood where you are coming from here GuidoT, but there is such a thing as code of conduct – I mean what about all the rubbish the government gave as instructions to mortgage and finance companies to engage with their clients to find resolutions or alternatives to keep people in their homes?

 

if they employ such views of “pull the ladder up and sod the rest jack” I’m sorry but that is not the way to go. Not trying to be moralistic here just fighting to keep a roof over my head here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have hit the nail on the head when you say it is rubbish.

 

The government say one thing and the banks do as they please, in particular the ones they own (but cannot control).

 

I am sorry I am so cynical, you should try and reason with them, you have absolutely nothing to lose, if that fails at least it should buy you some time and you never know what is round the corner that may assist you.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should write to Future (copy the solicitors) by recorded delivery enclosing a budget sheet and referring them to the Civil Justice Council Mortgage Arrears Protocols which the government published last year. If you need help with the content of the letter, let me know and I'll draft one for you.

 

Ell

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood where you are coming from here GuidoT, but there is such a thing as code of conduct – I mean what about all the rubbish the government gave as instructions to mortgage and finance companies to engage with their clients to find resolutions or alternatives to keep people in their homes?

 

if they employ such views of “pull the ladder up and sod the rest jack” I’m sorry but that is not the way to go. Not trying to be moralistic here just fighting to keep a roof over my head here.

 

Its difficult when you cant afford the repayments but sadly, sometimes the economics are against you.

 

It may be worth asking Futures to follow the principles of the Homeowners Support Scheme which encourages lenders to accept payments at less than the interest only rate for a temporary period:

 

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/1205889.pdf

 

Do you have other (unsecured) debts which you can negotiate on to free up more cash for this most important debt?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its difficult when you cant afford the repayments but sadly, sometimes the economics are against you.

 

It may be worth asking Futures to follow the principles of the Homeowners Support Scheme which encourages lenders to accept payments at less than the interest only rate for a temporary period:

 

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/1205889.pdf

 

Do you have other (unsecured) debts which you can negotiate on to free up more cash for this most important debt?

 

 

Hi thanks for the advice – I have no other debts I only have one credit card which I only use in emergency.

I essence I need these guys a Future mortgages to agree lower payments. But that is proving impossible since they literally have stopped listening!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Future mortgages / has anyone had any dealings?

 

Ok here’s the deal:

Property bought for 156k 100% loan

Interest payment for 3 years till the end of 2011 with future mortgage of £900 x month

 

Loss of job – that put me in a very difficult position – arrear where building up took a lowered paid job and after a long-ish battle with the solicitor of Future mortgages agreed to take a reduced payment of £450 per month in the mean time I managed to get a slightly better job and raised that reduced payment to £600 per month. Now I raised again to £700 per month

 

 

Problems here – arrears + the fact that after the credit crunch the property value has dropped leaves me with figures that are looking like this

 

At the start - outlay

 

156k +

Arrears +

Cost of having a 100% mortgage

The grand total outstanding right now is

179k.

 

Questions are my paltry £700 a month are not eve touching the sides they as in the mortgage company are not listening since they prefer me talking to the solicitor.

 

The property is in neg equity valued by the estate agent at 140k max – this is a one bed flat.

With the job I have now I can’t raise the payments past the £700 mark and these sods have been adding £50 pounds administration fees every month.

 

My fear is this – I need to know all I can on future mortgage – I need to stat challenging them and raise complains on how this all deal has evolved. They are clearly useless in helping their customers.

 

I fear that they are preparing a repo order against me since I have now been making reduced payments for 1 year and they have not engaged in talking with me at all,

 

The economy is still recovering but well paid jobs are still far and few in between in my sector which is banking. every job advertised is at list 25 to 30% lower in terms of salary because of the banking crisis.

 

So any advise is very welcome – I just need tangible steps to turn this ship around and gather control.

 

Many thanks for this site which is a gold mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Red,

 

I would suggest starting with data subject access requests to both Future and the broker who placed your mortgage with them. This should get you full copies of both of their files which should arm you with information to find any problems.

 

You may uncover legal challenges such as a secret commission paid to the broker.

 

Alternatively there may be things you can raise with the FOS, such as poor advice from the broker in not pointing out the potential to end up in negative equity with a 100% mortgage, the broker selling an interest only mortgage with no investigation of how the mortgage would be repaid (these first two assume the sale was on an advised basis rather than execution only) or Future continuing to charge monthly arrears administration fees when you are making agreed payments.

 

Hope this helps as a starting point.

 

KC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi all, need some urgent help regarding reposession - i've been sent a letter by the solicitor acting on behalf of future mortgages proceeedings have ben issued with CPR order 55.10

 

the short back ground is that the mortage is in arrears by 8k -now and i'm still paying the reduced ammount that was agreed back last year when i was in financial dire straights - the solicitor and future mortgages have not been that helpful.

 

bottom line is that i have now reached the end of the road here, they want to take the property the full monthly payment is 901 and i paid 700 right now also they are came out with a letter saying that my arrangement of lower payments had been suspended, back last june but it took them nearly 1 year to send me a letter to say to me that!

 

i need help to mount a defence and to keep my property the court date is the 23rd of June.

 

please help i'm really stressed about this i need advice how how to fight these people i don't want to lose my home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, are you still not in a position to pay the full monthly payment?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...