Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • reading the order is quite difficult for me. this is a letter (names and addresses taken out) that i sent in which is what i assumed i needed too. court.odt
    • Thanks for the message jk2054   I have just been drafting what I want to say and I think its best to focus purely on the supremacy of contract. The reason being that I dont want the judge to start focusing on other parts of my witness statement when surely just the supremacy of contract section alone should be enough to get this dismissed.    The crux of my defense revolves around the principle of Supremacy of Contract. When I purchased my flat in December 2016, the contract explicitly included ownership of parking spot 112, as delineated in the lease documentation provided in Exhibit 1. This documentation unequivocally establishes my right to use and occupy this parking space. Furthermore, the subsequent exhibits, particularly Exhibit 3, clearly depict the marked boundaries of parking spot 112, corroborating my ownership as stated in the lease agreement. Additionally, the official register of title, presented in Exhibit 4, reinforces this ownership claim. Moreover, I draw the court's attention to relevant legal precedents, such as Pace v Mr N and Link Parking v Ms P, which demonstrate that parking companies cannot override a tenant's right to park on designated property. These cases serve as persuasive authorities supporting my argument regarding the Supremacy of Contract in residential parking disputes. It is my contention that the absence of any contractual obligation to display a permit for parking spot 112 absolves me of any liability in this matter. The claimant's failure to acknowledge my ownership rights in their witness statement further underscores the weakness of their case.
    • I agree with you LFI, a totally wrong decision, I may be wrong but IMO who was driving is irrelevant .... So what if he declared himself as the driver within 28 days? .... I may be wrong but it's my understanding that that just makes him liable for the charge as driver. The fact is, the driver, declared or not, only made the error of entering the wrong vehicle registration number .... The parking was paid for. I think it more likely the judge dismissed because he didn't appeal to the PPC and tell them about the error and confirm he paid giving the chance of rectifying the situation before it got to court. But we can only know if Dave962 clarifies. Pollux, is that a fish like Cod? 😁
    • and more .. As thames water pushes to further rip off captive customers, not get fined for it, and allow more dividends .. for little more than 'aspirations' to do better More detail comes out of the literally and figuratively sh** companies apparently shunting money out of the regulated business to profit/bonus/dividend generating unregulated side companies   "Accounts filed at Companies House show : (Kennets) accounts, filed more than 12 months after the end of Kennet’s financial year, showed that the company made a £1.15m pre-tax profit for the year to 31 March 2023, up from £374,000 a year earlier. Revenues rose to £1.6m in 2023 – up from £1m in "Kennet Properties paid out a £14.5m dividend in the year to 31 March 2023" "Kennet ?takes on? land no longer needed by Britain’s biggest water company before developing it and selling it on, typically for housing or commercial premises. It also received income for the use of sewer networks by third parties for fibre-optic cabling."   Thames Water could raise bills to £627 a year to help fix leaks | Thames Water | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Embattled water supplier promises to invest up to £3bn more over the next five years     Thames Water-linked firm paid £14m in dividends despite concerns over group | Thames Water | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Kennet Properties sells off Thames Water land, whose owner, Kemble Water, has warned it would not be able to pay a £190m loan  
    • I think it will make more sense if you read that the Judge meant the 28 day sentence was on the PCN not the sign. He lost because in the Judge's opinion the registered keeper has the option to declare who was driving on the day. Dave didn't do that so he takes the blame for not making the declaration. A totally wrong decision which can be challenged at a price. There is no guarantee that another Judge will want to say that the original judgement was majorly wrong so may not change it. On the other hand another Judge may say the decision was an absolute load of pollux and reverse the decision and add punitive additions on to TPS for bringing such a hopeless case to Court.  That's why we call it Judge Lottery. To be fair, Judges tend to get it right more often than not. Doesn't make things any easier for Dave.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Abbey National Mortgage and how to value claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 165 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,

 i've a couple of questions if thats ok.

 

I took out my mortgage in January 1989.

I've tried to understand what rules apply, when, and what don't.

I've found it confusing.

 

My mortgage was regulated under the CCA(1974). I think its known as a "Legacy CCA Mortgage". As such am i still afforded the protections of the CCA in regards to "Unfair Relationships"......... have i got that assumption right ?

 

And next question:

My mortage was for £13,375.69 @ 12.75% for 25 years. I was quoted and paid £118.69 .

Now , MIRAS needs to be taken into account and it was 25% at the time.

I've tried several calculators and still come up with a different figure to what i was quoted and paid.

 

Here is what i get:

A monthly repayment of £148.34, of which £142.12 is interest, remove 25% of the interest portion (i.e £35.53) that would leave an actual expected payment of £112.81.

 

So how accurate do the figures need to be or is near enough good enough ?

 

Many Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi,

i'd appreciate any advice or help with this.

 

I'll set out what has happened and then i'll set out what i have done and intend to do:

 

I got a mortgage from Abbey National in January 1989,  purchase price of house was £13,950, i put a £700 deposit down. Mortgage advance was £13,250 plus a mortgage indemnity premium to make the total amount £13,375.69. This was a standard repayment mortgage over 25 years.

 

It has ran without issue (sort of), in as much as i have never defaulted or missed payments. No PPI or anything like that just a very straightforward repayment mortgage.

 

In 1997 (8 years into the mortgage) i found out quite by chance that my mortgage had approximately 10 years longer to run than i expected. Instead of my expected finish date of 2014, my finish date was now 2023. That is still the case today.

 

When i found out my mortgage had longer to run i demanded an explanation, and i got one. They told me that the interest rate had risen on completion of my mortgage and that i had infact continued to pay at the previous lower rate quoted. Also i had failed to pay my buildings insurance premiums and these had been debited to my mortgage account. They where the reason for the "term extension" of my mortgage.

 

From 1997 until 2002 i continued to write and phone call them about this and always got the same answer. I reluctantly conceded i must of done something wrong. Although quite how i could of got a payment amount wrong i don't know as i always went into the branch, asked how much i had to pay and then paid it over the counter. So this is still the current position of the mortgage today. It has approx a year to run before it finishes.

 

About a year ago i was clearing out all my old paperwork and before i threw out my old mortgage stuff i quickly Googled ...Abbey National extending mortgage term" and i found lots around this subject.

 

Briefly it appears Abbey did this to thousands of customers without their knowledge, just extending the term by 10 years or so , or in some cases more. I also read that FOS had been inundated with complaints over this and had ordered Abbey to put customers back in the position they would of been if Abbey had not extended their mortgages without their knowledge.

 

I also read that in 2007 the FOS had set a deadline where they would deal with no new cases after this time, and also Abbey had a dedicated team to contact customers affected and put them right.

 

i contacted their complaints department, now Santander. They outright refused to deal with my complaint on the basis that what i was complaining about happened more than 6 years ago. They referred me to FOS but also told me they would not give consent for FOS to look at it.

 

The FOS investigator concluded that he could not look at it as it was more than 6 years ago, i got a second opinion from an Ombudsman and they concluded the same. They concluded that when i found out about it in 1997, my correspondence from then until 2002 was just queries and i should of known something was wrong and made complaint then. So that was really the end of the matter for me, my complaint essentially dead in the water.

 

As this was going on i'd made a DSAR to Santander, and got quite a bit of stuff back as you could imagine. The first useful information it revealed was that my mortgage was initially for £13,375.xx , i'd always thought it was for £13,301.xx as that is what all my annual statements show. It also revealed that my mortgage had changed on 01/01/1993 to a term of 370 months and a start value of £13,301.xx .

 

The next useful thing it revealed was that my agreement was and is in fact a Consumer Credit Agreement, as per the 1974 Act and my completion documents show i had made extra interest payment in order to comply with the Consumer Credit Act.

 

i researched the Consumer Credit Act, its application to mortgages, and the FCA's helpful review of the retained provisions of the Consumer Credits Act in relation to mortgages etc...

 

 

I was now able to understand that my initial agreement to pay £13,375.xx over 25 years had now been replaced with an agreement to repay £13,301.xx over 370 months. This had been done unilaterally.

 

s82(1) CCA says ........Where, under a power contained in a regulated agreement, the creditor or owner varies the agreement, the variation shall not take effect before notice of it is given to the debtor or hirer in the prescribed manner.

 

The prescribed manner in this case is moot, as no notice was given at all. As far as i can see this agreement was prevented by law from happening ? I have already sent off pre claim notice to Santander over this.

 

Simultaneously i identified that in the same way as the NRAM/Northern Rock annual statements where incorrect (S77A CCA) mine are too. They do not include the original loan amount, they state £13,301.xx.  i have made complaint to them over this, they assure me their statements are compliant. The matter is now with FOS, as they are not able to charge interest for the periods of non compliance.

 

Further......... i submitted a S77(1) request for information in June 2022 and sent the obligatory £1 cheque. They cashed the cheque and denied having had the request. I still have not had the request fulfilled to date, despite complaints over it and them paying me £100 compensation for the delay. It appears they do not have a CCA compliant agreement, nor subsequent modifying agreement either. And apparently they may not hold the terms and conditions of any agreement either. Although they have not told me that yet, but if they had them then i'd of been sent them by now.  That has now gone to FOS as a separate complaint.

 

here is my question.

If i initiate legal action i.e Unfair Relationship, creating their own agreements etc... which they where not entitled in law to do. How would i put a monetary value on my claim ?

 

Would i just request all interest re paid to me? If so would i be entitled to simple interest or restitutionary interest , how would i value it ?

 

Thanks for reading.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just thought i'd update. I have now been allocated a FOS adjudicator to look into my complaint (mortgage statements not compliant with S77A CCA). I can't envisage this is a difficult investigation, they either comply or they don't. I'll update when i know more, but i would guess it will be very soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, i wonder if someone could help or advise.

 

I've still got no S77 request.

Is it possible for me to apply to a court to force them to provide my request ?

Would i use the small claims procedure, ask for the Court to order what i'm asking, but from what i can see you need to have a "value" to your claim ?

 

So could i just nominally say..."£100 compensation " ?

Is it possible to issue such a claim in that way or is there another procedure ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you getting the CCA from them or not ...what would that prove?

the window for that redress scheme has surely now been and gone.

 

abbey were compelled by whom to contact everyone - why did they not contact you? so you could join the scheme when it existed?

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DX, many thanks for response. Here is two links to explain what happened, then i will tell you what i know.

WWW.THISISMONEY.CO.UK

The mortgage bank has admitted blunders left hundreds of customers with home loans extended by as much as 13 years

 

 

Now as far as i understand, the majority of those affected like myself would of had "unregulated" loans/mortgages. So there was a reliance on the Ombudsman to correct them and do what was "fair and reasonable" . How i got missed out i've no idea.

 

But where my own personal situation is different is that my mortgage is a Regulated Credit Agreement and that sheds a whole new light on it. Its not actually possible to modify a Credit Agreement like that without a Modifying Agreement.  The reason they will not answer my S77 request is that they will have to tell me that they do not have (1) an agreement and (2) a modifying agreement.

 

My ultimate intention is to take them to Court via the Unfair Relationship provisions and ask the Court to make the relationship fair and for them to terminate the relationship and remove the charge from my property. So although the window for redress through the Ombudsman scheme may have passed, as my account is still active and alive and not been in arrears or default ever i am still protected by the CCA. I believe that having it in writing that they have no agreements will put me in a strong position to negotiate with them rather than having to go through an expensive trial for an unfair relationship scenario. And of course i want to go through all the terms and conditions and have eye on the financials what i have borrowed, paid etc.....

 

I've been doing some more reading, from what i can fathom S138D of the Financial Services and Markets Act gives me the legal position to bring a claim for breach of duty ? That breach of duty is the duty obligated by S77(1) CCA. So that would be the basis for a claim ? That would cost me £35 to take them to Court to impell them to provide my request , does that seem right ?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is way outside my area of experience but I have just picked up a report which was flagged by my site team colleague @dx100uk asking someone to have a look at your thread.
The first thing is that I see that we haven't responded to you since you first posted at the end of May and I am very sorry about that. I suppose it is partly because your story is pretty complicated and it deals with an area which we aren't really fully up-to-date on.

In terms of ascertaining the value, it seems to me to be quite reasonable to be suing for whatever amount of money which puts you back into the position that you would have been if they had stuck by the original agreement – this is broadly in line with what the FOS has apparently told you and this is what I would have expected.

It also seems to be pretty clear from what you say that they should have giving you notice and they were contractually bound to and the fact that the notice (I'm assuming) has still not been served suggests to me that there is an ongoing breach and this itself would be a reasonable argument to put to the FOS as to why you are still within the time limit. However of course that's just simply my technical legal argument and I'm afraid that we can to find that the ombudsman service is limp wristed and often favours the bank when things get difficult to decide.

This means that you would probably have to go to court and you seem to realise that already. However if it was considered to be simply a breach of contract which occurred at the time that the notice should have been given, then that is more than six years ago and rights to bring actions for breach of contract expire after six years.
You would have to argue that they still haven't given you the notice and therefore this is an ongoing breach. The County Court judge may well have some sympathy with that view that I can equally imagine that the bank might try to appeal and that could get very complicated for you.

A big question is – what is the value that you might be suing for. If it's more than £10,000 – and it sounds as if it would be – then even if you sued, you wouldn't be able to sue using the small claims track and this means that you will be liable for the bank's costs if they won and of course even if they felt they might lose, they could incur so many costs and of course they will be threatening you and telling you that if you continued you would have to pay your costs, that you might well feel that it was very dangerous.

Another possible action could be the recovery of money paid under a mistake but even there there is a six year rule and that six years runs from the time that you could reasonably have learnt of the mistake.
 

I think the first thing you need to calculate is the value of your claim. I know you've been asking for guidance on this question on this thread – and the best I can suggest is that you need to know how much you have overpaid and this would reflect what it would take in order to return you to zero.
I don't know of any of this helps. I'm rather ad-libbing this because as I've said, this is outside my experience and I'm trying simply to apply some general contract principles to the problem – but that may well be what it takes.

I think it's very significant that they didn't serve you the notice and my argument would be that no reasonable professional should expect a lay client to be so sufficiently acquainted with the technicalities of banking that they should understand when their bank is making an error.
This is one of the reasons why the bank is required to give notice of variations or modifications.

The final possible cause of action occurs to me and that might be breach of fiduciary duty. I'm not very familiar with this cause of action and you would need to do a little research to find out what the time limits are on it but I am concerned that it may not be something that could be brought before Small Claims Court. That would have to be researched as well.

I told you it was complicated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to both of you. Its really been getting me down, i've spent over a year researching this stuff. I seem to be getting shot down at every point either by my creditor or the FOS. The FOS have told me now that my statements even if they are found to be incorrect, they will only go back the last six years and not before that.

 

It initially seems a complicated case, but once you whittle through everything it really is a simple case. Althought the stakes are high. Its as simple as this : we have a consumer credit agreement that was not exectuted correctly and it was modified incorrectly too. The Consumer Credit Law and Practice- A guide by Dennis Rosenthal says the following:

modify.pdf

 

You are correct, this will probably end in a Court case. The price of bringing an action just on Court fee's alone is so expensive. Thats something i'm prepared to do, but before i do it i need to do as much work beforehand as possible to narrow down issues. At this point my creditor will not entertain me one iota.

 

I mentioned S138 FMSA above , thats moot really as i understand it it creates provision for an action based on a failure to comply with an FCA rule/handbook etc.... It would be simpler for me to just action for breach of duty, the S77 duty. Problem i have with that is generally i think i will have to claim a "loss", not sure how i would quantify that at this point, and obviously just in relation to that point only , nothing else.

 

The reason why i believe my S77(1) request is so important is that once i recieve the correct response it would almost make the larger part of my case for me. Here is what the request should provide, as explained by the Consumer Credit Sourcebook  (CONC):

WWW.HANDBOOK.FCA.ORG.UK

 

 

I believe there is a wider Consumer interest here too. At this point my creditor does not need to supply me with some sort of signed copy of our agreement. They are allowed to hoof together some sort of copy of what i would of signed , along with the terms and conditions. That would satisfy my request. The S77 request is just for information purposes. Somehow they are unable to do that.

 

The Consumer (Agreements) Regulations 1983 sets out the form for what i should of signed for the agreement to be executed properly. I know for a fact i never signed one of those, it would have charge for credit, total charge for credit, APR etc.. i've never seen a document in my life from them like that. It would also contain my creditors name and address, in this case Abbey National Building Society. The reason i believe they have not complied is that they did not, nor ever have had any Consumer Agreement templates. In other words, they just treated every mortgage they got as an unregulated loan. The charge on the property and the application for a mortgage sufficed for them.

 

To fullfil the S77 request correctly would need them to provide a copy of the modifying agreement too, or say they do not have one. A modifying agreement also needs to comply with the same 1983 agreement regulations. In my case that will be fatal to them and their agreement as they do not have one. They could of course try to hoof one together for information purposes, but their name had changed at this point to Abbey National PLC. I'd doubt they even have a template either or even complied with any Consumer Act legislation at all. In my particular case they acknowledge it was all changed without my knowledge.

 

I'm certain my complaint to FOS over non compliance with S77 request will result in them telling me they are not a Court and cannot rule on unenforcability etc....But hopefully they will be able to decide that by not addressing my complaint in over three months is a problem. I've contacted the FCA, but sadly they are not a consumer facing body. I've give them my reports and they say they have noted them etc... but they are not answerable to me in as much as they aint gonna force my creditor to do anything.

 

My mortgage credit will run out soon, i havn't made a payment since maybe June this year. At some point they will need to send me a NOSIA.

 

So this afternoon i have done more reading and research. I have an idea. As frustrated as i am that they are not complying with a duty under the consumer credit act and no one seems to be able to help me unless i take the very expensive action and go to Court, i've seen this:

 

CCA 1974 as ammended:

161 Enforcement authorities.

(1)The following authorities ( “enforcement authorities ”) have a duty to enforce this Act and regulations made under it—

F1(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(b)in Great Britain, the local weights and measures authority,

 

 

So, Google has led me to believe that the local weights and measures authority is actually what we call "Trading Standards". If i'm right they have a duty to enforce the Act. I'm going to contact them in the morning. Fingers crossed.

 

Any input gratefully recieved, i'd sooner fail here than in court. Thanks again.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew this wasn't going to be easy, but i had no idea just how hard. FOS adjudicator asked me three question a few days ago. I thought they where bizarre:

 

[1] Please can you tell me why you believe the consumer credit act is applicable to your mortgage?

 

[2] Please can you confirm when and how you became aware your mortgage statements where not CCA compliant?

 

[3] Please can you tell me if there are any exeptional circumstances that prevented you from making a complaint sooner?

 

I answered back. Today recieved letter that basically the CCA will only generally apply to unsecured agreements and if mine is a secured agreement  then............... The adjudicator is waiting for a response from the business to find out about what type of agreement it is. So i've just told the adjudicator its a secured agreement and its a first charge mortgage  and they can get on and make their findings on that basis. There is literally no point in reviewing any of my complaint if thats the case. I'm certain they'll refuse me, probably before the week is out.

 

Not sure what will happen next if thats the case, appeal to actual Ombudsman for a descision or what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you already have the following may be of interest :-

 

https://goughsq.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/PLC-Jan-20.pdf

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy, yes have copy of that. I have pointed the adjudicator to the FCA's own policy too:

 

WWW.FCA.ORG.UK

We propose rules for firms performing activities in relation to pre-2004 first charge CCA mortgages. Why are we issuing this consultation paper? Prior...

 

But i fear it will fall on deaf ears. I'll keep posted what happens next, thanks a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so a lot has happened since my last post. I pretty much had a mini meltdown dwelling on what the Ombudsman said so far ...if my agreement was a secured agreement then it would not be regulated under the CCA. I've made complaint to the Ombudsman on the basis the investigator has no knowledge of the subject matter they are dealing with and also their 6 year arbitrary time limit has already been conveyed to me before they know what they are dealing with etc.... and more but i'm keeping this short. I'll have an answer by 1st December.

 

The reason i had a mini meltdown was that i realised if this complaint [failure to provide compliant S77A Annual statements] failed on this basis, then my complaint right behind it........failure to give a response to a S77(1) request would automatically fail too.

 

I've an admission to make at this point. I contacted a firm of Solicitors back in July with a outline of my complaint. They are a CCA specialist Solicitors who tout their high profile credentials, and the short story is they cannot help me. Another high profile CCA specialist Solicitor says........."CCA does not apply to first charge mortgages". All that is in keeping with what the Ombudsman has indicated.

 

I appear to be making more enemies than friends at this point. I also need to take a step back and consider a couple of things so far.

[1] Either me as a manual worker with no trained financial or legal knowledge knows or is aware of more things than specialist CCA solicitors and the FOS service , or ........

[2] I've got myself into some sort of fixated, delusional syndrome and i need to stop.

 

What i have decided to do (and have done), is approach Direct Access Barristers (Counsel) for a written evaluation and advice of my potential claim. It is expensive outlay but could save me a lot of money in the longrun. If it comes back in the negative then i can put the matter to bed and i've lost a relativley small amount compared to if i pressed on and incurred legal costs through failing. If it comes back in the positive then i will be able to put that advice to my lender and hopefuly should force them to negotiate with me. Or failing that i can make an informed desision wether to do it myself as a LIP or engage a Solicitor armed with what i have.

 

I feel i have the potential to unwind the whole lot, with interest. That would be circa £34k over 34 years, so the potential is high. Let you know as i go........... Thanks for reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again. The first barristers i contacted could not act for me as they would be compromised (my lenders Barristers!). Second one i asked gave me a fixed quote for advice , i wanted written advice they offered me a conference and conference notes. Price was eye watering to say the least. I have a private recommendation for another one, but i discovered a sticking point that i'd like to iron out for myself first. Someone here may be able to help, i can only ask.

 

Its a simple question really, but hard to fathom out : "was my agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act at point of execution" ?

 

Well it ticks all the correct boxes, it was under the £15k threshold at the time and its a personal debtor /creditor credit agreement. However , S16 (Exempt Agreements) of the CCA says :

 

(1)This Act does not regulate a consumer credit agreement where the creditor is a local authority or building society, or a body specified, or of a description specified, in an order made by the Secretary of State, being—

(a)an insurance company,

(b)a friendly society,

(etc)

 

That is the CCA Original (as enacted), so on the face of it as my Creditor was a Building Society my agreement is exempt from the Act. My agreement was executed in January 1989, incidentally my Creditor ceased to be a Building Society as of July 1989 (they converted to PLC) , so if the agreement had of been executed after that then straight off it would not be an exempt agreement.

 

Here is my problem. On the legislation.gov website it does not track the changes over time, so from the original as enacted we jump to how it was at a point in time, in this case 1991. Here is what it (S16) says in 1991:

 

(1)This Act does not regulate a consumer credit agreement where the creditor is a local authority , or a body specified, or of a description specified, in an order made by the Secretary of State, being—

(a)an insurance company,

.............<snip>

(g)a building society

 

So we can see the position has changed dramatically for Building Societies, to be exempt they need to be specified in an order, such as the Consumer Credit (Exempt Agreements) Order 1989 for example.

 

I can track how the change was made, it was made here :

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

An Act to make fresh provision with respect to building societies and further provision with respect to conveyancing services.

 

What i am unable to work out is exactly when that change was made. Any advice as to how i find out when that change was made ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to answer my own question here a bit , i think. The Legislation.gov site shows changes since 1988. The wording of the Consumer Agreement exemption regulations changes quite a bit between 1985 and 1987 and i can see "building Societies" getting a specific mention in the later ones. I'm confident the change was around 1987. Can't be before 1986 as it was changed by the 1986 Building Societies Act .Looks like i can get the info from The Law Society.

 

Hold on, got it just as i'm reading , and typing this. That change was brought in by the Building Society Act 1986 on July 1986. And there is no Abbey National Building Society excluded in any Order i've found

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the Ombudsman said they would reply to my complaint about their investigator by 1st December. Nothing so far. In the meantime i'd contacted my lender again and set out the legal basis for my claim, they won't engage with me at all. They just state they are assuming the same position : they will not communicate with me and i should liase with my FOS adjudicator. Even though my claim is not related to what i have complained to FOS about them.

 

Trading Standards have been in touch again, i have a reference number and they may get back to me for more information. Thats twice they've been back in touch with me , i was suprised by that really.

 

So fingers crossed for reply from Ombudsman, i'm just trying everything before i have to press the "nuke" button and fill out the Court forms. Time is running out for S78(1) request too, i've waited 6 months for it as it is. The agreement has 11 months left to run before it concludes. I'll have to make a descision soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Just an update with good news really, although i still may have a way to go:

 

I have been allocated a new investigator, they have decided that as regards my complaint over non compliant statements (S78A) since 2008, that this is something they can look at. Short story, it is not reasonable that i would know about this stuff, or should know. My lender has not agreed and said 2008 is too long a time to go back. My lender had until 22nd this month to disagree or it will go ahead without them, i'm unsure of what they have done at this point but i guess i'll find out soon. Thats a short version.

 

Next: my S78(1) complaint is being dealt with too by same investigator. This sort of all ties up nicely together really as there would seem to be no point in my lender trying to defer dealing with statements when they will have to deal with this too, and they had a similar deadline for this complaint too and no way out of it . So i'm certain this one at least will be dealt with and have an outcome before the end of January, probably well before.

 

I feel a little bit lucky here because if my mortgage had of been for over £15K i would of had an unregulated loan and non of the CCA protections would of applied to me. Another clue (for me at least) that everything is going to work out fine for me is the fact i have not made a payment since at least June i think, and to date they have not asked me for one despite me asking when my next payment is due and how much i need to pay. Of course too, they will need to issue another (non compliant i assume) annual statement by mid January, so not sure where that leaves their train of thought?  This tells me that they are now looking at the matter with some seriousness.

 

Looking forward to 2023 and see what it brings me, Happy New Year to you all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done on getting a more positive outlook...

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ok, got my answer back from investigator today. Complaint (S77A Annual statements) was not found in my favour. Reason being that my creditor provides :

 

Details the date the mortgage started, balance outstanding, monthly payment and payment date.

The summary also gives a figure for illustration purposes about the Early Repayment Charge (ERC) and the repayment fee.
 I think this information would allow most customers to have an overview of their mortgage account and allow them to make informed decisions regarding this.vAlso says i have not been affected financially by this.

 

I've asked for it to be elevated to an actual Ombudsman, that will take a few months more. So i'm not holding my breath over this.

 

 I've told them i had an agreement for £13,375.xx over 25 years starting 1989. I don't recognise an agreement for £13,301 over 31 years starting in 1993, therefore its incorrect..and i have been financially impacted by paying interest i am not liable to pay etc.....

 

The investigator cleverly does not raise the issue of incorrect amount for credit, nor length of agreement. Pretty fundamental in a consumer credit agreement i would of thought.

 

I was pretty deflated over that as i was certain it would be found in my favour, my only fear was they would offer a lesser amount than i expected. So i got that very wrong.

 

My other complaint by same investigator still needs an outcome, that is failure to respond to  a S77 request.

 

No idea now whats going to happen with that, and maybe that fact that this simpler complaint has been left later may be poignant. It would reveal what should be on the statements................

. I am awaiting the outcome of this any week now.

 

In the meantime, my mortgage payments for last year where approx £65 PM, i never paid since June as i was in credit.

 

I've had a letter to tell me that my new payments are now £96 PM starting 23rd Jan. The agreement concludes in November this year so i must owe about a grand. I'm not going to pay a penny more so they will be forced to take me to Court for it. I think realistically that my only and next option.

 

Also, another point i have picked up on. Whenever there is a variation in the interest rate my lender just sends me a letter telling me what my new monthly payment is. So thats what i pay. At no point have they ever told me a variation in interest rate.

 

My understanding is that S82 (CCA) impels them to let me know the variation in interest rate, and that it cannot take effect until they do. I'm gonna run with that as a new complaint too. There maybe something in legislation that allows them to not tell me, for example if they publish it somewhere or other but i guess i'll find that out by asking them?

 

Not sure how i havn't just give up at this point, i'm finding it so hard, so stressful and seemingly getting knocked down at every twist and turn but a thousand pound is a thousand pound, may not be a lot to some but it is to me.

 

The harder i try and fail then the higher my expectations go and i'm doing everything possible to avoid taking them to court, if / when i do i want everything back they where not legally entitled too............ probably £36k with interest over 34 years.

 

I realise i'm just venting here but boy do i feel ripped off.

And, i'm not the only one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a thought and i'd like to run it past the collective as it may hold a wider interest and i'm sure someone will let me know if i've got something wrong in my assumptions:

 

Buildings Insurance: It was and probably still is, compulsory to have it on a mortgaged property. My lender required me to get it myself and if i didn't by say...1st April, they would provide it and debit me with the amount. For the sake of example lets say the insurance premium was £150 for the year. They would debit my account for £150 and i would just pay it back subsumed into my original agreement.

 

I can't see how this provision of £150 credit escapes the Consumer Credit Act. It is £150 of restricted use credit, and its undocumented. It is still subject to the S60 requirements? My agreement was for a fixed sum credit agreement, so its not possible to "shoehorn" an extra £150 in to this agreement year on year either ?

 

Any thoughts ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is getting much worse for me. Complaint to Ombudsman............. S78 request for information not complied with at all, not one iota. Since June last year. Got my decision today from the investigator:

Complaint:

 

Quote

says they delayed
request for information about their mortgage statements.

 

 

Here's the outcome:

Quote

After reading all the evidence and arguments submitted by both parties, I think the £100
offered for the distress and inconvenience is fair and reasonable to cover the mistakes B
is responsible for. So, I won’t be upholding this complaint or asking B to take any other
action but to pay the £100 offered if not done so already.

 

It shouldn't be this hard to get a S78 request . Not sure why the investigator appears so obtuse. I told them specifically it was a S78 request, i paid £1 and i still havn't got it. Its like they just answered a complaint i didn't make.

 

So, i'm out of options now. This will now drag on for ages as i go back and forth with the ombudsman again. My last option , and its the only thing i can do now is sit back, don't pay and let them take me to Court. And it won't suprise me one iota if they don't even do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All change again. I've pointed out that a decision appears to have been made about something i didn't complain about. I reiterated my complaint. Sent further proof that my lender has not closed the complaint , nor dealt with it. So the complaint is still activley being looked at .

 

Related: On Twitter there is an elderly lady, aged nearly 80 and all she does is post about how they have scammed her too in the same way. From reading her posts it looks like she now has a brief on the case. From what i can see, she doesn't have a Consumer Credit Agreement, where i have.

 

I'm mulling over wether to try contact her and see if there is anything we could do as a collective. Although , really me contacting an elderly lady about her mortgage somehow just seems off.

 

I'm going to see what it is possible for me to do with the FCA, if they see there is a few of us slipped through the net they make take a positive action. There will be more in our position i guess. But probably all in that age range of 60 years old to 80 years old if they havn't died or moved.

 

*Apologies. I keep stating S78 in my posts. Its S77. I've got it correct in my correspondance and complaints, but for some reason keep saying S78 here. Heads fizzled  !!

 

Email address on her website didn't work, i've left a voice message to get in touch. I've added a caveat that i'd like to speak to her about the same shared problems we are having but that i am not asking for any personal information, and if she is happy for a phone call i would sooner it be done in the presence of a younger family member, so as to be assured she is not speaking to scammers etc...

 

For the avoidance of any doubt, this is who i have contacted. Its a public profile, who says a lot.  I hope or expect i havn't crossed any line here as to what is acceptable. I'm just trying to be open and transparent:

 

https://tinyurl.com/2p9a44pz

 

 

 

Not sure whats happened here and i've no idea how to shorten it. But as you say, include a twitter handle in your post !!

 

Edited by dx100uk
whole twitter page converted to tinyurl
Link to post
Share on other sites

ive converted the twitter page link via tinyurl site

that way you get the actual tweet you want to show people not her front page

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if some could help me understand some legal jargon please, i'm not sure i understand it and i just have a few days to get my last submission to the Ombudsman over my statements.

 

From 2008 my statements had to be CCA compliant. This ended in 2016, they had to be compliant with MCOBS after that (2016 date).

 

The sanction for non compliance via S77A is as follows :
 

Quote

 

(b)the debtor shall have no liability to pay any sum of interest to the extent calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance or to any part of it; and

(c)the debtor shall have no liability to pay any default sum which (apart from this paragraph)—

(i)would have become payable during the period of non-compliance; or

(ii)would have become payable after the end of that period in connection with a breach of the agreement which occurs during that period (whether or not the breach continues after the end of that period).

 

 

 

The FCA changed the rules and the law regarding this matter (annual statements) like i said in 2016. They say the following:

 

Quote

Annual statements under MCOB 7.5 will replace the annual statements provided under s.77 CCA, The s.77A sanctions for non-
compliance will fall away subject to accrued rights and defences being preserved

 

So my question is.... exactly what does "accrued rights and defences being preserved" mean ?

Does that mean if there was no entitlement to charge interest during the period of non compliance , that that situation still persists ? The right to that has not diminished or gone away ?

 

I have Googled it, but to be honest i don't understand exactly the results i am reading as its mostly in "legalese" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, marylikes said:

Does that mean if there was no entitlement to charge interest during the period of non compliance , that that situation still persists ?

 

correct they must not have sent the required NOSIA's letters (notice of sums in arrears) typically known across the industry as NOSIN letters.

if they did not send those out, then they can't charge interest for the period of the arrears.

 

smells you might also have £1000's in unlawful penalty charges here too, but what good that does all these years later is a mute point under the FCA DISP rules. BUT it might well be an interesting revealing exercise to do so as it could add serious financial weight to your whole argument .

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...