My Mortgage Fees Were Refunded!!!!!!!!

[dashngail]

Hi gizmo111

Just had a look a Nightstar saga, will keep our eye on that one.

Cheers

Dashngail

[JulesTools]

Hi Dashngail,

Just finished reading this thread from start to finish.Wow.

You seem to be the 1st to have gone through the process and are an encouragement to us all.I have pasted your letters and will be adapting them to suit .

A GREAT BIG THANK YOU FROM EVERYONE

Lots of people including myself have been holding off action until seeing the results of your case and now I think you will have hundereds or thousands of people following suit.What an achievement you and your son should be so proud of you both.We are.

[dashngail]

Not sure what's blown us away most this week the judgement or finding out that people have been watching and waiting to see what happened in our claim.

 

The daft thing is we thought we would be the first to not get anything back from any of the bodies we are claiming from.

 

Thank you very much for your very kind and encouraging words.

 

Our advise for you now is

 

GO AND GET YOUR MONEY RETURNED, JUST DO WHAT IS TAKES

 

Will be following your journey with interest.

Cheers

Dashngail

[paddym]

well done dashngail im sure your sons over the moon with the result thanks to all your hard work again well done !

[lesken]

wow, i have been also following this thread with great interest, we are currently in the middle of remortgaging to victoria from preffered and are looking to pay 3500 redemption charges not as much as some but still is a lot of money, weve only been with preferred for 1 yr but changed to get better interest rate, think will wait a while before challenging them (sorry if that sounds cowardly), in process of mc with nationwide wait till thats through then take on tsb then will contemplate taking on preffered, need a bit more experience on this i think....thanks for this thread has been extremelly interesting and informative. well done dashngail

[dashngail]

Thanks for your message, we now waiting for payment. We were a little concerned that they might try to stop the judgement but they havn't made any comment at all. We have written a letter informing Platform that we will be issuing a warrent if we havn't received the refund by Thursday, so hopefully our son's bank balance will rise pretty soon.

 

We are due to issue two court claims this week, one for Lloyds (bank charges)and the other Platform Holding (our mortgage redemtion penalties £6000)

 

When you said you need more experience, I think that you can only get this by doing what needs doing as each case is so different plus each bank seems to operate in different way.

 

I'm going to put your post on our reminder list as you are a week in front of us with Lloyds.

 

Keep going, you get what is YOURS

 

Cheers

dashngail

[lesken]

Hi dashngail, am waiting for nationwide to produce before i go after lloyds, and was going to wait until my mortgage is switched before i go after preffered would hate to do anything to stall it at the moment, i would also be afraid to get confused with a few running at once, although could really do with the money at the moment!! as could we all!lol keep me posted how you do it would be great to think you have the bailiffs knocking down their door..lol

Thanks

Les

[dashngail]

Sorry I thought I had read on your signature that you had already issued the money claim against Lloyds. Must have been someones elses signature.

 

Cheers

dashngail

[dashngail]

Ah...........................HELP HELP

 

We got our judgement on the 1st Sept. heard nothing since today we were getting ready to instruct the balliffs.

 

Daz thought he would ring them one last time, he was told that they had ignored our second letter instructing them because after they had answered our first letter they had closed the file.

 

They are also saying they didn't get the court summons and only got the judgement yesterday. We got our judgement letter last week.

 

We have now been informed that they are going to ask for the judgement to be set aside, the court have advised that it is pointless instructing the balliffs if they are going to take this action.

 

Mortgages PLC havn't responded in anyway to either us or the court from us sending our second letter.

 

Does anyone know if we can contact the court informing them how mortgages PLC have ignored everything, in the hope the court refuses to set the judgement aside.

 

The last conversation was a 4.50 pm today with mortgages plc, but we,ve just listened to our answer phone and found a message for a firm of solicitors acting on behalf of mortgages plc, is this usual practise for the defendents solicitors to speak to us.

 

This has through us a little, so any words of wisdom would be a great help

 

Cheers

Dashngail

[zootscoot]

Oh no what a turn of events!

 

I'm not sure how this could happen as they have to sign for the summons. Have you had word from the court to this effect or is it just them telling you this. It may just be a delaying tactic to stop you going for enforcement.

 

is this usual practise for the defendents solicitors to speak to us.

 

Yes the court encourages communication between the parties, although primarily to reach a settlement. They should certainly put you in the picture as to what their intentions are.

 

It would probably be best to contact the court and ask if this is a common occurrance and what you can do about it.

 

Don't lose faith I'm sure it will all turn out well in the end.

 

All the best

 

Zoot

[dashngail]

Hi

Already spoke to the court, they say that the summons are just posted in the regular post, so no evidence that it's been delivered.

 

As I mentioned we had a message from mortgages plc's solicitor, but it was too late to get back to them today, so first thing in the morning we'll have to see what they have to say. All very disheartening.

 

Cheers

Dashngail

[dashngail]

Hi All

Another instalment from Mortgages PLC after ringing them on Thursday and informing that we would instruct balliffs on Friday we received a very arrogant letter from their solicitor on Friday morning.

 

Here's the contents

We understand that the proceeding have been served although we make no admissions in relation to the validity or otherwise of the same and also understand that a judgement in default has been obtained.

We confirm that we are now shortly to make an application to have the judgement set aside and will serve the application upon you in the very near future

Given the above your threat to attend our clients premises tomorrow with balliffs is entirely inappropriate (all Daz said to Mortgages PLC was that we were going to instruct balliffs, nothing about them attending on Friday or that we intended to be there) and as such we confirm that in so far as you will not now agree to desist from the same we will seek an immediate injunction against you to restrain you from taking such steps.

We look forward to receiing confiration that your threat of enforcement is now withdrawn pending the outcome of our application to set aside.

 

After getting this awful letter we responded via e-mail stating that we objected to the tone of the letter etc, and that we were acting within our rights due to the fact that we do at this point have a judgement.

Today (saturday) we have received an e-mail from the solicitor saying he takes our comments but would we please confirm that we will not be instructing balliffs.

So that is twice he's asked us not to send in the balliffs, we have no intention of repling to this second e-mail at this point. We need more guidence first.

 

We are at this time putting together a letter to send to the court on Monday, with it we shall include all our previous letters, the proof of posting and also a copy of both the solicitors letter and e-mail. We feel that this solicitor is using bullying tactics when in fact it's Mortgages PLC that have failed to respond to the court, which we hope that the court will look at in our favour.

 

Any comments would be gratefully accepted.

Cheers

Dashngail

[catherinebear]

Hi there

Keep your peckers up we are watching your case closely as we are trying to claim money back from Kensington and GMAC. Dont give up just remember we are all behind you all the way and we are going to win this fight against these B..........s!! We think they are just trying bullying tactics as most Solicitors do I should know I used to be a legal secretary for 30 years!!!!!

Regards

Catherine and Dave

[dashngail]

Hi

Thank you Catherine and Dave we need all the support we can get this weekend. That letter arriving on Friday morning caused, as it set out to do, more than a few ripples.

We're sure when the court get our paper work they like us will come to the conclusion that Mortgages PLC have had no respect for the court.

Back on track now though

Best wishes

Dashngail

[zootscoot]

Hi Dahngail

 

Gosh they're really putting you through the ringer.

 

You seem to have things under control. Regarding the letter it is bullying tactics but more importantly it is also a tactic to try to convince the court that you are acting unreasonably. You should draw this to the attention of the court and make sure you keep all future correspondence in writing where they can not twist you words.

 

Don't worry this is not the end just a blip. Even if they do get the judgement set aside they still have to prove in court of law that the ERC is a penalty. You will get the money back its just a question of sooner rather than later.

 

All the best

 

Zoot

[dashngail]

Here's the letter along with all previous doucments relating to our battle with Mortgages PLC, it's a bit like war and peace, but we would it anyone had any comments.

 

 

Dear Sirs

 

With reference to the above Claim Number, I have been in communication with the Defendant, Mortgages PLC, since June 2006 in regard to reimbursement of charges levied against me when I redeemed a mortgage account in October 2005

 

My claim was instigated as a result of being made aware that certain charges made by financial institutions are disproportionate to the amount of actual work involved and are therefore deemed to be unenforceable both at common law and under the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations.

 

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS RELATING TO CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MORTGAGES PLC AND MYSELF No. 1 – 9

ALL CORREPONDENCE FROM ME TO MORTGAGES HAS BEEN POSTED VIA SPECIAL DELIVERY ( I HAVE ALL PROOFS OF POSTING)

 

Given Mortgages PLC’s position, I initiated County Court Proceeding through the Money Claim Onsite website, which was accepted and issued by the court on

9 August 2006. As attachments I had already informed Mortgages PLC of my intention.

 

Due to the lack of response to the court summons, I received a judgement by default from the court on 31st August 06 and asked that payment be made immediately.

 

After a period of over one week I heard nothing from Mortgages PLC so on Monday 4th Sept 06 I sent a letter (see attachment no 7)

 

On Fri 8th Sept 06 once again, in an attempt to avoid any unnecessary unpleasantness or extra costs, I telephoned Mortgages PLC at their Scarborough office at approximately 10am on 7 September 2006, to reiterate the situation and emphasise the resolve of my position. I spoke with Miss Geraghty, who was involved in the original correspondence and she confirmed she would look into the matter and call me back.

At 4.55pm on the same day Ms McCallum telephoned me at home. She explained to me that Mortgages PLC would not be paying me any refund, and were seeking an application to have the court judgement set aside, primarily on the basis that Mortgages PLC had never received the court order in the first place, and that any attempt to send bailiffs would end in failure. I questioned Ms McCallum whether the company had received any letters on this matter since their reply of 31 July. She informed me that the Confirmation of Judgement was received on the 1st Sept and my last letter 5th Sept 06, she did not comment on the Judgement letter, but regarding my letter, said my letter was not responded to because as far as they were concerned the file was closed and as such no further correspondence was considered.

 

Finally on 8 September 2006 a letter was received from Mr Rob Nicholson of Halliwells Solicitors, confirming that an application to have the judgement set aside was being made. Further more this letter mentions my threatening to go to the premises with the bailiffs on Friday, this is total nonsense, what I said, within my rights, was that due to lack of response throughout the whole court process that I would be instructing bailiffs certainly no mention of them going on Friday or indeed that I would be accompanying the bailiffs. The response threatening me with a restraining order was a moot point as it was never my intention, it indeed possible.

 

As I understand the fact that the bailiffs would have been instructed doesn’t mean that action would have been taken on the same day. However at no time in any of my letters did I state a date or time that bailiff would attend, I merely offered timescales by which action would be required to resolve the matter.

 

I replied to the letter from Helliwells solicitors via e-mail (see attachment no 9) and on Sat 9th 06 got a reply from Mr Nicholson saying he accepted my points but he still wanted me to confirm that I would not instruct bailiffs. I feel that the fact that the court had given me the right to instruct bailiffs then the solicitor did not have the right to take that away until a request to set aside had been received to the court. I feel that the tone both the solicitors and Mortgages PLC have taken with me over the last few days has been nothing short of intimidating when I was acting within my rights

 

I now understand that Mortgages PLC intend to request this judgement be set aside on the basis that the original court papers were not received, I suggest that this statement borders on being disingenuous, all previous correspondence has been received and the court claim was requested to be sent to the same address. I find it difficult to believe that whilst all other documents have been received by Mortgages PLC, this crucial document happens to have not.

 

Furthermore, I am of the firm opinion that no action would have been taken at all by Mortgages PLC with regard to the court claim had I not made the telephone call on the morning of 7 September. I believe this is bourn out by both the telephone call at 4.55pm and the subsequent letter from Hallowell’s. If this were not the case why was nothing whatsoever done from 1 September for a full seven day period by way of response, surely an earlier reply of some kind would have been made. Any claim can be viewed on the internet via the Money Claim site even if, as Mortgages PLC attest, only the judgement notice has been received.

 

 

 

I am a honest, down-to-earth, straightforward self employed person, who has become made aware of certain information relative to the possible reclamation of mortgage penalty fees. As such I have only ever acted within my rights and have indeed acted fairly in my dealings with Mortgages PLC, since they have repeatedly failed to reply to my letters by specified dates or provide the information requested. This lack of response to documents received from the court only serves to reinforce this shortcoming.

 

 

I believe Mortgages PLC have acted irresponsibly, firstly to genuine requests to enter into dialogue regarding a matter I take seriously, and then later to documents and instructions received from the court. For these reasons I would ask the court to disregard Mortgages PLC’s application that this judgement be set aside.

 

It is a daunting prospect to confront the large financial organizations but I feel very strongly about this matter but then to have the organization ignore the legal document received from the court in such a manner makes the progress of following the legal process even harder for the individual to do.

 

Cheers

Dashngail

[zootscoot]

It looks very good Dashngail, you make your points very clear and rational and it follows a logical structure.

 

A couple of points (I'm just being pedantic!):

it indeed possible

Should that be if indeed possible?

Also a court judgment is spelt without an e in the middle

a honest

Should be an honest

reclamation

Perhaps recovery would be better reclamation suggests you've already claimed it once

organizations

Thats the American spelling English - organisations

 

Like I say I'm just being picky ...I have to say if I were the judge reading that letter I know what my decision would be!

 

All the best

 

Zoot

[dashngail]

Hi

 

Like I say I'm just being picky

 

NO, we dont think that, we have been waiting for someone to read through for us before we send.

 

It took ages to produce the letter, sometimes when you spend so much time on one thing you miss the little bits, and it's so important that we appear to be in total control. NO KNEE JERK REACTIONS FOR US, UNLIKE MORTGAGES PLC.

 

I've made the changes and off it goes tomorrow.

 

Could really do without them acting so stupid I have to attend hosp tomorrow for results from a biopsy, Ah well bring it all on at once.

 

Thank you very much for your help, lets see what happens next. Dare I say we are issuing court actions against Lloyds TSB and Platform Holding this week, the more the merrier.

 

Will let you know.

 

Cheers

dashngail

[dayglo]

also, there's three different spellings of the solicitors name

 

Halliwells : Hallowells : Helliwells

[sammyjammy]

I'm very impressed at your long running quest to get the redemption penalty back, its all a bit scary isn't it, I'm trying to pluck up the courage to do the same with IGroup, I've actually paid redemption penalties on two mortgages but the other was with Abbey whom I'm currently mortgaged with so don't want to risk upsetting the apple cart, the mortgage with IGroup was a tracker at about 2.5% above base rate and I remortgaged after a year, it was all I could get at the time and I took it as I needed to repay debts.

 

FIngers crossed, I guess I have nothing to lose even if I chicken out at the court stage its just a few letters after all, isn't it!

[dashngail]

We're still here, now waiting for the balliffs to attend at the premises of Mortgages PLC.

 

We had a letter from the court explaining that the co. could still ask for a set aside, but that all the paperwork we sent had been put on file, we included all our letters from before court action along with the both the letter and e-mail from the solicitor.

 

Since we had the threatening letter from Mortgages PLC's solicitor, over two weeks ago, they havn't applied for a set aside or been in touch with the court we are hopeful that if they do it now it will show that they havn't had any respect for the court and that any district judge would be able to see that.

 

Back again soon

 

Cheers

Dashngail

[zootscoot]

Fingers crossed for you. Lets hope they stop messing you around. Surely if they wanted to apply for a set aside they would have done so by now.

 

All the best

 

Zoot

[dashngail]

Thanks, they are justing behaving like idiots, just no sense in what they are doing.

Do you know how long we should leave it with the balliffs before I start ringing them.

Cheers

Gail

[zootscoot]

I really don't know but I've put out a plea for help amongst the site helpers to see if anyone else knows. I'm sure there must be time limits in requesting set asides. Have you heard nothing from the court as to how long you are expected to hang on for?

[dashngail]

We have a letter from the court stating that the balliff's have been instructed but that Mortgages PLC could still ask for a set aside, but not time limit given.

 

It seems a bit back to front, when the baliffs attended surely they are going to get settlement for the judgment. I havn't been able to find a time limit. I'm grateful that you have asked the question, I await the replies with interest

 

Thanks for your help.

Speak soon

Dashngail