complaining about equitable charge off the deeds

MARKBLACK

dunstonh wrote: »

The FOS are not there to support you or the lender. You made a bad choice in stopping the payments and the Nationwide did nothing wrong. The FOS work on the basis of law and regulations and there was no way they could side with you.

I asked the FOS to support me after the NW messed me about - in 2006 I wanted reassurance/compension for mis selling the FOS decided I didn't have a case, at one stage I had done nothing wrong I was going about my daily chores when the endowments went up the creek, that wasnt my doing. I signed an agreement in 1988 with the NW that my mortgage would be paid off they broke this agreement NOT ME. They threatened me with court action I ASKED for a face to face I was prepared to travel 200miles they ignored my invite, they lost their nerve after being abusive on the phone to me. The FOS work for the lenders they have no interest in helping the general public
MB

VIGILANT22

[QUOTE=MARKBLACK_I_signed_an_agreement_in_1988_with_the_NW_that_my_mortgage_would_be_paid_off_they_broke_this_agreement_NOT_ME.[/QUOTE]

Somehow I feel you didn't understand what yr investment was all about...

dunstonh

The FOS work for the lenders they have no interest in helping the general public

Stop being paranoid. Its generally acknowledged that the FOS are, if anything, slightly consumer biased compared to the courts as they also consider fairness (which the courts wouldnt).

I asked the FOS to support me after the NW messed me about

They are not there to support you. They are there to make sure no rules have been broken and things have been done correctly.

in 2006 I wanted reassurance/compension for mis selling the FOS decided I didn't have a case

So, what was your evidence that was so strong that made you think you would win your case?

I had done nothing wrong I was going about my daily chores when the endowments went up the creek, that wasnt my doing.

That isnt grounds for complaint though. Ironically, the reasons that led to many endowments failing made most of us better of in other areas. Endowments were designed to work in a boom/bust economy with high inflation. The move to low inflation consistency hit endowments but it helped living standards, reduced mortgage costs and increased take home income.

With hindsight, what the lenders should have done was take some of that money saved on mortgage repayments and used it to make up for lower investment returns.

I signed an agreement in 1988 with the NW that my mortgage would be paid off they broke this agreement NOT ME.

We all know that isnt the case. If you had that in writing you would have won your case.

They threatened me with court action

not to do with the endowment though. That was because you, as you admit, did the silly thing of refusing to pay your loan.

If you calm down and take a more level headed view, things will be easier.

getmore4less

I don't understand why you did not check the charge had been removed when you paid off the debt.

Given the circumstances the charge happened it would have thought it was an obvious thing to do at the time.

MARKBLACK

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

Somehow I feel you didn't understand what yr investment was all about...

correct I was young needed somewhere to live - but I knew I didn't want an endowment mortgage.

dunstonh

MARKBLACK wrote: »

correct I was young needed somewhere to live - but I knew I didn't want an endowment mortgage.

In 1988 that would have put in you in a minority. Back then endowments were maturing with 3-4 times their target amount. The media were pro endowment. Which? were pro endowment and no endowment had ever failed.

However, despite all that you could have just said "no thank you".

MARKBLACK

getmore4less wrote: »

I don't understand why you did not check the charge had been removed when you paid off the debt.

Given the circumstances the charge happened it would have thought it was an obvious thing to do at the time.

If I had known one had to do this I would have - I thought once the debt was paid the NW would not have any interest in my home the charge would have been automatically removed - plus its not my field I know nothing about these things. My solictor has only just cottoned on, so how on earth would I know.
MB

MARKBLACK

as was said earlier "The move to low inflation consistency hit endowments but it helped living standards, reduced mortgage costs and increased take home income".

This proabably was the wordings of the mortgage advisor in those days - at some time in your life you take advice - as you think they are trying to help. Plus they didn't explain the forms as well as they do these days.
MB

MARKBLACK

dunstonh wrote: »

However, despite all that you could have just said "no thank you".

Come off it I was a kid - first house - wife pregnant - you are talking here as if you've never made a mistake.
MB

MARKBLACK

dunstonh wrote: »

not to do with the endowment though. That was because you, as you admit, did the silly thing of refusing to pay your loan.

If you calm down and take a more level headed view, things will be easier.

There comes a time when you have to make a stance - I was very calm believe me - I wrote letter after letter I phoned person after person - one can't comment here unless you went through what I did - but listen to the old sayings what goes around comes around. You never know whats round the corner.
MB