are Santander mortgage arrears charges and legal fees fair? FOS say they are!

tifo

roonaldo wrote: »

Tifo, GMAC were charging far more at £50 arrears fee and a additional £15 for not paying by DD which is why they got fined, so you cannot compare them.

It doesn't matter how much they charge, only that the amount has to cover costs only and not make a profit (MCOB 12.4.1R, common law on penalty and unfair terms).

tifo

dunstonh wrote: »

It doesnt matter what you say on an internet board, it is not going to change anything. most here are telling you that there is no wrong doing.

the whole point of this forum is to help one another and some people will be against and some for an opinion. Some of the advice may help.

in this case i think i am right and the FOS is wrong. It wouldn't be the first time, i've had this from them before.

tifo

i may be convinced when I see their breakdown for each amount of arrears charge they applied (this was between £15 - £35 over the years). The rise should show that their costs increased.

since they haven't charged me any arrears fees while the case is at the FOS, are they losing money from me? If they are right, then they should carry on charging regardless of any complaint.

i don't think they're being 'nice' to me .....

tifo

with a recent review, the charges are fair because:

1. the bank has provided a breakdown
2. i agreed to the T's and C's
3. the bank applied them because of my conduct of the account (i missed payments)
4. reg 5 and 6 of the UTCCR do not apply as i can't challenge the charges on price
5. i cannot use s.140 of CCA (unfair relationship) because that's for the court
6. the FSA fines on other lenders are not relevant as they haven't fined my lender
7. the test case on personal account overdraft charges said all such charges are fair
8. they're set at a market rate
9. initially they said they do not investigate arrears mortgage charges but later said they look at the charges as part of the 'fair treatment' assessment.

and much more, but the above are the main points.

so how are others getting their arrears charges back through the fos?

tifo

I've had a response from the FOS and it's the same as before, i.e. charges are fair under the circumstances and the bank has provided a breakdown.

However, this time they say the contract has also been assessed for PIL and as it is clear I understand why the charges are incurred, there is no doubt that it is in PIL. Thus Reg 6 of UTCCR precludes any assessment under Reg 5 and the 'service' by the bank is the admin of the account whilst in arrears.

I don't believe the contract has been properly assessed for PIL but only that I know why the charges are incurred. But what I said was I don't know why they are so high, why the litigation referral fees are so high and why the bank applies monitoring fees while the account is at the solicitors, incurring me double fees.

Again they say the FSA fines against other lenders are not relevant.

This is totally the opposite of what others get from the FOS.

dunstonh

This is totally the opposite of what others get from the FOS.

What you described is exactly what you would have expected from the FOS.

Again they say the FSA fines against other lenders are not relevant.

Of course they are irrelevant. Those firms were doing things wrong. They could not provide the information and were effectively saying they were charging for doing something but not actually doing it. Just because one or two firms were doing it wrong, doesnt mean they all were.

You are not going to get any joy via the FOS. You are either going to have to accept it or decide to put your money where your mouth is and go to court if you feel that strongly about it.

tifo

dunstonh wrote: »

You are not going to get any joy via the FOS.

Many do and maybe I was hoping for the same. There's not much difference between my arrears charges and others'.

I'm not too surprised by the FOS. I've had irrational decisions before.

tifo

This has gone to court now .... by Santander.

At least I can now ask for a breakdown of disputed charges and the creditor to whom my mortgage was sold to in 2005 and 2010.

tifo

site team might want to help now ....

i've got an eviction notice in a few weeks using the suspended possession order from May 2008.

i'm going to apply for a stay of the warrant and a set aside of the possession order so that I can argue my points.

if the court refuses by saying the order is more than 4 years old, then if the bank can use it why can't i appeal against it?

if the court asks why i didn't argue my points at the time of the order, this is because i didn't know that the bank's charges were disproportionate (because they always say they're not) plus information came to light about mortgages being sold and it is only through the FOS that i have a statement showing when my mortgage was sold (two times). The bank's own statements do not include the transactions relating to the sales. In 2005 my mortgage was paid off (by whoever) and again in 2010. Though I did agree for the bank to debit my account with the loan amount of the mortgage, I did not authorise them to debit it again in 2005 and 2010. If someone paid the mortgage off that's fine, they didn't ask me first.

and finally I have tried through the FOS, for the past few years, to have the charges refunded and the service has not applied the laws as they stand, for example unfair terms regulations and case law on disproportionate sums. The FOS simply looked at the case as "you were in arrears so the charges were applied fairly (for that reason)" NOT that "you were in arrears and the charges are fair".

I can do this through a solicitor (and get a barrister's opinion on the case) or myself .....

Angry_Cat

As it was securitised, why not use the arguments the lender sold your mortgage and no longer has the right to repossess