Anyone claimed fees back from regency mortgage corp?

dunstonh

my opinion is that any negative comments about your rights to reclaim unfair charges should not be taken at face value. Neither should positive ones. You should make your own judgements from your own research.

tifo, the comments posted above are fact. The FSA or courts do not consider the adding of fees to a mortgage as unlawful or incorrect. People do it all the time. With advised cases they expect a few risk warnings to be added but it is fine to do it.

Jenz2010 could have been mis-sold and may have a valid reason for complaint. However, those reasons given are typical cold calling claims company made up reasons. Often based on internet myths and misinformation. That said there is potential that those reasons, in conjunction with a failing in another area could result in redress. For example, adding fees to mortgage is acceptable but on an advised case I mentioned that it needs to have risk warnings given. Those risk warnings may not have been given by the broker. So, that is a potential mis-sale. Its not the provider that gets the complaint though. Its the broker. An upheld case on that front would probably just result in a refund of the interest on the charge element. It wont result in the charge being wiped out (or the mortgage as some claim). The amount of redress is probably a lot less than the upfront fee paid to the claims company.

from my findings, the charges are unfair and thus i continue to take action on my own complaints.

If you have "found" things to support your opinion then why did the FOS reject your complaint and why havent you taken your case to court? If you have the legal basis to win a case, why are you not pointing out to all the people here so they know what to do? To date, based on your posts made, you have not found one thing to support your view that charges are unfair. You have an opinion they are unfair. But that is all it is. No-one that matters agrees with you. Not the FOS. Not the courts.

tifo

dunstonh wrote: »

why did the FOS reject your complaint and why havent you taken your case to court?

they didn't 'reject' the claim, they didn't investigate the matter because apparently its not within their remit to look at mortgage arrears charges.

however, we are going around in circles so there's no point arguing on old points again.

and yes, i am looking forward to taking this to court after the FOS. If i don't the bank definitely will because they have a suspended repossession order and i have told them i believe the balance to be incorrect due to unfair charges and associated interest and that their/their solicitors actions in previous court proceedings were unfair as well.

but this thread isn't about me so back to the OP ....

tifo

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/mortgages/2009/07/mortgage-lenders-charging-strugglin

Many homeowners have successfully got their money back when levied with these charges. The Ombudsman says in its 2009 annual report: "Many of the complaints we have seen about mortgage arrears involved disputes about arrears fees.

"We settle a significant proportion of cases in favour of the consumer, where we found fees had been applied incorrectly or had been charged for work that had not been done."

tifo

I quote from FSA's report and subsequent fine against GMAC-RFC .... a few other lenders were also fined for the same reason.

4.18. The above charges were unfair because they did not accurately reflect the additional administration work to the mortgage account caused by the fact that the customer was in arrears.

5.5. In addition, GMAC did not treat its customers fairly as a result of applying certain charges and fees to customers’ accounts that were unfair as they did not accurately reflect the additional cost of administering an account in arrears in breach of MCOB 12.4.1R and 13.3.1 R.

dunstonh

"We settle a significant proportion of cases in favour of the consumer, where we found fees had been applied incorrectly or had been charged for work that had not been done."

I notice you only emphasised the first bit. Try reading the second bit. That is the bit where most fall down. Also, look at the date. It was prior to the bank charges court case.

I quote from FSA's report and subsequent fine against GMAC-RFC .... a few other lenders were also fined for the same reason.

If you are with those lenders then you have a better chance of success. If you are not with those lenders then its less likely.

tifo

dunstonh wrote: »

I notice you only emphasised the first bit. Try reading the second bit. That is the bit where most fall down. Also, look at the date. It was prior to the bank charges court case.

If you are with those lenders then you have a better chance of success. If you are not with those lenders then its less likely.

The second bit also applies. If they charge £35 for something that costs them £10 then they are charging for work not done. And the bank charges case on personal current account charges was nothing to do with mortgage arrears charges. But we'll go over old stuff if we start arguing about that again. You seem to fully well know what the arguments for and against are.

It may help with that lender but it also concerns the same type of arrears fees like other lenders. What do you think of the bank having breached MCOB 12.4.1R and 13.3.1R?

I'll probably answer my own question by saying you'll say it only applies to the bank being investigated.

HughJarse_2

dunstonh wrote: »

I notice you only emphasised the first bit. Try reading the second bit. That is the bit where most fall down. Also, look at the date. It was prior to the bank charges court case.


If you are with those lenders then you have a better chance of success. If you are not with those lenders then its less likely.

That has absolutely nothing to do with claims against any type of financial account that is not a personal bank account.

Please advise further how the bank charges court case is relevant in any possible way?

tifo

HughJarse wrote: »

That has absolutely nothing to do with claims against any type of financial account that is not a personal bank account.

Please advise further how the bank charges court case is relevant in any possible way?

Yes, i agree.

The test case was on whether the OFT had the powers under UTCCR Reg 6 to make a declaration of unfair charges and the banks won on the point that these charges were a core part of the account and thus not subject to a price assessment and that there was no breach by the consumer. Only personal current account T's and C's were assessed. The court even said the OFT could have used Reg 5 to make a better argument. It made no judgment on fairness of charges.

This is totally different to the case of mortgage accounts where the consumer breaches the duty to make an instalment payment and is forced to pay a disproportionate sum in compensation of their breach. Much like credit card charges. Such charges are unfair under UTCCR and can come under Reg 5 and 6 and other laws on penalties.

The charge for requesting an overdraft (to borrow) and failing to pay an instalment on an existing debt (mortgage) cannot be the "same type of charge". Each is made in completely different scenarios and subject to very different agreements.

clifford66

I too have received a letter from Premier law with regard to claiming
from The fscs scheme under this press release

I tried to post a link to the fscs press release but the forum wont let me post it as I am a new user so I have deleated the ....... infront of the link as it is genuine and not spam

fscs.org.uk/uploaded_files/Press_Releases/press-release-21-12-2010.pdf

With regard to regency mortgage corporation

The letter is a longish one and mentions that the solicitor allowed large broker fees without giving advice inactual fact they would not let me use any other solicitor only theirs 5000£ on a 25000£ mortgage .

I re-mortgaged a couple of years later after the time limit for early repayment and am not in/and have not been in arrears .

I am loath to use this premier law and have rang Fscs and they are sending me there first enquiry form to see if there is an eligible claim
I have all the original paperwork

With regard to other posibble claims from other persons, I shall look at them after I receive the Fscs form

I write this also to mention that premier law are asking for no fees just on a no win no fee basis but I do not trust the look of the letter and will use my own solicitor for anything that I find I cannot do via my own research .

I invite any comments or advice with thanks in anticipation

Edit: anybody should be able to find the press release by copying the bit above! into google

jellyhead

We've had a letter from Premier today.

I don't know a lot about mortgages to be honest, and I haven't got the paperwork yet.

We didn't have PPI, so it's just the fees we're talking about.

Is it worth doing this? It says no win no fee, but I've never claimed anything before - does this mean that if we don't get anything we won't have to pay them anything? If we do get anything will their fees take up the lion's share of any compensation?

We were with regency/GE for the minimum 3 years then we remortgaged with the woolich.