Sakamuka

sakamuka

Hi, Iwas most impressed with Martins appearance on GMTV this morning advising how we can beat the banks. Even more so because I am in the middle of challenging Barclays bank at the moment over a "Self Appreciation Mortgage (SAMS)" sold to my late father in the late 90's.
I'm looking for advice on how you think I should proceed? I'll try to keep the message brief, but basically my father took out a SAM with Barclays in 1999 for £15,750 when they valued his property at £64,000. On his death (last year), to repay the loan I needed to pay £85,000 as the loan was directly linked to the current value of his property. I bitterly argued to Barclays that this constituted extortionate credit as the mark up on the origal loan was exorbitant. this in itself constitutes usuary and excessive credit terms. Basically I got nowhere as they held the deeds and therfore the ace hand. I continued to complain but eventually paid the money in full although I was prepared to make an out of court settlement for £70,000 (which I felt was most generous on my behalf - but still got nowhere). Having paid the £85,000 I recieved the title deeds on sold the property on.
Then for some reason Barclays managed to pay the £85,000 back to me in full!! Some weeks later they picked up on this and requested the money back. As they applied a little pressure with the prospect of debt recovery agencies getting involved I agreed to repay them £70,000 (as I had originally suggested as a settlement figure), and promptly did so. I am now sitting on the remaining £15,000 refusing to pay it back as they no longer have the lever over me as they did so previously. Barclays have since "respectfully advised me to seek advice from the FOS" which to date I have ignored (if they are advising me to go to them. it smells of a rat to me!).
Do you think I have any scope with this....or do I need to repay the £15,000?
ANY advice greatfully received, Regards, Sakamuka.

MORTGAGESTALLION

The terms and conditions and literature for the SAM clearly outlined what would happen if house prices went up quite significantly - as they have done. If house prices had gone down and you had to pay nothing extra back, would you be happy if the lender chased you for the money they had lost. I don't think so!

A few other points:

1. Did you father seek legal advice before entering into the SAM?
2. Your fathers estate will have also benefited from the increase in house prices, albeit by not as much as the lender.
3. The lender took on the risk and won!

I know that a number of cases have gone to the FOS and the lender has won the case. In my view you should accept that and pay up!

EdInvestor

From the FOS site:

Although the number involved has not been great, we have begun to see complaints this year about so-called ‘shared-appreciation’ mortgages. With these mortgages, the lender had agreed to charge no interest (or low interest) in return for a share in the increase in value of the property.

Property values shot up faster than either lenders or borrowers had expected. Borrowers complained that lenders made extra profit, while lenders said they had securitised the mortgages and the extra profit had not gone to them.

In most cases, we did not uphold the complaints – because the documents were extremely clear and had been fully explained to the borrowers, usually by their own solicitors.

Either complain properly - there appear to have been a few successful ones - or pay back the money.

chivers1977

The terms and conditions of the SAM clearly stated that independent advice should be sought and your father signed the mortgage deed to agree to the terms of the offer. Your father's solicitors confirmed that the terms of the SAM had been explained.

You know that you owe Barclays the £15,000 and they will chase you for it.....