Nat West claim we owe £30,000, and we only owe £20,000! HELP!!!

jonyd

Hi, i'm new on here.
Question: what can i do when a secured lender (Nasty West) says they are owed one sum, and i know for a fact we owe less. There is a £10,000 difference in the 2 sums.
FOS is one option, but they are soooo slow, being sooo busy....
I am more than happy to sue N W if nec.
Not sure what the procedure is though...any ideas please?
Thanks!
NB: Here is a bit more info: It was originally a charge to secure business overdraft lending for a limited co business in which i had shares. It was for £40k max. We subsequently agreed with the bank that the lending would be split..into a £20,000 loan, and a £20, 000 o/d. This way i was happy as i could see the liability halving over a year or two with loan repayments been made. The business duly failed but luckily the loan was paid back in full....£20k with int.
I then asked the bank how much we owed. £30k comes the reply. The reason? Simple. The bank didn't cap the o/d at 20k so they were potentially exposed for £60k max for a time....
the business apparently went some 25,000 o/d and with int, the o/d is now around 30k.
I never got bank statements. they went to the company.
My view is simple.
The bank messed up.
They intend to try and use my equity to make up for their mess up.
I'm 100% clear im not going to let them, and am now just wondering what action is best for me to take.

kyleemlewis

I work for a mortgage lender (although not Nat West!) have you put in writing what you believe you owe and proof as to how you came to that figure? If you have then maybe time to put an official complaint in because the FOS will just refer you back to the bank if you have followed the complaints procedure.

laurel7172

I'm sorry if this is something you already know, but you do realise, don't you, that you pay more interest at the beginning of a loan?

So if you borrow £100,000, then halfway through the repayments you will still owe a LOT more than £50,000.

TonyMMM

Hhow about a bit more information ....what type of loan, how long ago, length of loan, interest rate ..have all payments been made on time or are arrears involved, what are you basing your calcualtion on, what evidence have they supplied to support their amount ?

dunstonh

Banks dont often make mistakes on mortgage balances nowadays. So, what makes you think you owe £10k less than they think you do?

Have the mortgage statements not showed the balances each year and how they have gone down?

jonyd

Ok; Thanks for initial feedback. Here is a bit more info: It was originally a charge to secure business overdraft lending for a limited co business in which i had shares. It was for £40k max. We subsequently agreed with the bank that the lending would be split..into a £20,000 loan, and a £20, 000 o/d. This way i was happy as i could see the liability halving over a year or two with loan repayments been made. The business duly failed but luckily the loan was paid back in full....£20k with int.
I then asked the bank how much we owed. £30k comes the reply. The reason? Simple. The bank didn't cap the o/d at 20k so they were potentially exposed for £60k max for a time....
the business apparently went some 25,000 o/d and with int, the o/d is now around 30k.
I never got bank statements. they went to the company.
My view is simple.
The bank messed up.
They intend to try and use my equity to make up for their mess up.
I'm 100% clear im not going to let them, and am now just wondering what action is best for me to take.

dlk

So if I've got this right your overdraft limit should have been £20k but was incorrectly set at £40k.

You then went £30k overdrawn.

You now claim that as the limit shouldn't have allowed you to reach this debt level you only want to pay back the £20k that the limit should have been set at.


If the above is what you're saying then I'm sorry to say you've got absolutely no chance of winning this case. Yes they may have made an error with your limit but you've still taken the money and they are therefore rightly expecting to have it back.

jonyd

Hi, first of all, to be 100% clear, the money was in fact lent to a limited co, not to me personally.
The house the charge is on is in joint names. Me and my wife.
My wife was keen to see the house not so exposed, so we specifically switched the original 40k o/d to a 20 k loan, and a 20k o/d.
Having paid the loan back, even though the company sadly failed at some point in the time we did so, you can imagine how she feels now she finds we still have the house being held seemingly to ransom by the bank as security for more than we both signed for/agreed.
With respect, i dont agree with your analysis , but thanks for it anyway.

Voyager2002

Ask the bank for copies of all statements. Look carefully at these, and highlight any errors.

DVardysShadow

dlk wrote: »

So if I've got this right your overdraft limit should have been £20k but was incorrectly set at £40k.

You then went £30k overdrawn.

You now claim that as the limit shouldn't have allowed you to reach this debt level you only want to pay back the £20k that the limit should have been set at.


If the above is what you're saying then I'm sorry to say you've got absolutely no chance of winning this case. Yes they may have made an error with your limit but you've still taken the money and they are therefore rightly expecting to have it back.

I would not fully agree with this. The bank have at the very least been dishonourable in securing £30,000 when they were only authorised to secure £20,000 after the renegotiation of the original £40,000 into £20,000 loan plus £20,000 charge.

The weak point of jonyd's position is that presumably the original £40,000 charge deed remained in place and it all hangs now on whatever evidence there is that NatWest were only authorised to secure an overdraft to the extent of £20,000

dunstonh

The security for the bank would have been documented with the amounts. This is signed by the individual. So, why wasn't the figure of £40k queried at the start rather than now?