Repossession Hearing Friday, can I claim costs?

The_J

Most people can afford a rate of 7.5% if push comes to shove. Above that is when it really starts to bite.

If interest rates increase it doesn't follow that the money markets would track at the same margin as they do now.

Of course, that's just my view. You are entitled to yours even if you believe the Rothschilds rule the world.

SivEd

Having worked in mortgage repossessions for years

Hmmm... Wonder which way this comment is going to lean

1. No, you cant claim costs from your mortgage company. You've clearly been to Court already.

Four times! Three of those four times I have called the mortgage company before in order to come to a (fully budgeted) arrangement. and they have NOT stopped taking me to court despite my assurances (and offer of evidence) that I have the ability to pay. If they had accepted my assurances - with or without evidence - the case would not have gone to court and repayments would have continued. They always have. The same is true this time. I do not see why I should have to pay for a court appearance I tried in all faith to avoid while my mortgage company have refused to listen.

If a suspended possession order in place and you have defaulted on it.

I have been made redundant twice in the last two years, I have had another employer fail to pay me without telling me he wasn't paying me and another went bankrupt. I have (stupidly I now know) refused to take any benefits while I was unemployed, only taking them in the new year just before getting my new job. It's been a tough couple of years. I am not a sob story kind of guy, so I think that's enough of an explanation of why payments have been "patchy" over the recession.

The Order was their security that they could apply for an eviction date should you default. They have not done any wrong here.

They have done wrong because they have NEVER ONCE compromised about anything, taking legal action in preference to any kind of agreement.

2. They are entitled to their costs as they have taken the action they deem necessary.

And so am I because I have done the same. I am trying to stay in my home here.

they have clearly been lenient in the past and have helped you all they can

Rubbish! They have taken me to court four times and refused any other course of action when it has been presented to them. The arrears on my mortgage equate roughly to the charges they have imposed by the action they have taken. If the thousands of pounds of charges were deducted, I would probably be able to pay the arrears in a single payment. If there were any at all.

By agreeing a suspended Order.

They never have agreed a suspended possession order, ever, the judge has made them accept it.

You also signed your mortgage documents agreeing to these charges - the small print.

I can tell you work for a mortgage company The banks had to moderate the charges they made or legislation would have made them do it. I suspect mortgage charges are going to head the same way. I am still charged £25 a letter - for the computer generated missed payment ones. You telling me that's right and fair?

3. If they sent someone round with a financial questionnaire he was there to assist you

Again rubbish! There was a guy who came round to "assist" me. He found out I had already been getting real assistance from the CAB and literally copied their forms onto his. Then went away! I had to go to court, presented the same CAB prepared budget to the judge which he accepted. I was charged £150. Ripoff! He was uninvited and I have heard of people claiming this money back. I'm looking into it, though it is probably too late for it in this instance.

And come to a payment plan with you without the need for further Court action.

I had a payment plan, prepared with the CAB. He didn't accept it and neither did anyone else. He copied it and left. I stuck to that payment plan and repaid the lot. When I stopped paying, I got chased (at a cost per letter) for "arrears" again. They were chasing charges (letters etc) not arrears at all. A couple of hundred pounds is all though. I repaid that over time, but fell into trouble again.

Perhaps if you had let him in and spoken to him, you would have avoided the mortgage company applying for an eviction date.

This was after the eviction date. This more recent time he was there with a questionnaire about the eviction. I was literally phoning the mortgage company with the good news that I had work when he arrived (8am, too early to be calling mortgage companies though).

Not letting him in shows you have been unco-operative. The costs of requesting a bailiff appointment alone is £110.00.

Rubbish! I have been fully co-operative and want to come to an arrangement. I have a budget which has been carefully and accurately prepared with the help of the National Debtline. The mortgage company won't even look at it. Who is being uncooperative?

And now you've applied to have the eviction suspended thats going to be a further £100.00 at least of costs incurred.

You have made A LOT of assumptions in your reply. Please ask questions before making judgements. Read my previous comment.

Have you been making payments as and when you can?

Yes I have. Repayments were "Patchy" last year and the start of this year, but I have made a repayment last month of about 2/3 of the mortgage and this month it's gone out on a standing order, including my previous arrears agreement.

Not doing so shows a lack of ability and willingness to pay.

Again assumptions! Please ask the question first then reply with information.

Saying you have a new job will not cut it. You need documentary evidence of this proving your salary. Do you have these?

Already answered, I offered all these to the mortgage company in order to avoid court action. They refused to see them. Saying I have a new job should cut it. I know you work in repossessions, I suspect you've lost a little of your humanity maybe? Making people homeless is a serious thing to do.

You have made a ton of assumptions in this reply, and most of the subsequent replies have followed those as if they were true. I hope I've provided you with the addition information you needed in order to make an informed comment this time?

If I called your company and told you I was in new employment, what would you do?

SivEd

The "pre-action protocol":

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_ad...e_court_action

The_J wrote: »

Wow, that's ridiculous. Nanny state strikes back ... legitimate mortgage payers, have to pay for it with higher rates and greater LTV restrictions.

That is a fair checklist of things that should be carried out before trying to make someone homeless. Not even a little bit nanny state. Personally I would have gone MUCH further with some kind of enforced and binding mediation, rather than going to court. Keeps people in their homes and gets the mortgage companies their profits. Costs should be shared of such mediation.

Also legitimate mortgage payers don't pay for it with higher rates - that's rubbish. Where did you get that idea? Rates and LTV restrictions have almost nothing to do with repossession rates - other than they are both effected by the recession. When did you hear of a rate rise because of the cost of repossessions? LTV restrictions are caused by the "credit crunch" which in turn was caused by greedy banks. Not caused by struggling mortgage (and tax) payers who are now helping the organisations who caused this whole mess in the first place!

The biggest looser is bank/building society profits. That is assuming that the repossession is not in profit, which is hard to measure as the arrears prior to repossession are probably inclusive of charges related to the repossession (and other charges which might make the repossession profitable) but not included in the cost of it. If the house has a value clearly greater than the mortgage and other secured loans, then I would argue that it is good for the mortgage company to pile on as many charges as possible and repossess.

The_J

You seem to struggle with finance, perhaps that is why you don't pay your mortgage or don't take out insurance to cover yourself in the event of losing your job or don't take out benefits to which you are entitled which exist exactly for this purpose, to help out the taxpayer who falls on hard times. At least you seem to be learning albeit the hard way.

You do kind of understand, that repossessions hit profits which is right. But how do they make profits? By charging higher interest rates to borrowers, lower interest rates to savers (this is extremely generalised but the core mechanics are correct). If they didn't have repossession costs, they could offer better deals and still keep the same profits right?

Do you know the ratio for good borrowers to bad borrowers required to make a book profitable? 35-1. That's 35 good mortgages to pay for 1 bad mortgage. That is an acceptable level so lenders base their credit score on that.

Banks were greedy, they offered too much debt, but they weren't holding a gun to people's head. Everyone has shared responsibility in this recession, finger pointing and shifting blame will not help the country tackle it's debt addiction.

opinions4u

No you can't claim costs.

But they will ensure all their costs are charged against you and rightly so

Does that help?

SivEd

opinions4u wrote: »

No you can't claim costs.

But they will ensure all their costs are charged against you and rightly so

Does that help?

Thanks.

Why rightly so when I have had an acceptable offer on the table three times already (ask the judge who ruled in my favour) and maybe for a fourth time?... Why won't they accept the offer I have made?

Hanky_Panky

SivEd wrote: »

Hmmm... Wonder which way this comment is going to lean

Four times! Three of those four times I have called the mortgage company before in order to come to a (fully budgeted) arrangement. and they have NOT stopped taking me to court despite my assurances (and offer of evidence) that I have the ability to pay. If they had accepted my assurances - with or without evidence - the case would not have gone to court and repayments would have continued. They always have. The same is true this time. I do not see why I should have to pay for a court appearance I tried in all faith to avoid while my mortgage company have refused to listen.
It's your timing that is responsible for this. Lenders always give you time to resolve the situation however because of your circumstances you are always falling behind which is further excabertaing your arrears position. So you have already got to the end of their internal process beyond which their only course of action is to litigate. Eventually they have to make a decision to go one way or the other. What is not clear from your posts is if you have brought the account up to dat at any point during the last couple of years.

I have been made redundant twice in the last two years, I have had another employer fail to pay me without telling me he wasn't paying me and another went bankrupt. I have (stupidly I now know) refused to take any benefits while I was unemployed, only taking them in the new year just before getting my new job. It's been a tough couple of years. I am not a sob story kind of guy, so I think that's enough of an explanation of why payments have been "patchy" over the recession.
It is an explanation but has no bearing - only your payment history is what counts.

They have done wrong because they have NEVER ONCE compromised about anything, taking legal action in preference to any kind of agreement.
I disagree - you are in arrears - that means they have compromised to some degree - maybe not the one you want but clear eveidence they have tried to bear with you. Again as posted above they get to a point where they have to follow the due process. Also how may arrangements have you made and subsequently broken - albeit because of your circumstances ? Again the only thing that counts is your payment history.

And so am I because I have done the same. I am trying to stay in my home here.

Rubbish! They have taken me to court four times and refused any other course of action when it has been presented to them. The arrears on my mortgage equate roughly to the charges they have imposed by the action they have taken. If the thousands of pounds of charges were deducted, I would probably be able to pay the arrears in a single payment. If there were any at all.
Again - timing. How many arrangements made previously - in a nut shell - why should they believe your claims this time. You have even had 3 previous suspended orders for payments made by the court and failed to keep those. Exactly how long do you think the mortgage company should wait for their money ? There comes a point when it is in the borrowers best interests to repossess and crystalise the debt at where it stands before getting even worse.

They never have agreed a suspended possession order, ever, the judge has made them accept it.

I can tell you work for a mortgage company The banks had to moderate the charges they made or legislation would have made them do it.
Actaully your referring to bank charges on current accounts and they are woprse now that they were before.
I suspect mortgage charges are going to head the same way. I am still charged £25 a letter - for the computer generated missed payment ones. You telling me that's right and fair?

Again rubbish! There was a guy who came round to "assist" me. He found out I had already been getting real assistance from the CAB and literally copied their forms onto his. Then went away! I had to go to court, presented the same CAB prepared budget to the judge which he accepted. I was charged £150. Ripoff! He was uninvited and I have heard of people claiming this money back. I'm looking into it, though it is probably too late for it in this instance.
So for whatever reason you failed to convince him you were genuine in your conviction to resolve the problem and that's what he recommended to the lender. Could have been an attitudanal thing judging from your other posts on here.

I had a payment plan, prepared with the CAB. He didn't accept it and neither did anyone else. He copied it and left. I stuck to that payment plan and repaid the lot.
This is confusing me - you repaid all the arrears ?
When I stopped paying, I got chased (at a cost per letter) for "arrears" again. They were chasing charges (letters etc) not arrears at all. A couple of hundred pounds is all though. I repaid that over time, but fell into trouble again.

This was after the eviction date. This more recent time he was there with a questionnaire about the eviction. I was literally phoning the mortgage company with the good news that I had work when he arrived (8am, too early to be calling mortgage companies though).

Rubbish! I have been fully co-operative and want to come to an arrangement. I have a budget which has been carefully and accurately prepared with the help of the National Debtline. The mortgage company won't even look at it. Who is being uncooperative?
Again timiing - you are being cooperative now - but in the past the evidence is you haven't (broken payments arrangements). Why should they believe you know ?

You have made A LOT of assumptions in your reply. Please ask questions before making judgements. Read my previous comment.

Yes I have. Repayments were "Patchy" last year and the start of this year, but I have made a repayment last month of about 2/3 of the mortgage and this month it's gone out on a standing order, including my previous arrears agreement.

Again assumptions! Please ask the question first then reply with information.

Already answered, I offered all these to the mortgage company in order to avoid court action. They refused to see them. Saying I have a new job should cut it.
Why ? Based on your previous payment history ?

I know you work in repossessions, I suspect you've lost a little of your humanity maybe? Making people homeless is a serious thing to do.

You have made a ton of assumptions in this reply, and most of the subsequent replies have followed those as if they were true. I hope I've provided you with the addition information you needed in order to make an informed comment this time?

If I called your company and told you I was in new employment, what would you do?
Depends entirely on your previous history which I'm afraid to say in your case is awful.

I realise that the above was not directed at me but just wanted you to know that you're only looking at this from your point of view and not how the lender will look at it.

CrazyAngel_3

'If I called your company and told you I was in new employment, what would you do?'

Its quite simple what I would do - ask for proof! This is standard amongst all companies, not just mortgage lenders. I now work in vehicle repossessions and the stance is the same!

There are many people out there who will lie and say ive got a new job / ive been made redundant / ive had an injury and off work, in the hope of getting a payment plan after they have fallen into arrears. Usually, its quite simply that they cannot manage their financial commitments. A phone call means nothing, evidence must be received. Just saying you have a new job will not be sufficient.

For this action to be taken, your payment history must be absolutely abysmal. Maybe its time to sell up and cut your losses?

If you turn up at Court on your fourth application to suspend an eviction, WITHOUT proof you are almost certainly going to have your application dismissed. The judge will get fed up of seeing you in his courtroom and will lose patience with you. Ive seen it many times and I will see it again and again.

SivEd

CrazyAngel wrote: »

'If I called your company and told you I was in new employment, what would you do?'

Its quite simple what I would do - ask for proof! This is standard amongst all companies.
- I have proof.

There are many people out there who will lie...
- I have offered proof.

For this action to be taken, your payment history must be absolutely abysmal.
- Ask the question, don't make the assumption! I explain more later.

Maybe its time to sell up and cut your losses?
- Not yet, maybe Friday!

If you turn up at Court on your fourth application to suspend an eviction, WITHOUT proof you are almost certainly going to have your application dismissed. The judge will get fed up of seeing you in his courtroom and will lose patience with you. Ive seen it many times and I will see it again and again.
- Once more, I have proof. If anything the judges I have met are more fed up with mortgage lenders taking unnecessary legal action. If I turn up at Court on my fourth application WITH proof I guess I'll almost certainly have my application approved?

Thank you, a fair and honest comment. So the fact that my mortgage company did not even ask for proof of any kind before court, this time, OR the other three times is non-standard at the very least. That, incidentally, includes the first time they tried to repossess where I called them again with an offer to show them a budget and proof of income which they did not want to see. Are you defending that as a course of action at a first time eviction?

I have been advised by National Debtline that all I need is a budget. I will take one and all the proof necessary to back it up. Payslips, bank statements, employment contract, letter from employer etc etc. I wouldn't expect you to believe me without proof and I have always offered proof. I am sure some people do lie.

Please understand win or loose on Friday I will accept the result with good grace. You are right that there have been times in my repayment agreements where I have been unable to make payment, but I have always stuck to the court agreement, catching up on the arrears until I have lost my job the next time. Now really is not the time to give up, I am in a new, good job in a growing company and I am enjoying my work. I am earning enough to repay the arrears and catch up. Now is not the time to walk away. What I have to do now is convince the Judge of that.

Hanky Panky, you are right, the timing this time could not be worse, but I telephoned them to advise them of new employment before they had an eviction date and to be fair to them they said I had to present my case to the judge. Maybe that is how they intend getting proof? I just think to have to go through this court appearance every time is pretty awful and I believe in this case could have been avoided. They have my repayment history and two of you have again assumed without having the facts that it is pretty bad. It has been at times, and at other times it hasn't. I have always caught up some and yes Hanky Panky, once I caught up completely, and stayed there for a while.

My whole "plan" for the last twelve months (since the company I was working for went bankrupt) is to find a good steady stable job which is paid monthly so that all my debts can go out on a standing order for repayment. The J, you again also are right in that I have struggled in the past with finance. Ask almost any forum on this board how easy it is to restore your finances to normal once you get behind. I and thousands of others wouldn't be here if we hadn't struggled with our finances.

Hanky Panky, the other point you make that I'd like to comment on is that I am trying to see it from every point of view. I do know that my mortgage company aren't happy that I have done what I ahve done! You speak about repayment records again thinking that I have been bad. More detail. I was paid up with everything including arrears payments until December. It was patchy because I got into arrears before catching it up in December. Skipped Jan, Feb and March and made the part payment (two thirds) I've already spoken about for April. Full payment for May including previous arrears agreement. But the total arrears in court will include the arrears not repaid from before, so they aren't just three and a bit months, closer to five. Plus the court costs that will be put on there now!

In terms of points of view, there is only one that really matters and that is the judge.

I have always been cooperative and while in work always made my payments including whatever was agreed towards whatever arrears there were. Please don't assume I have a permanently bad payment record, I don't. It is unsurprisingly the most important debt I have.

I repeat - every time I have been to court, the judge has ruled in my favour. Why do you think that is? My mortgage company has had a solicitor there every time, at my expense, while I could not afford one. Is that fair too?

This solicitor has actually on two of the three occasions been agreeable to my budget. It would not surprise me if that is what happens this time either.

You are all speaking like I am some kind of skiving layabout who is trying to freeload his way into home ownership and again assumptions have been made. That's not the case at all. My mortgage company have never, ever helped me when I've been behind and have always taken me to court. this includes the first time when our relationship was much better. I hear of other people with other mortgage companies who get swapped to interest only mortgages, mortgage holidays etc etc.

All I can say is I hope none of you find yourself on the receiving end of the behaviour my mortgage company has made towards me. The reason I want costs is because - despite the comments you have made - I am quite confident of being successful in this hearing and certainly all the advice I have received outside of this thread goes that way.

Thanks for all the opinions.

SivEd

The_J wrote: »

You seem to struggle with finance, perhaps that is why you don't pay your mortgage or don't take out insurance to cover yourself in the event of losing your job or don't take out benefits to which you are entitled which exist exactly for this purpose, to help out the taxpayer who falls on hard times. At least you seem to be learning albeit the hard way.

Honestly, this was true when I started my mortgage and struggled immediately. It's not true now. I have always learned from my mistakes. I have not been unemployed since I was 18 (three decades ago), so finding myself unemployed last year I avoided signing on - yes, out of pride - and was never advised to do so. After thirty years in employment, I had to learn the hard way.

The_J wrote: »

You do kind of understand, that repossessions hit profits which is right. But how do they make profits? By charging higher interest rates to borrowers, lower interest rates to savers. If they didn't have repossession costs, they could offer better deals and still keep the same profits right?

Untrue. You are speaking in generalities rather than looking at the specifics of what has actually happened. This recession, repossessions have grown and rates have shrunk. Doesn't matter how "generalised" you make it, that's the exact opposite of the mechanism you describe (and try to blame on struggling mortgage payers). My point is that much, much bigger forces are completely swamping any effect repossessions are having making it irrelevant to rates. The answer I'd really like to know the answer to is how profitable repossessions actually are? Maybe they are actually reducing rates?

The_J wrote: »

Do you know the ratio for good borrowers to bad borrowers required to make a book profitable? 35-1. That's 35 good mortgages to pay for 1 bad mortgage. That is an acceptable level so lenders base their credit score on that.

Take your word for it, but what is a bad mortgage, if repossession is a profitable action? The majority of "bad mortgages" are people who are honest and struggling. If the mortgage company sells the house and recoups the shortfall including costs, I suspect that the number of "bad mortgages" then becomes the people who do not repay the shortfall, which an honest and struggling customer would. How many of them are there?

The_J wrote: »

Banks were greedy, they offered too much debt, but they weren't holding a gun to people's head. Everyone has shared responsibility in this recession, finger pointing and shifting blame will not help the country tackle it's debt addiction.

I agree that finger pointing won't make the recession go away, but I believe banks are the worst culprits in terms of "passing on the hurt" to their customers in order to maintain their profits. Don't get me wrong, I agree with charges, but I think they are excessive and should be at, or close to, cost. Maybe you believe they be a source of profit too?