NRAM - not behind on payments - NRAM seeking possession

rjedwards

Dear all,
After financially difficulties we had reduced repayments on our mortgage with Northern Rock.
At the end of the agreement they asked for financial statements and in January 2013 we had a court hearing as they felt our ability to pay was not strong and they were seeking repossession unless we could clear the arrears (11000).
We went to court and it was agreed we would pay 997.50 in February then each month after 997.50 mortgage and 100 towards the arrears.
In February we paid 998 - In March a total of 1000 - we contacted NRAM in April and explained that we do the payments electronically and we were 97.50 short but would 'double up' in April. April we paid a total of 1197.50 and May we paid 1100.
We received a statement showing that our arrears had been reduced by 300 in 3 months but Northern Rock have applied for a repossession on the 19th June.
We have tried to contact them but they are stating that as the payments were made on the 31st of the month their system does not recognise them as being made on time - we explained that the court and their solicitor had not given us a date each month to pay by just stated the end of the month. They have asked for all our bank statements etc so they can assess our ability to pay but we are not sure why this is going to be of any use as we have paid the full amount. As we previously found out Northern Rock do not move quickly and so as we are due for eviction in 7 days - Would anyone have any suggestions. ?? We have downloaded the N244 form and are aiming to go to court tomorrow to pay the fees and submit them, anything else we can do ??
Regards

holly_hobby

Contact shelter for urgent advice and guidance - they are an excellent resource in such circs ..

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repossession

You may also want to speak to a solicitor (check to see if your hse ins has legal advice cover, as many do inc this)

Wish you well

Holly

ValHaller

To the court you have to admit a breach of the order in March which was rectified in April and state that the order has been complied with in full and there are currently no sums outstanding. You need to make the point to the court that you have been verbally advised that NRAM consider your payment late because they have received it on 31st of the month but their internal systems regard the 30th as the last day of the month. Ask the court to view this according to the general understanding of the end of the month and not according to NRAM's.

What have NRAM actually said on their application to the court for repo?

Thrugelmir

The order made was for an additional payment of £100 every month. The first month you were due to pay the additional sum, i.e. March, you defaulted on the order.

Given it's going to take many years to clear the arrears at £100 per month. NRAM may well be losing patience. Their view is that you either struggling to meet the committment or you are not treating it as a priority debt.

ValHaller

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The order made was for an additional payment of £100 every month. The first month you were due to pay the additional sum, i.e. March, you defaulted on the order.

Given it's going to take many years to clear the arrears at £100 per month. NRAM may well be losing patience. Their view is that you either struggling to meet the committment or you are not treating it as a priority debt.

Defaulted is too strong a term for this. The net extent of OP's breach is for approx £100 to be paid one month late. Since then the account has been run in compliance for 2 months and it is currently up to date.

NRAM seem to have jumped the gun here and I do not believe that they should be granted a repo order for a transgression this small. OP 'struggling' to meet the commitment is not grounds for a repo on a strict interpretation of 'struggling' - it is when those struggles result in failure. And it is particularity unacceptable, taking OP at face value, to rule that the payments are late according to the NRAM systems definition of the end of the month, when that definition is at variance with the definition of end of the month as used in the Court Order.

At this point, if I were judge, I would not award repo - I would award costs to OP and tell NRAM to stop using my courtroom to uphold their systems definitions over my court order.

Thrugelmir

ValHaller wrote: »

Defaulted is too strong a term for this.

Then I suggest you look up the definition in a dictionary. As perfectly clear.

I am merely conveying the seriousness of the situation. Agreements made in Court aren't a matter to be taken lightly. As on the next occasion the lender will certainly have the upper hand, and the judge less sympathetic that's a certainty.

Thrugelmir

ValHaller wrote: »

At this point, if I were judge, I would not award repo - I would award costs to OP and tell NRAM to stop using my courtroom to uphold their systems definitions over my court order.

Judges uphold the law not their personal opinion. So a major difference.

rjedwards

I absolutely take on board what you have said and just hope that NRAM and indeed the judge will see what measures we have taken to ensure that the payments are made in full. We have increased the payments from last year of £400 in total monthly to £1100 per month so have made a big increase in amounts paid.
We are going to court to file papers tomorrow and will update the forum
Regards

rjedwards

Many thanks for your reply - it echoes my sentiments exactly. I only hope that we can show the judge what great strides we have made and how hard we are working to ensure our payments are made and am definately not sitting back and shrugging our shoulders and denying any responsibility. Time will tell !! Regards

ValHaller

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Then I suggest you look up the definition in a dictionary. As perfectly clear.

I am merely conveying the seriousness of the situation. Agreements made in Court aren't a matter to be taken lightly. As on the next occasion the lender will certainly have the upper hand, and the judge less sympathetic that's a certainty.

Yes, and from the definition, it is clear OP is not currently in default.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Judges uphold the law not their personal opinion. So a major difference.

Yes, NRAM seem to argue that OP is is default according to NRAM's system definition for end of the month. Judges are not employed by the state to uphold perverse systems definitions applied to their own judgements.

Dave_the_Ginger_Cat

ValHaller wrote: »

Yes, and from the definition, it is clear OP is not currently in default.


Yes, NRAM seem to argue that OP is is default according to NRAM's system definition for end of the month. Judges are not employed by the state to uphold perverse systems definitions applied to their own judgements.

I'm not sure I agree.

Most mortgage terms and conditions require the payment to have been recieved by the stated due date - when it was sent is not relevant. And the terms and conditions carry even when a judgment is made.

Technically this is a default, and per the law, they'd be entitled to enforce. In my experience judges will look more favouorably on cases where borrowers are trying hard.

OP - whatever the outcome today, I'd encourage you to stay in communication with your lender, especially if there is a risk that you won't be able to comply with the terms of any order

Were I the lender (I'm another), I would not enforce this, but would monitor very closely, and were I the judge I would award a further suspended possession order.