Theft of personal belongings by Natwest

rev_pinky

Quick run-down.
Home re-possessed after marital breakdown and subsequent family law case.
Made homeless for 3 weeks until found rental property.
Old home had temporary shelter to store tools (self employed mechanic)
Had been advised that i could store tools etc on property until sale of house by estate agent.
six weeks later found space for shelter and tools but was refused permission to remove shelter.
Appealed but continued to be refused as said garage (shelter) was part of sale.
House sold whilst under appeal along with tools.
This was in 2013, it took until 2015 to be told that shelter was on the deeds ???? i had built myself and was free standing.
2018 after recovering from breakdown due to losing job, home, wife etc still being told shelter was on deeds. new land registry search by myself. no shelter has ever been on plan.
Natwest refusing to explain.
what can i do ?

silvercar

If the temporary shelter was outdoors, why would you need permission?

It sounds to me that the estate agent gave you wrong information rather than the lender.

rev_pinky

the shelter was on the property hence why i needed permission.
they also kept the key.
my problem is that the bank alleged it was on the deeds of the house which if you do a land registry search shows otherwise.

enthusiasticsaver

A temporary shelter would not show on the deeds.

If you were storing tools on the property after the repossession the lender can do what they wish with them.

You should have removed them before repossession.

I don't think Nat West have a case to answer unless the estate agent got confirmation from them of their agreement to you temporarily storing the tools there.

rev_pinky

Please read carefully.
Natwest stated the shelter WAS on the deeds and refused to allow me to remove.
As i was unable to find accommodation, i had no where to move my tools prior to repossession. Estate agent knew this hence why i was allowed to store on property. They held the keys.

lisyloo

What evidence do you have?
Do you have letters from natwest refusing you permission?
If you have nothing and you want to pursue it then Id do a subject access request (SAR) including recorded phone call transcripts for which I believe the max charge is £10 and check whether there is any documentation or phone call transcript proving you were refused.
How much were the tools worth?
Do you have any proof of what the tools were worth? Did you do any books as a self-employed person where these are accounted for?

I believe you but you need to be a position to prove this on the balance of probability otherwise natwest can just say you mis-remembered and were not refused.

Id send the SAR by recorded delivery myself. Not strictly necessary but you Will at least know its definitely arrived and not got lost in the post.

walkersneed

If you do go through the SAR route, and you can wait until the 25th of May, it's going to be free due to the new data protection regulations, and you should expect to receive a response within 30 days, not 40 days.

rev_pinky

This has been going on since 2013, i have letters, emails. even two separate complaint decisions stating that the shelter was on the deeds.
The tools were worth over 15,000 and the estate agent will have photographic evidence as i was allowed to remove a small amount of belongings but it had to be witnessed by a third party company who came with the keys and photographed the tools before and after.
It is simply a case of buck passing to avoid blame.

aninvasion

enthusiasticsaver wrote: »

A temporary shelter would not show on the deeds.

If you were storing tools on the property after the repossession the lender can do what they wish with them.

You should have removed them before repossession.

I don't think Natwest have a case to answer unless the estate agent got confirmation from them of their agreement to you temporarily storing the tools there.

The tools were on the property after possession and therefore you're going to have a very hard job claiming your case when it seems like the storing of your tools was more of an 'agreement' rather than a 'contract'.

By the sounds of it, a lot of time has passed now and even though there is a considerable amount of value attached to your tools it may be best to but your hopes on cutting your loses and starting again.

If you have e-mails etc as you have stated by all means give it a go pushing any legal routes or a complaints escalation processes but you'll have a hard job accusing Natwest themselves of theft. I'm not saying don't try, just don't expect the world.

Good luck with it all regardless

rev_pinky

Thankyou, Even though a lot of time has passed i have constantly been in touch with the bank.
My main point of contention is that Natwest have said all along that the shelter was on the deeds of the property so i could not remove but this has been proven to be untrue via a land registry search.
£15,000 amounts to a lot of tools and equipment to store, hence my need of the shelter.
I think the problem lies between the estate agent and the bank but the E/A would need authorisation from the bank to allow me to store until such time as i could remove.
Sadly it is me that has taken the fall for Natwest lies.
I at no time relinquished ownership of tools or shelter and was still under appeal at time of sale, Natwest sold my shelter and tools without my permission and infact gained them under false pretenses (wrongly saing part of property) Theft ?

John-K_3

rev_pinky wrote: »

This has been going on since 2013, i have letters, emails. even two separate complaint decisions stating that the shelter was on the deeds.
The tools were worth over 15,000 and the estate agent will have photographic evidence as i was allowed to remove a small amount of belongings but it had to be witnessed by a third party company who came with the keys and photographed the tools before and after.
It is simply a case of buck passing to avoid blame.

Buck passing to avoid blame, I agree, so time, I think, for you to stop, and move on.

Five years fighting a case you are unlikely to win seems a bit futile. Look at things from their point of view, you stiffed them on what you owed, they got some of it back with the sale of what was left.

You seem to be implying that it is fine for them to lose out, but not you.

If you repaid everything that you owed then it is a different case, I think, as they have enriched themselves at your expense.

Which was it, did you end up repaying everything, with interest?