Mortgage Repossession on an Inflated Debt Caused by Bank Errors

Domsjo

sheramber said:

Where did they apply the overpayments?

They havent provided a clear answer, one response letter says they either reduced monthly payments  or  reduced the term - but dont stipulate which. In an email they said they sat in a separate pot.

The contract says they should have gone to capital if the endowment became insecure - this would have reduced the interest applied over the term of the mortgage.

A very basic calculation shows the payments made are 5-6k more than the interest applied, and it was interest only. A thorough calculation, adding interest and payments in real-time shows around the same 6-7k out.

Their end balances show the capital balance ending 4k higher than the mortgage balance - and then interests and charges are used to make both these figures match an amount they declare as the original loan amount - which is a random figure, likely a typo of the actual loan amount.

Domsjo

MWT said:

Domsjo said:

I made overpayments towards the capital inline with the contract directions if an endowment becomes insecure. They didnt apply the overpayments to the capital.

Typically the overpayments would be applied to the capital or the accrued interest (either for that month or due to prior non-payments), if they were not applied to the capital where did they go? 

That is basically my defence - where did they go? But if I keep asking that I could owe 100k in their legal costs - even if I win.

silvercar

Domsjo said:

sheramber said:

If the correct balance had been presented at maturity (16-17k), I would have been able to pay it off in cash settled. 

I was directed to gain permission from all parties to remortgage to pay their figure (23k), which I began the process for in good faith in 2024.

Why did you not pay off the £16/17k that you could, leaving only the balance payable? 

Because I only just found out. This figure only came to light when they submitted the full account balances as evidence, and i had them audited. Their end balances show 3 different figures and reconcile against an incorrect loan amount

What did you do with the £16/17k if not pay the mortgage down?

What does the mortgage co signature say? 

silvercar

It is going to need investigating by an independent forensic accountant. It sounds like your complaint will be rejected by the lender, so you then need to take it to the ombudsman. Ideally before repossession. Your other option is to pay under protest until it is resolved to avoid repossession. 

MWT

This feels more like a failure to fully understand the calculations rather than malign intent on the part of the lender unfortunately.

I'm not suggesting that there can never be mistakes, but what is described here would require a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors over what sounds like a long period of time.

Have you been able to have someone familiar with this type of financial product take a look at the details the lender has given to you?

It feels like it would be a better use of money than paying legal costs as it would either frame your complaint clearly, or prove to you that there is nothing wrong with their numbers...

Domsjo

silvercar said:

Domsjo said:

sheramber said:

If the correct balance had been presented at maturity (16-17k), I would have been able to pay it off in cash settled. 

I was directed to gain permission from all parties to remortgage to pay their figure (23k), which I began the process for in good faith in 2024.

Why did you not pay off the £16/17k that you could, leaving only the balance payable? 

Because I only just found out. This figure only came to light when they submitted the full account balances as evidence, and i had them audited. Their end balances show 3 different figures and reconcile against an incorrect loan amount

What did you do with the £16/17k if not pay the mortgage down?

What does the mortgage co signature say? 

The 16-17k wasnt a payout fro the endowment - its what I have in the bank though yes I could use this to pay under protest and can table this at mediation.

The co signature has gone back off grid, understandably tbf. I wish I could do the same!

Domsjo

MWT said:

This feels more like a failure to fully understand the calculations rather than malign intent on the part of the lender unfortunately.

I'm not suggesting that there can never be mistakes, but what is described here would require a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors over what sounds like a long period of time.

Have you been able to have someone familiar with this type of financial product take a look at the details the lender has given to you?

It feels like it would be a better use of money than paying legal costs as it would either frame your complaint clearly, or prove to you that there is nothing wrong with their numbers...

Yes, there is a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors evidenced in their balances, miscalculation and my defence. Its why after 2 hearings the property hasnt been repossessed. 

The issue isnt that I cant prove it - I can. The problem is even if I prove it I am still liable for their legal bill which is really high. I dont have direct legal costs as Im litigant in person

silvercar

Domsjo said:

MWT said:

This feels more like a failure to fully understand the calculations rather than malign intent on the part of the lender unfortunately.

I'm not suggesting that there can never be mistakes, but what is described here would require a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors over what sounds like a long period of time.

Have you been able to have someone familiar with this type of financial product take a look at the details the lender has given to you?

It feels like it would be a better use of money than paying legal costs as it would either frame your complaint clearly, or prove to you that there is nothing wrong with their numbers...

Yes, there is a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors evidenced in their balances, miscalculation and my defence. Its why after 2 hearings the property hasnt been repossessed. 

The issue isnt that I cant prove it - I can. The problem is even if I prove it I am still liable for their legal bill which is really high. I dont have direct legal costs as Im litigant in person

Why are you liable if the lender has acted in error? Does the lender seriously expect a court to award then £100k legal costs for a £23k mortgage? Sounds like they are trying to intimidate you.

Domsjo

silvercar said:

It is going to need investigating by an independent forensic accountant. It sounds like your complaint will be rejected by the lender, so you then need to take it to the ombudsman. Ideally before repossession. Your other option is to pay under protest until it is resolved to avoid repossession. 

The ombudsman are trying to extend their scope for investigation based on the evidence in the transaction balance. The FCA have marked it as a complaint against the bank. The bank are skirting close to being unreasonable over the mediation, they really tried to object to it in court and the judge had to talk over them in the directions hearing to push for mediation, but theres a chance they dont want to engage meaningfully

Domsjo

silvercar said:

Domsjo said:

MWT said:

This feels more like a failure to fully understand the calculations rather than malign intent on the part of the lender unfortunately.

I'm not suggesting that there can never be mistakes, but what is described here would require a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors over what sounds like a long period of time.

Have you been able to have someone familiar with this type of financial product take a look at the details the lender has given to you?

It feels like it would be a better use of money than paying legal costs as it would either frame your complaint clearly, or prove to you that there is nothing wrong with their numbers...

Yes, there is a consistent repeated pattern of unfixed errors evidenced in their balances, miscalculation and my defence. Its why after 2 hearings the property hasnt been repossessed. 

The issue isnt that I cant prove it - I can. The problem is even if I prove it I am still liable for their legal bill which is really high. I dont have direct legal costs as Im litigant in person

Why are you liable if the lender has acted in error? Does the lender seriously expect a court to award then £100k legal costs for a £23k mortgage? Sounds like they are trying to intimidate you.

Yes, that how I feel about it, but its in the contract - any legal fees the borrower is liable for and technically there is a debt, and I'm not disputing there is money owed - I'm just disputing the amount, which they say is immaterial but to me everything rests on it. The fees feel very disproportionate to the debt and likely theyre are trying to discourage me from continuing my defence.

But then whats to stop them doing it again, if I enter into a new arrangement for whatever amount theyre currently seeking and theres a track record of fudged and inflated charges - I could be locked in for another 30 year cycle, with no real consumer protection. Seems unjust.