RBS claiming that an unsecured loan is secured

avriel

I am currently in a DMP with payplan and have RBS as one of my creditors. I hold a loan and a mortgage with RBS but the loan is unsecured and in my name where as the Mortgage is in the joint names of both me and my wife.
I have been fighting for a while now to get them to remove the PPI from the loan as it is no use to me at all due to now being in a DMP and so am unable to claim off it. RBS have stalled continuallyy in removing the PPI and 2 months ago they claimed that they have lost all of the paperwork relating to the loan (including the credit agreement) and asked me to provide them with my copies of the agreement. Obviously I didn't do this and so the saga continued with them claiming that they can not remove the PPI without being in posession of the relevant paperwork.
RBS have also continuoasly claimed that they have recieved no contact from me or from payplan regarding the DMP no matter how many letters I have sent or conversations on the phone that I have had with them.
Last week I recieved a statment from RBS with the usual warnings of court action and default notices printed at the top of the statement. On reading the statement it became evident that the PPI amount had been deducted from the loan at last, and so I immediatly forwarded the statement to Payplan. The statement included both my loan and mortgage amounts which concerned me a little so I immediately called RBS to confirm that the Loan was seperate from the mortgage. Despite some warnings that people experiencing dificulties with a loan usually experience difficulties with their mortgage at a later date it was confirmed that the loan and mortgage were seperate entities and that the mortgage was safe.

Today I recieved a call from Payplan asking me to confirm that the loan was unsecured. I confirmed this fact and stated that the Mortgage was in joint names but the loan was in mine only and that my wife did not have to sign the loan agreement as she would have had to if it was a secured loan. The lady at the other end of the phone then informed me that RBS were telling payplan that the loan is secured against my home. She is going to contact RBS and find out what is going on.

Obviously I am very concerned about this and just wanted to know your opinions on the matter. has anybody ever experienced a loan company claiming such a thing in the past ? and should I be concerned or are RBS just trying it on ?

Many thanks for any reassurance or advice you can give me

Avriel

peb

Under the small print of your mortgage deed (in the terms and conditions booklet) usually there is reference to the fact that they can call in any debt as part of teh mortgage should they become concerned as to your ability to repay that debt. It sounds to me that if they have got wind of the D M P they are annexing the loan to the mortgage - I do always advise clients of this. They do this so that should they have to accept less (ie in a bankrupcy) they get the full monies and don't have to accept a percentage as a unsecured lender - it sounds like they are doing teh same here; this way they know you will have to pay the full amount and they won't freeze interest.

mrcow

Surely if there is no credit agreement, then they can whistle for their money?

Broken_hearted

Maybe but they could call the mortgage debt in and leave the OP totaly stuffed.

Snaggles

peb wrote: »

Under the small print of your mortgage deed (in the terms and conditions booklet) usually there is reference to the fact that they can call in any debt as part of teh mortgage should they become concerned as to your ability to repay that debt. It sounds to me that if they have got wind of the D M P they are annexing the loan to the mortgage - I do always advise clients of this. They do this so that should they have to accept less (ie in a bankrupcy) they get the full monies and don't have to accept a percentage as a unsecured lender - it sounds like they are doing teh same here; this way they know you will have to pay the full amount and they won't freeze interest.

I agree in part with this, but if an all monies charge is held, and it is in joint names, I don't think this would cover a debt in sole name?