You need to contact the landlord to discuss this. Are you sure this is a repossession letter? Under current law the landlord has to serve a notice to quit two months in advance if he wants to have possession of the property. So for example, if there is twos the left in a year contract they would send that letter just in case the tenant does intend to extend their contract. The bottom line is with private renting, even if you are up to date with your payments your rental will be for a fixed term and when this expires the landlord can take steps to take the property back. Mods - is this in the right forum?

Just my two pence. You should always attend an application to suspend a warrant. In my experience of hundreds of these cases the DJ will usually take a very dim view of someone who does not attend such an important court appearance. I'm sure Ell-en will agree with me on this.

From the above its not clear what your current arrears level is? Has the 15k been applied yet? If so then if your arrears are now 25k is this amount something you could realistically clear in the term of your loan? How much is your monthly instalment - I ask this because of the large sums involved.

Oh I'm just a bloke down the pub. Ignore me. Your right. Every single one of the thousands of people working in finance in this country are out to screw you. And if you do have to call them make sure you put tin foil in your head so the aliens can't hear you. Background, er 25 years working for mortgage companies, regulatory agencies and advice centres. Don't bother replying, I won't read it.

Agreed, however whilst JS beleives the issues to be similar I do not believe they are. That said, I should have done some digging too!

Agreed, and the guidelines are open to interpretation as well. I'm just concerned when you make blanket statements about charges being unlawful then it can be misleading. People will see the word "charge" on their statement, and try to fight them. I don't want to highjack this thread but a quick example. I dealt with a case where someone was disputing the solicitors costs they had incurred as a result of Court proceedings. They believed that they were excessive due to some advice they had received from an internet forum (not this one!) as about charges being unlawful. The costs were £300. This amount seems like a large sum to the man on the street, but anyone with any industry experience would know that £300 for raising an action is extremely low. The person made a claim to court, which was rejected in 2 minutes by the DJ due to the costs being applied reasonably. The result - the person also had the costs of the application. solicitors attendance and a day off work. So I feel if someone posts as they have done here complaining about charges, the first response should be to ask for details, not just to say they are wrong.

Thats a very simplistic response! They were not fined for applying all charges. They were fined for applying unreasonable ones. The FSA and OFT have guidelines as to what they consider reasonable. For example, solicitors costs incurred in arrears recovery. If these are the charges that were applied, and the OFT and FSA consider them reasonable, there is no basis for a claim. As a member of the site team you have a responsibility to be more careful than this, and clearly highlight than not all charges are considered unreasonable by the regulators and courts. If you allow people to believe that they have the basis to claim against any form of charge applied to there mortgage, then people who are not as savvy as you will make claims where they have no basis, potentially getting them in to further debt.

Okay, first question. You took the mortgage out at 100% in 2007 and you think there is £13k equity in the property. Have you checked this is the case? Property prices dropped and whilst they have raised since then £13k seems like a large amount of equity to have generated in 4 years. Remember, you mortgage payments at the start of the loan will mostly just be covering the interest and only reducing the balance slightly. Mortgage companies aren't lending to the high level loan to value that you will need to pay off your debts. Even without the CCJ you would likely struggle to get the finance, with it, I think its not realistic.

Nonsense. They want you to phone as they will want to go through a full review of your finances to discuss what is realistic and affordable. Do you think a call centre worker has the time at the end of the shift to sit and listen to the 100s of calls they took that day. This is just paranoia. That said. you are entitled to put your offer in writing. If you want to do this, why not just call them and if you don't want to discuss anything just ask exactly what info they would need in the letter? An I&E would be a start. GE Money will neogtiate a plan which would run up to the end of the term of the loan, but this doesn't means they will accept this if you can afford more. Remember, its better for you to pay as quickly as possible.

Who was your broker? If you are basing your claim on the fact your didn't receive adequate advice, it is 99% likely that your claim is against the broker and not the mortgage company. Many of these brokers following the crunch (recession!) are no longer trading. This doesnt mean you shouldnt investigate a claim, it just means it will take time and effort. Also, as Lea has said, its a pretty weak argument that you weren't offered advice on how to pay off the loan. You knew you would, why didn't you look in to it? Not being harsh but that is the first question a Judge would ask.

There are two different issues here which I think has led to the confusion. You haven't posted much information but Im guessing this is what happened. Your first claim was against the charges which had been applied to your account. Charges should be applied to the balance of the account and not form part of the arrears. I'm guessing in this case the charges were applied to the balance and not the arrears. Your claim was refused as the charges had been applied correctly as per the terms and conditions of the agreement. With your next claim, you say the charges were applied to the arrears. This should not happen as the arrears should only reflect payments you have missed. This is why the Ombudsman has rejected their claim. He is not saying that you shouldn't have been charged, he is saying the charges should have been recorded against your account balance and not form part of the arrears. The two claims are completely different, and I do not think you will have much luck re-opening your first claim. I appreciate this is can be confusing, many people struggle to understand the difference between arrears, the account balance, and the charges balance. For reference this type of claim was my bread and butter fort ten years.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the charging orders need to be paid. The original advice you got from your solicitors is ridiculous, of course they need to be paid when a property is sold - that's why creditors get them! You will have to speak to the companies who hold the charging orders to see if they will accept a lesser amount in settlement, they are not obliged to but if they are practical and you can prove the property is being sold for its true value then they may allow it. But it will not be quick. ONce you have settled this you should complain to the Solicitors Regulation Authority about the advice you received. However, having a complaint with your solicitors however valid will not mean the sale can proceed anyway.

I-Group are now GE Money. However, you will not be able to e-mail them or the other companies to obtain the info you want. They will consider account numbers as data considered sensitive under DPA, and therefore would not reply to an e-mail request for that information. You will need to write to them.

Im not trying to comment on whether they can take action under the situation you have raised. But even if they have done wrong, if you owe them money they can take you to court - they will sort out the problems. You cant defend the fact you cant afford the mortgage on the basis they made an admin error. At best youll spend a few months putting them on the back foot due to it. But if you cant pay, you will be repossessed. Errors don't matter it will get there. What are you doing about the fact you cant afford payments? Or would you rather focus on a minor error which might delay matters for a week or two? Ell-Enn can you help me focus him on the right thing?

i'm sorry you have missed my point. You may be right in all of the above, you may be successful. But that will only delay matters by a few months. After which, you will still owe the bank money, they will by law be entitled to repossess your house (even if they have instructed their solicitors incorrectly now, they will just start proceedings again). By all means, fight the could fight on this technicality you have an issue with. But the bottom line is if you can't pay your mortgage, you will be repossessed Would you rather be victorious in this minor admin technicality, which it is though you don't see it that way, or address your long term future?

Believe it or not but 3 months is industry standard. The reason behind this is the litigation action itself will take at the very quickest 3 months. This means at the point the bank can repossess if the customer is not paying they will be at least 6 months in arrears. Ultimately, NRAM will not be looking to repossess the property. Their goal in this will be to get an SPO - a suspended possession order which states they can't take any action whilst you pay x amount. The thinking being that this will mean you will pay more consistently as you have the sword of damocles over your head. However, Pre-Action Protocol dictates that if they are notified that you have become unemployed - and are applying for housing benefit - they should not commence proceedings providing you keep them up to date. If you have not told them this, then doing so now maybe too late, you will need to attend the hearing and explain your circumstances to the DJ, including why you had not kept the lender informed, if that is the case.

Just to repeat what Lea has said, whilst you believe that the solicitors might have been instructed in error, once the bank are notified it will be rectified between them and the solicitors. A DJ or a regulatory body would be a bit miffed at this miscommunication, if that's what occurred, but I think you need to be realistic about any complaint you make. At best you will get an apology letter and possibly a small payment as a gesture of goodwill. You'll still owe the bank the same amount of money, you can't afford the property, and the bank and solicitors will simply recommence action as they are perfectly entitled to do so. I understand their actions have annoyed you, but really this is a very minor issue compared to your financial situation, and your energy would be far better served dealing with that.

Hi Bake, You don't have any automatic right to have a meeting with your mortgage lender. If you are having trouble communicating with them you might want to think about getting someone to represent you, for instance your local Citizen's Advice Bureau.

Hi Ascint, Have you approached the mortgage company regarding value of the property being less than the balance of the mortgage? If they are practical, they may allow the sale to proceed as it is likely to realise more money than a repossession. They are likely to expect you to pay the difference on an unsecured basis, can you afford to do this?

Have you spoken to your mortgage company? If you are realistically selling your property for its true value than they should let the sale complete. If there is a shortfall, can you afford to pay them on an unsecured basis? You do not mention in your post the reason for the repossession other than the arrears. Are you in work - can you afford to offer payments while the sale completes?

That's just nonsense. Even in they do combine them in your arrears figure you can only be repossessed based on missed payments on your mortgage.

Hi Sorry to hear about your situation. Are you at all on speaking terms with your ex? If so, is there any chance you could try and sell rather than be repossessed?

Hi Emmanewt To help, we will need some more information about your situation - Who is trying to evict you, a mortgage or a secured loan - how many payments have you missed? - what is the reason you have missed those payments? - what can you afford to pay now? - if you can not pay anything, are you looking to sell/get rehoused?

"I dont believe that they could not give you permission to rent out if they wanted to." Mortgage companies will often write in to the terms and conditions that you can not let the property without their permission. It is common practice and legal. However, you would expect them in such situations to take a reasonable approach. Rippedoff15 - I am presuming that you offered to pay the monthly instalment whilst the property was rented out?

Hi Maye What were your arrears when the Suspended Possession Order was made, and what are they now? From what you have posted it seems you have brought them down substantially and I can't believe that Capstone are moving towards repossession!