Ok so a lot has happened since my last post. I pretty much had a mini meltdown dwelling on what the Ombudsman said so far ...if my agreement was a secured agreement then it would not be regulated under the CCA. I've made complaint to the Ombudsman on the basis the investigator has no knowledge of the subject matter they are dealing with and also their 6 year arbitrary time limit has already been conveyed to me before they know what they are dealing with etc.... and more but i'm keeping this short. I'll have an answer by 1st December. The reason i had a mini meltdown was that i realised if this complaint [failure to provide compliant S77A Annual statements] failed on this basis, then my complaint right behind it........failure to give a response to a S77(1) request would automatically fail too. I've an admission to make at this point. I contacted a firm of Solicitors back in July with a outline of my complaint. They are a CCA specialist Solicitors who tout their high profile credentials, and the short story is they cannot help me. Another high profile CCA specialist Solicitor says........."CCA does not apply to first charge mortgages". All that is in keeping with what the Ombudsman has indicated. I appear to be making more enemies than friends at this point. I also need to take a step back and consider a couple of things so far. [1] Either me as a manual worker with no trained financial or legal knowledge knows or is aware of more things than specialist CCA solicitors and the FOS service , or ........ [2] I've got myself into some sort of fixated, delusional syndrome and i need to stop. What i have decided to do (and have done), is approach Direct Access Barristers (Counsel) for a written evaluation and advice of my potential claim. It is expensive outlay but could save me a lot of money in the longrun. If it comes back in the negative then i can put the matter to bed and i've lost a relativley small amount compared to if i pressed on and incurred legal costs through failing. If it comes back in the positive then i will be able to put that advice to my lender and hopefuly should force them to negotiate with me. Or failing that i can make an informed desision wether to do it myself as a LIP or engage a Solicitor armed with what i have. I feel i have the potential to unwind the whole lot, with interest. That would be circa £34k over 34 years, so the potential is high. Let you know as i go........... Thanks for reading.

Thanks Andy, yes have copy of that. I have pointed the adjudicator to the FCA's own policy too: CP15/36: Future regulatory treatment of CCA regulated first charge mortgages WWW.FCA.ORG.UK We propose rules for firms performing activities in relation to pre-2004 first charge CCA mortgages. Why are we issuing this consultation paper? Prior... But i fear it will fall on deaf ears. I'll keep posted what happens next, thanks a lot.

I knew this wasn't going to be easy, but i had no idea just how hard. FOS adjudicator asked me three question a few days ago. I thought they where bizarre: [1] Please can you tell me why you believe the consumer credit act is applicable to your mortgage? [2] Please can you confirm when and how you became aware your mortgage statements where not CCA compliant? [3] Please can you tell me if there are any exeptional circumstances that prevented you from making a complaint sooner? I answered back. Today recieved letter that basically the CCA will only generally apply to unsecured agreements and if mine is a secured agreement then............... The adjudicator is waiting for a response from the business to find out about what type of agreement it is. So i've just told the adjudicator its a secured agreement and its a first charge mortgage and they can get on and make their findings on that basis. There is literally no point in reviewing any of my complaint if thats the case. I'm certain they'll refuse me, probably before the week is out. Not sure what will happen next if thats the case, appeal to actual Ombudsman for a descision or what.

Thanks to both of you. Its really been getting me down, i've spent over a year researching this stuff. I seem to be getting shot down at every point either by my creditor or the FOS. The FOS have told me now that my statements even if they are found to be incorrect, they will only go back the last six years and not before that. It initially seems a complicated case, but once you whittle through everything it really is a simple case. Althought the stakes are high. Its as simple as this : we have a consumer credit agreement that was not exectuted correctly and it was modified incorrectly too. The Consumer Credit Law and Practice- A guide by Dennis Rosenthal says the following: modify.pdf You are correct, this will probably end in a Court case. The price of bringing an action just on Court fee's alone is so expensive. Thats something i'm prepared to do, but before i do it i need to do as much work beforehand as possible to narrow down issues. At this point my creditor will not entertain me one iota. I mentioned S138 FMSA above , thats moot really as i understand it it creates provision for an action based on a failure to comply with an FCA rule/handbook etc.... It would be simpler for me to just action for breach of duty, the S77 duty. Problem i have with that is generally i think i will have to claim a "loss", not sure how i would quantify that at this point, and obviously just in relation to that point only , nothing else. The reason why i believe my S77(1) request is so important is that once i recieve the correct response it would almost make the larger part of my case for me. Here is what the request should provide, as explained by the Consumer Credit Sourcebook (CONC): CONC 13 - FCA Handbook WWW.HANDBOOK.FCA.ORG.UK I believe there is a wider Consumer interest here too. At this point my creditor does not need to supply me with some sort of signed copy of our agreement. They are allowed to hoof together some sort of copy of what i would of signed , along with the terms and conditions. That would satisfy my request. The S77 request is just for information purposes. Somehow they are unable to do that. The Consumer (Agreements) Regulations 1983 sets out the form for what i should of signed for the agreement to be executed properly. I know for a fact i never signed one of those, it would have charge for credit, total charge for credit, APR etc.. i've never seen a document in my life from them like that. It would also contain my creditors name and address, in this case Abbey National Building Society. The reason i believe they have not complied is that they did not, nor ever have had any Consumer Agreement templates. In other words, they just treated every mortgage they got as an unregulated loan. The charge on the property and the application for a mortgage sufficed for them. To fullfil the S77 request correctly would need them to provide a copy of the modifying agreement too, or say they do not have one. A modifying agreement also needs to comply with the same 1983 agreement regulations. In my case that will be fatal to them and their agreement as they do not have one. They could of course try to hoof one together for information purposes, but their name had changed at this point to Abbey National PLC. I'd doubt they even have a template either or even complied with any Consumer Act legislation at all. In my particular case they acknowledge it was all changed without my knowledge. I'm certain my complaint to FOS over non compliance with S77 request will result in them telling me they are not a Court and cannot rule on unenforcability etc....But hopefully they will be able to decide that by not addressing my complaint in over three months is a problem. I've contacted the FCA, but sadly they are not a consumer facing body. I've give them my reports and they say they have noted them etc... but they are not answerable to me in as much as they aint gonna force my creditor to do anything. My mortgage credit will run out soon, i havn't made a payment since maybe June this year. At some point they will need to send me a NOSIA. So this afternoon i have done more reading and research. I have an idea. As frustrated as i am that they are not complying with a duty under the consumer credit act and no one seems to be able to help me unless i take the very expensive action and go to Court, i've seen this: CCA 1974 as ammended: 161 Enforcement authorities. (1)The following authorities ( “enforcement authorities ”) have a duty to enforce this Act and regulations made under it— F1(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b)in Great Britain, the local weights and measures authority, So, Google has led me to believe that the local weights and measures authority is actually what we call "Trading Standards". If i'm right they have a duty to enforce the Act. I'm going to contact them in the morning. Fingers crossed. Any input gratefully recieved, i'd sooner fail here than in court. Thanks again.

Hi DX, many thanks for response. Here is two links to explain what happened, then i will tell you what i know. 'We're sorry,' says Abbey National | This is Money WWW.THISISMONEY.CO.UK The mortgage bank has admitted blunders left hundreds of customers with home loans extended by as much as 13 years Abbey Borrowers Face Lengthened Mortgage Terms WEB.ARCHIVE.ORG Now as far as i understand, the majority of those affected like myself would of had "unregulated" loans/mortgages. So there was a reliance on the Ombudsman to correct them and do what was "fair and reasonable" . How i got missed out i've no idea. But where my own personal situation is different is that my mortgage is a Regulated Credit Agreement and that sheds a whole new light on it. Its not actually possible to modify a Credit Agreement like that without a Modifying Agreement. The reason they will not answer my S77 request is that they will have to tell me that they do not have (1) an agreement and (2) a modifying agreement. My ultimate intention is to take them to Court via the Unfair Relationship provisions and ask the Court to make the relationship fair and for them to terminate the relationship and remove the charge from my property. So although the window for redress through the Ombudsman scheme may have passed, as my account is still active and alive and not been in arrears or default ever i am still protected by the CCA. I believe that having it in writing that they have no agreements will put me in a strong position to negotiate with them rather than having to go through an expensive trial for an unfair relationship scenario. And of course i want to go through all the terms and conditions and have eye on the financials what i have borrowed, paid etc..... I've been doing some more reading, from what i can fathom S138D of the Financial Services and Markets Act gives me the legal position to bring a claim for breach of duty ? That breach of duty is the duty obligated by S77(1) CCA. So that would be the basis for a claim ? That would cost me £35 to take them to Court to impell them to provide my request , does that seem right ?

Hi, i wonder if someone could help or advise. I've still got no S77 request. Is it possible for me to apply to a court to force them to provide my request ? Would i use the small claims procedure, ask for the Court to order what i'm asking, but from what i can see you need to have a "value" to your claim ? So could i just nominally say..."£100 compensation " ? Is it possible to issue such a claim in that way or is there another procedure ?

Just thought i'd update. I have now been allocated a FOS adjudicator to look into my complaint (mortgage statements not compliant with S77A CCA). I can't envisage this is a difficult investigation, they either comply or they don't. I'll update when i know more, but i would guess it will be very soon.

Hi, i'd appreciate any advice or help with this. I'll set out what has happened and then i'll set out what i have done and intend to do: I got a mortgage from Abbey National in January 1989, purchase price of house was £13,950, i put a £700 deposit down. Mortgage advance was £13,250 plus a mortgage indemnity premium to make the total amount £13,375.69. This was a standard repayment mortgage over 25 years. It has ran without issue (sort of), in as much as i have never defaulted or missed payments. No PPI or anything like that just a very straightforward repayment mortgage. In 1997 (8 years into the mortgage) i found out quite by chance that my mortgage had approximately 10 years longer to run than i expected. Instead of my expected finish date of 2014, my finish date was now 2023. That is still the case today. When i found out my mortgage had longer to run i demanded an explanation, and i got one. They told me that the interest rate had risen on completion of my mortgage and that i had infact continued to pay at the previous lower rate quoted. Also i had failed to pay my buildings insurance premiums and these had been debited to my mortgage account. They where the reason for the "term extension" of my mortgage. From 1997 until 2002 i continued to write and phone call them about this and always got the same answer. I reluctantly conceded i must of done something wrong. Although quite how i could of got a payment amount wrong i don't know as i always went into the branch, asked how much i had to pay and then paid it over the counter. So this is still the current position of the mortgage today. It has approx a year to run before it finishes. About a year ago i was clearing out all my old paperwork and before i threw out my old mortgage stuff i quickly Googled ...Abbey National extending mortgage term" and i found lots around this subject. Briefly it appears Abbey did this to thousands of customers without their knowledge, just extending the term by 10 years or so , or in some cases more. I also read that FOS had been inundated with complaints over this and had ordered Abbey to put customers back in the position they would of been if Abbey had not extended their mortgages without their knowledge. I also read that in 2007 the FOS had set a deadline where they would deal with no new cases after this time, and also Abbey had a dedicated team to contact customers affected and put them right. i contacted their complaints department, now Santander. They outright refused to deal with my complaint on the basis that what i was complaining about happened more than 6 years ago. They referred me to FOS but also told me they would not give consent for FOS to look at it. The FOS investigator concluded that he could not look at it as it was more than 6 years ago, i got a second opinion from an Ombudsman and they concluded the same. They concluded that when i found out about it in 1997, my correspondence from then until 2002 was just queries and i should of known something was wrong and made complaint then. So that was really the end of the matter for me, my complaint essentially dead in the water. As this was going on i'd made a DSAR to Santander, and got quite a bit of stuff back as you could imagine. The first useful information it revealed was that my mortgage was initially for £13,375.xx , i'd always thought it was for £13,301.xx as that is what all my annual statements show. It also revealed that my mortgage had changed on 01/01/1993 to a term of 370 months and a start value of £13,301.xx . The next useful thing it revealed was that my agreement was and is in fact a Consumer Credit Agreement, as per the 1974 Act and my completion documents show i had made extra interest payment in order to comply with the Consumer Credit Act. i researched the Consumer Credit Act, its application to mortgages, and the FCA's helpful review of the retained provisions of the Consumer Credits Act in relation to mortgages etc... I was now able to understand that my initial agreement to pay £13,375.xx over 25 years had now been replaced with an agreement to repay £13,301.xx over 370 months. This had been done unilaterally. s82(1) CCA says ........Where, under a power contained in a regulated agreement, the creditor or owner varies the agreement, the variation shall not take effect before notice of it is given to the debtor or hirer in the prescribed manner. The prescribed manner in this case is moot, as no notice was given at all. As far as i can see this agreement was prevented by law from happening ? I have already sent off pre claim notice to Santander over this. Simultaneously i identified that in the same way as the NRAM/Northern Rock annual statements where incorrect (S77A CCA) mine are too. They do not include the original loan amount, they state £13,301.xx. i have made complaint to them over this, they assure me their statements are compliant. The matter is now with FOS, as they are not able to charge interest for the periods of non compliance. Further......... i submitted a S77(1) request for information in June 2022 and sent the obligatory £1 cheque. They cashed the cheque and denied having had the request. I still have not had the request fulfilled to date, despite complaints over it and them paying me £100 compensation for the delay. It appears they do not have a CCA compliant agreement, nor subsequent modifying agreement either. And apparently they may not hold the terms and conditions of any agreement either. Although they have not told me that yet, but if they had them then i'd of been sent them by now. That has now gone to FOS as a separate complaint. here is my question. If i initiate legal action i.e Unfair Relationship, creating their own agreements etc... which they where not entitled in law to do. How would i put a monetary value on my claim ? Would i just request all interest re paid to me? If so would i be entitled to simple interest or restitutionary interest , how would i value it ? Thanks for reading.

Hi, i've a couple of questions if thats ok. I took out my mortgage in January 1989. I've tried to understand what rules apply, when, and what don't. I've found it confusing. My mortgage was regulated under the CCA(1974). I think its known as a "Legacy CCA Mortgage". As such am i still afforded the protections of the CCA in regards to "Unfair Relationships"......... have i got that assumption right ? And next question: My mortage was for £13,375.69 @ 12.75% for 25 years. I was quoted and paid £118.69 . Now , MIRAS needs to be taken into account and it was 25% at the time. I've tried several calculators and still come up with a different figure to what i was quoted and paid. Here is what i get: A monthly repayment of £148.34, of which £142.12 is interest, remove 25% of the interest portion (i.e £35.53) that would leave an actual expected payment of £112.81. So how accurate do the figures need to be or is near enough good enough ? Many Thanks.

HI, Mr.A asks me to do some work for him, he is the director /owner of company B.Ltd. He follows his request up with emails from his company B email adress. I do the work, i get paid for some work and not other work. I need to claim for the work i have not been paid for. Do i claim agaimst Mr.A , or company B.Ltd, or joint i.e Mr.A of Company B.Ltd?

Doesn't look to me like you have a defence based on what you've said. You seem to be concerned with what other people will think? You hope that moving and them not getting your updated address even though you have moved and are getting the mail might be a defence? The answer is No, its not a defence.

Hi Angel, yes a lot of work was done on both sides. It could of been agreed without recourse to a Court, so yes a lot of wasted work and fee's. A simple letter would of done the trick. But hey ho. Regards the PPI, yes i'll fill in one of those questionaires, that seems the easy way to go. And yes, by knock it off the tab, i mean knock it off the balance. As of course if i owe them an amount, and they have to repay me PPI they will offset it ? As they say, Tescos not Lloyds, every little helps !!

What do you think Angel235 , good outcome ? You might be able to help me with my next question. My DSAR to Lloyds reveals approx £1500 of PPI on a credit card i took out in 1996, i was self employed (usually) and at the time out of work, as the DSAR and agreement show. Someone had ticked the PPI box for me. Obviously being unemployed it as no use to me, nor was it any use to me in my usual self employed job when i was employed. How long do them queries take to be dealt with ? I'm hoping i can reclaim and knock it off the tab ?

All done and dusted. No trial, sorted out by way of consent order before i went through the court doors. I'd already guessed it would be. I was quite impressed by the solicitor who dealt with me, he was very straightforward, he explained to me the costs he would apply for if he won, he said what he would definateley get i.e ACTUAL costs as regards hearing fee's etc.and explained what he could get .He also outlined the case with me and picked up on strenghts and weakness in my case. He also suggested i could take a punt and go through the court doors to fight my case. Give my witness statement and defence acknowledged the debt and my attempts to try to repay it, i thought it prudent to agree some sort of settlement rather than deny and fight it totally. I'm happy with the outcome of it all, no CCJ and an affordable figure to pay. The Judge thanked me for agreeing an order rather than put him through the process of a trial. I found this bizzare. Having said i am happy with the arrangement, i still have a winge !! We could of come to this arrangement very easily if they would of spoke to or contacted me over the matter. Someones gonna say...you got a letter before action didn't you ? Why didn't you respond? I'm gonna say..i did !! And i also paid!! Its not fair to leave something to a state of LBA, then act quick on it. Whats that gonna achieve, a court action ? Thats precisely what we (claimant and me) should be trying to avoid? Its also become apparent to me that most people, even literate, educated people when faced with a court claim might write to a court and explain issues etc.. This infact doesn't cut the mustard as far as Court Procedures are concerned, your acknowledgement, defence, WS all need to be CPR compliant. Who the **** knows that if you're not a solicitor? The amount of claims awarded on this basis alone must be staggering. Thankfully due to some research i was able to find out what i had to do. Here's a thought !!! The LIP guide produced by the courts, should they send one through with every claim issued ? I think they should, by the time you find it you're generally deeper in the ****. Just like a DN say you should consult CAB, the Pope, or whoever a claim form should have all the relevant info too. Another thing i thought worth mentioning here, although i never debated it with the solicitor. He was under the impression that my DN argument was a strong one. From a lot of reading i come to two conclusions, 1) If a Claimant has pleaded a document in his case then he should produce it. 2) A Court will accept a computer dump that one was produced. In the case of 2) (above) it wouldn't negate a Claimant from demonstrating what was sent. (thats my opinion). This seems to be backed up by what the Solicitor said to me...........if the DN is found to be non compliant, or no proof of it being compliant then they (the Claimant) will re issue a compliant one. This was a moot discussion for me regarding my own case as i was happy to make an agreement. But it does set out the stall of how, at least Lloyds (SCM) see things. I'm well aware of all the counter arguments..agreement has been terminated already, agreement may have contractually expired anyway etc.. Not to lose sight of the fact that the DN was neccesary for the court procedure in the first place, so how would it happen? Would they find it duff, stay proceedings, issue a new DN, re plead then carry on ? I don't think so. But there you go anyway. Like i say i'm happy with the outcome, but thats only due to hours, days, weeks of research and complex arguments to come to this conclusion. If i hadn't of done that i'd have a CCJ now and owe a few grand more. The system is [naughty word].

did you recieve the copy of terms and conditions i sent you from 1996 ?

Check out http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1981/1687/part/1/made

......... Sorry Mary, I am a little confused. If a default notice [or particularly the interpretation of normal post] is not part of CPR as you assert, why are the 1985 Pratice Directions (essentially a practice direction to the 1985 Civil Procedure Rules) being quoted/relied upon? The 1985 Practice Directions instruct, direct,interpret s7 Interpretation Act within the context of Civil Procedure?

Yes i'm broadly agreeing with you here. I think with a lack of anymore knowledge on it i'd intend to put forward the information (1985PD), as Richard says in post #21 on this thread, it will be for the Judge to decide. What seems obvious to me either way is that the onus is on the server of the notice to quantify its postage method, and not the other way round. I've searched and up until now i can't find that the practice direction we're talking about has been revoked?

wap, nothing you've said above makes any sense to me. People are mentioning CPR. A Default Notice is not part of the Civil Procedure . Nor is it neccesarily part of pre action protocol. So how everyone is mentioning CPR in relationship to DN's baffles me. Its merely a Notice that you have Defaulted, it may or may not lead to further action, its a step a Creditor needs to take before he can assert his rights. So whether CPR says documents need to be served in a bright yellow envelope is neither here nor there. The CCA itself spells out whats acceptable for Documents served under the Act. Seems straightforward to me, Documents required to be sent under the CCA can be sent by post? This seems very straightforward to me. The only thing it doesn't address is how it was sent exactly as there is a few methods of "ordinary course of post". You could not prove the contrary unless you knew what it was supposed to be? Thats where the 1985 Practice Direction helps, it clarifies it. ......... It should now be a straightforward matter. The issuer of the Default Notice will have a Affadavit of service or they have not. Service of such Document can be worked out from that very easily. Its either two days from posting or four days from posting. Thats my take on it now from all the reading i've done. Unless i've missed something?

Actually, thinking about it. Many large organisations are not asserting anything other than a reliance on s7 of the Interpretation Act. And thats it.

What is the criteria for posting a DN. Is it enough to say "it would of been sent ...xyz", is there a need for an affadavit of service? Would the sender of a DN need to keep a record of sending/postage, would it be prudent for him to do so? Just to establish that situation really. Many creditors now will rely on (and apparently satisfy ssome courts) producing some sort of record to say one was produced, and further rely on "would of been sent"...

It may be fair to also say that (in the case of a large Bank etc.), they use a type of "Buisness Post" service, this is not "normal course of post" ?

I'm still struggling with the relevence to CP6 section 88 Goode

Thanks for that Richard, its a bit of a minefield to me researching it as a novice. I'm pretty much in the same boat as the OP. Looking for clarification of the issue of posting /serving. I'm not so sure any of CPR6 relates to Default Notices? I assume that because CCA1974 has its own section dealing with service, which points to Interpretation Act s7. ? And also exactly in the same case as the OP has, if someone says that PD of 1985 is defunct, how to you counter that? Or am i looking at it from the wrong way, i.e if the opposites side solicitor says..."its defunct" then is the onus on the solicitor to show it is?

Yes thats the correct case i was trying to link to. Although it does't specifically mention the 1985 PD, you think there is another PD that clarifies "the ordinary course of post" in s7 Interpretation Act 1978 ?