I'm finally getting out of my GMAC mortgage, and to be honest if the redemption penalties hadn't been so high I would have done so before and then claimed back the penalty. However, as the figure was over 5K I didn't want to risk a non-small claims route. So, having gotten a new mortgage offer, I sent all the forms and deeds off to my new lender's solicitors and got an initial completion date of mid-June. (Unknown to me they then sat on the case and did nothing, because one of the muppets was on holiday and didn't pass it to anyone else:evil: ). So, I had already warned GMAC that completion may be at or about the same date as my monthly payment. The chap said that was no problem and if it didn't complete I could pay by debit card over the phone. In any case he said, it would be added to the redemption figure. All sorted? Not really... GMAC hadn't supplied the redemption statement and of course the solicitors were also buggering about, so I couldn't complete by the end of June either. Instead of calling or writing to me, GMAC just applied a £50 penalty to my account and then posted a missed payment on my credit report. What a slimey, underhand, vindictive lot they are. I'll still try and claim back the £50 but surely 14 days does not constitute a missed payment? The woman I spoke to wouldn't budge and insisted they had to put that on my report. Thoughts anyone? Any help much appreciated

Thanks for replying - that what I feared. However, there should be some bloody control or audit over what the details are used for - as confirmed, any muppet can give the DVLA a number plate and get back name, address, DOB, etc, etc Massive scope for abuse and incompetence - sad reflection on current state of affairs, me thinks.

I got a letter a few days ago from Herts Highways Department saying that I was liable for damage to road signs and a lamp post over a year ago. Obviously I would have remembered having an accident of that size so I set about trying to find out who got it wrong. 1. Ring the council - I get an apathetic woman who says things like "you must have loaned your vehicle to someone" and "the police told us it was you". So I tell her that I can prove that my car was in a car park 25 miles away at the time and ask who in the police force gave them the information. She refuses, quoting the data protection act. Idiot. 2. Ring the police - not too difficult to get through to someone intelligent as the Herts force run a "collisions department". Discover that a bloody great white van (with a registration similar to my small black car) has taken out a chunk of barrier and signage on the A505. The police supplied the correct plate, make, model, colour and driver name to the council, so it's not their fault. Conclusion - the council have: Misread the number plate and got one letter wrong Didn't think to recheck the plate with the police Asked DVLA for the details on the wrong plate and get mine Write to me accusing me of liability even though the name, vehicle make, model colour and driver name are completely different. The reason this gives me the hump is that the DVLA have handed out my personal details without verification and this would never have happened otherwise. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether I have any cause for complaint? The council are already in hand but I don't think the DVLA should get away with it. Any advice much appreciated.

Hi all I have a mortgage with GMAC which I really want to get out of and move elsewhere. There's 10 months left until the ERC expires which they want to charge 4% for!!!! I've written telling them that it's a penalty and unlawful etc but they won't budge of course. Quite willing to go all the way with this given the sums involved but I don't know how to make them remove it. Can I go to court somehow and have a judge make them give me a settlement figure minus the ERC? Any advice much appreciated.

They owe me £200 and 2 weeks ago threatened to counterclaim (as expected) for the balance of my account after they got my Request for Payment letter. I then paid the balance off and I am now actually in credit. Anyway this morning by post they've offered £40 to settle the claim and now promise not to close my account LIKE I SHOULD BE GRATEFUL! Who the hell do they think they are? This really is supreme arrogance if they think they don't even need to match the (stupidly) published £12 amount and at least offer to bring the charges down to that amount, which would have been £80. Ye gods. :-?

Hi All I'm in the fortunate position of having just paid off the balance on my Egg card. They owe me £200 in charges for the usual late payment, over limit etc. They've got nothing on me, nothing to use against me and I really hate their arrogance, so happy to oblige. I've just had my (unusually polite) RFP turned down so LBA being prepared now.

Kind of explains where the half brained logic behind his decision to ACCEPT the offer came from, and as Ozzywizard says why post on a forum for opinion if you don't want to listen to any that disagree with your own view. Its probably lucky it didn't get to the filing a claim stage as the court staff may of needed a translator for your form While we're on the subject of grammar, I think you'll find that should be "MAY HAVE" People in glass houses... Best of luck HairyBear :grin:

Thanks Wickerman, much appreciated.

Appreciate if someone could clarify as I can't find a definitive answer in the other threads. If they're a subsiduary of RBS who are Edinburgh based can you still claim against Mint at their Southend address? Any advice/comfirmation appreciated

Hi Got the same letter from Cap One. Personally I think that £12 is still excessive and it seems that the OFT have basically scr*wed us all by suggesting that figure unilaterally. I suspect most Banks/CCs will jump on the same bandwagon if they have any sense. Can anyone offer an opinion on whether: 1. This will lead to judges staying cases with the implied suggestion that parties settle on the difference between the applied charge and this new "acceptable" figure? This would be bad... 2. To that end, is it relevant that it be applied retrospectively and you would only ever to be able to claim back charges in excess of £12 no matter how often they were applied by the offending bank? (E.g. you couldn't recover 3 days @ £10 per day even though it totals £30) It certainly doesn't seem right that banks can instantly reduce their exposure on this whole business based on this new-found moral high ground Any info much appreciated!