@natwest_help Natwest Renege on repayment Plan

[pumpytums]

Hi everyone,

as advised this is a break off thread to detail the treatment a family friend received from Natwest bank.

 

I found out last year that my mother in law was struggling with a very large loan with Natwest the loan was originally for £20k plus the loan increased from sub £3k over 7 years to the £20k+. At every review she was advised to take out a larger loan every single loan unknown to her had PPI. The reason for taking out the loans was to stop bank charges on her 2 current accounts with Natwest.

 

My mother in law is in her mid to late 60's and to pay the loan she works in an old peoples home as a care assistant she used to be a sister so has a good pension. The part time work pays her debts. Due to her age and health she needed to cut her hours. This obviously reduced her free capital to pay none essential loans. After during a preliminary I&E it was crystal clear she could not continue as she was.

 

The main creditor was Natwest they offered no help at all they never even told her about the PPI she had on her loans. We only found out about this when we received her SAR info back.

 

We completed I&E forms and sent them to her 3 creditors along with covering letters detailing exactly how much they WOULD be receiving and when. The repayments were set up by standing order and they were commenced as soon as the letters were sent. The payment amounts were not open to negotiation as everything was worked out on a prorate basis.

 

In late 2011 NatWest agreed to her repayment plan, payments were made every month after a few moths she received a letter stating that she had broken her repayment plan and that they would be taking further action unless we contacted them. The bank that sent the standing orders was contacted and everything was correct amount, account and sort code. After contacting NatWest she was told that she had indeed broken her repayment plan. It turned out that she had underpaid by 7p a month, she offered to correct this to be told that she had to resubmit her I&E and repayment offer this was done.

 

What needs to be made clear her is that Natwest took her repayment amount from her I&E form not the covering letter which clearly stated the repayment amount rounded down to the nearest £ the underpayment was in fact 0.05% of the monthly total a completely petty amount. To put it in perspective the first class stamp cost more than her alleged underpayment.

 

After she resubmitted her details nothing else was heard From Natwest the repayment amount was adjusted via the standing order as we promised, no acceptance was again received from Natwest. Towards the end of 2011 Apex contacted her demanding the full balance. The balance outstanding was now greatly in dispute as it turned out the loan had a huge upfront single premium PPI of the order of £7k in addition Natwest owed her £13k on the other 9 loans that had sold her PPI on. Natwest had agreed to refund all the outstanding PPI prior to Apex been attached.

 

I contacted Natwest on the phone to speak on her behalf as to why the account was been collected by an external agent when we had a repayment plan in place were were told that they could basically do what they wanted to do. I also asked why the account had not been returned as the balance was disputed. The numpty at NatWest stated that even though they had agreed to refund the PPI and we had accepted it the balance was still currently correct as the refunds had no been applied. Absolutely shocking.

 

So to date we are waiting for the new outstanding balance and responses to 2 letters of complaint sent to Natwest. She has received cheques for the 8% compensation but no updated balance to which they have set-off her PPI premiums.

 

Throughout this sorry mess she has not missed a single repayment we originally agreed in her original repayment plan letter.

 

After reading the latest newsletter it is clear to me she has been unfairly treated by NatWest Bank and we look for advice on our next step.

 

Thanks

 

Pumpytums

[citizenB]

How much of this communication do you have in writing ?

 

Have you kept a log of the telephone calls and a summary of the conversations?

 

Have sent a letter - Official Complaint - requesting/demanding an updated statement showing the ppi refund/offset ?

[pumpytums]

Hi CB,

we have all the letters we sent to NatWest. I have their acceptance letter of our repayment plan it mentions no amount however. We also have their communications saying she has broken the agreement. I know the exact date we called Natwest to say why they had passed the account on. I also can summarise the call.

 

So far we have sent 2 letters of complaint they have acknowledge neither.

 

I will now send an updated one special/recorded delivery to RBS head office, demanding updated amounts and also include a complaint and also demand why the previous 2 letters have been ignored.

 

Thanks

 

Pumpytums

[citizenB]

Please head your letter Official Complaint - they are obliged to deal with these within a specified period of time. Letters not headed OC are treated as general enquiries and there are no official timescales for those.

Let us know what the response is and we can take it from there.

[BankFodder]

Thanks for putting this story on to a thread.

I've read it briefly and it looks as if there has been very serious unfair treatment.

However, I understand that you are posting this on behalf of a friend.

To make an effective complaint, your friend would have to be directly involved and would have to make the complaint themselves. Does that cause any problems?

[pumpytums]

Hi BF,

the friend is actually my mother in law I have sent a complaint in her name signed by her. I type the letters up she ok's them

 

She recently received a letter from Apex stating that any arrangement that existed with NatWest prior to their involvement ceased to be in effect once they got involved. This is obviously false and I have written back to them stating that NatWest in our opinion has committed an unlawful act by acting unfairly towards her.

 

She is still continuing to make payments as arranged they have still not sent correct figures for the loan account. We have asked NatWest for correct figures with a breakdown on all accounts.

 

The official complaint was sent to her home branch.

 

Pumpytums

[citizenB]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?840-Stop-your-bank-or-lender-breaching-their-instalment-agreement

 

I put this on your other thread as well, PT

[pumpytums]

Hi all,

my mother-in-law has just received a rather grovelling letter from the DCA who insisted that the repayment agreement was null and void, apologising for any distress. They have now passed the account back to the OC. The OC (Natwest) have now confirmed her official complaint and will contact her ASAP.

 

We have still not received updated totals for any of the accounts, of course she is still continuing to make payments as per the agreement they broke.

 

Thanks

 

Pumpytums

[BankFodder]

Have you begun an offical complaint about their failure to give you an updated balance?

 

I'd like to get a handle on all of this.

 

What was the value of the loans? - each one?

 

How much was ther in PPI?

What is the basis for saying that the PPI was missold?

 

You say that they have returned 8% interest to her? But not he actual PPI payments?

 

What interest rate was she paying on the loands?

Is this interest still accruing?

 

Have you got the paperwork realting the reviews and the loands?

 

What were her her perosnal circumstances when she was offered the loans?

[pumpytums]

Have you begun an offical complaint about their failure to give you an updated balance?

 

Yes this has been sent to Natwest they have acknowledged receipt of it.

 

The complaint consisted of 5 parts

 

1. Failure of Natwest to assist her when she contacted them indicating her financial problems. Only telephone assistance offered no face to face meeting.

2. Natwest reneging on rthe repayment plan.

 

3. Request for bank charges to be refunded due to burden of PPI on loans and the charges added to further loans.

 

4. Failure of Natwest to respond at all to 2 previous complaint letters.

 

5. Failure of Natwest to issue updated statements and pass details onto their DCA of choice.

 

What was the value of the loans? - each one?

 

The loans are as follows

 

Loan and Insurance details

Loan Amount Insurance Opened Closed

£23000 £6670 10106/2008 N/a

£19500 £5278 01/11/2007 10106/2008

£18000 £4950 24/09/2007 01/11/2007

£16900 £4574 27/04/2007 24/09/2007

£16000 £4273 29/01/2007 27/04/2007

£15000 £4125 30106/2006 29/01/2007

£ 6500 £1641 03/05/2005 30106/2006

£ 5500 £1389 10101/2005 03/05/2005

£ 5000 £1263 16/04/2004 10101/2005

£ 2100 £ 361 11/12/2003 16/04/2004

 

Each loan was absorbed into the newer one.

 

What is the basis for saying that the PPI was missold?

 

She was past retirement age on some of the loans so the PPI would not have paid out she was also receiving her pension. Also she had absolutely no idea she even had it they added it without her knowledge. In some cases they even ticked the box requesting it or it wasn't even ticked they simply said sign here and here.

 

You say that they have returned 8% interest to her? But not he actual PPI payments?

 

They returned only the 8% compensation the rest was used to pay off the loans a half hearted incorrect loan update statement was received they failed to refund the upfront PPI premium. They have still not rectified it.

 

What interest rate was she paying on the loands?

Is this interest still accruing?

 

I'm unsure of the interest rate but I can look tonight we have copies of most of the agreements. They have confirmed that interest is frozen in writing.

 

Have you got the paperwork realting the reviews and the loands?

 

We have copies of the documents recommending the loans etc its like a loan pre check list. We have about 80%-90% of the agreements.

 

What were her her perosnal circumstances when she was offered the loans?

 

Basically she worked part time had some health problems. The loans were taken out to stop her getting bank charges obviously these were rolled into the loans. She had a good pension as she was a nurse but the repayments on the latter loans were completely unmanageable.

 

I hope that helps

 

Pumpytums

[BankFodder]

OK, here are some more questions.

 

But firstly what I have in mind is to show the lending was really completely irresponsible. That the mis-sold PPI is evidence of an ufair relationship and that as a result the whole lot is subjet to s.140A and is unenforceable under S.140B.

You are helped in this by the way they have ignored the payment agreement and tried to sell the debt on. Also by the way they are refusing to provide info as to the current state of the debt.

 

I don't understand whay each loand had to be funded by a further loan.

Was the purpose of each loan to fund the previous one or did they each time add a little spending money on top?

Have you signed a full and fal on the PPI repayments?

Why wasn't the 8% paid into the loan as well?

Was the amount of PPI refunded agrred with you or did they do their own calculation?

[BankFodder]

Also, have you gone through the list of charges which must have been levied on these loans as they fell into difficulty?

[pumpytums]

Hi BF,

basically she had a OD with NatWest at every review they recommended turning it into a loan which of course increased over time. Obviously the OD consisted of charges these of course then attracted interest at a loan rate. We were completely unaware of NatWest behaviour until she came to see me in confidence. I believe she had a small amount of spare cash as well but not a great deal. It was plainly obvious that she was unable to repay the loans her OD was constatly hitting the limit and charges been added. She never lived extravagantly at all.

 

Unfortunately she did sign F&F on the PPI. Having a £25k loan hanging round her neck was causing her a huge amount of stress. From the figure she received from Apex this is now reduced to approx £4k and she has £2k sitting in an ISA from the refunded 8%. Natwest have still failed to confirm the outstanding balance on her 2 current account with OD's or provide a correct balance on the loan.

 

She is still making repayments to the 2 current accounts and the loan at the agreed figures. Obviously her other creditors are suffering as she is making pro rata payments without NatWest sending her the balances she cannot adjust said payments. To put things in perspective the Natwest portion was £25k, Halifax £3k and MBNA £1k.

 

I have absolutely no idea why the refunded the 8% directly to her all I can imagine is it's compensation and their moral compass points the right direct for once. I have had a similar result with NatWest they refunded only the 8% element the remainder went to the outstanding balance on a OD I'm paying off slowly.

 

The amount refunded was by their calculations it seems approximately right from some rough calculations I did with regards to the amount paid in premiums.

 

I will have to check the loan statements from her SAR I don't recall any charges but I will check.

 

Thanks

 

Pumpytums

[BankFodder]

Note that s.140A and B of the CCA refer not only to the agreement - but also to any related agreement.

140AUnfair relationships between creditors and debtors

(1)The court may make an order under section 140B in connection with a credit agreement if it determines that the relationship between the creditor and the debtor arising out of the agreement (or the agreement taken with any related agreement) is unfair to the debtor because of one or more of the following—

(a)any of the terms of the agreement or of any related agreement;

(b)the way in which the creditor has exercised or enforced any of his rights under the agreement or any related agreement;

©any other thing done (or not done) by, or on behalf of, the creditor (either before or after the making of the agreement or any related agreement).

(2)In deciding whether to make a determination under this section the court shall have regard to all matters it thinks relevant (including matters relating to the creditor and matters relating to the debtor).

(3)For the purposes of this section the court shall (except to the extent that it is not appropriate to do so) treat anything done (or not done) by, or on behalf of, or in relation to, an associate or a former associate of the creditor as if done (or not done) by, or on behalf of, or in relation to, the creditor.

(4)A determination may be made under this section in relation to a relationship notwithstanding that the relationship may have ended.

(5)An order under section 140B shall not be made in connection with a credit agreement which is an exempt agreement by virtue of section 16(6C).

 

140BPowers of court in relation to unfair relationships

(1)An order under this section in connection with a credit agreement may do one or more of the following—

(a)require the creditor, or any associate or former associate of his, to repay (in whole or in part) any sum paid by the debtor or by a surety by virtue of the agreement or any related agreement (whether paid to the creditor, the associate or the former associate or to any other person);

(b)require the creditor, or any associate or former associate of his, to do or not to do (or to cease doing) anything specified in the order in connection with the agreement or any related agreement;

©reduce or discharge any sum payable by the debtor or by a surety by virtue of the agreement or any related agreement;

(d)direct the return to a surety of any property provided by him for the purposes of a security;

(e)otherwise set aside (in whole or in part) any duty imposed on the debtor or on a surety by virtue of the agreement or any related agreement;

(f)alter the terms of the agreement or of any related agreement;

(g)direct accounts to be taken, or (in Scotland) an accounting to be made, between any persons.

(2)An order under this section may be made in connection with a credit agreement only—

(a)on an application made by the debtor or by a surety;

(b)at the instance of the debtor or a surety in any proceedings in any court to which the debtor and the creditor are parties, being proceedings to enforce the agreement or any related agreement; or

©at the instance of the debtor or a surety in any other proceedings in any court where the amount paid or payable under the agreement or any related agreement is relevant.

(3)An order under this section may be made notwithstanding that its effect is to place on the creditor, or any associate or former associate of his, a burden in respect of an advantage e

I think that it is very unfair that she has been paying the loan interest but that the related PPI has only been returned at a rate of 8%. Had she not been conned by NatWest into taking the PPI should would have been able to borrow less than she did.

 

You haven't said whether there was any spending money top up on the loans. I think that this would be important to know because it would add to the evidence of an unfair relationship.

S.140A makes it clear that not only could the entire loan be challenged for unfairness but also the PPI full and final agreement because it is a related agreement. It think that this problem has a very good potemtial for being solved completely - even to the extent of having the entire debt discharges and all sums repaid.

 

It seems to me that continuing to offer sequential consolidation loans whilst at the same time allowing the overdraft to continue with no real evidence of any ability to repay is a evidence of an unfair relationship.

The misselling of the PPI is evidence of an unfair relationship in a related agreement which under s.140A can taint the principal regulated agreement. The refund of PPI with an interest rate far below what she was being required to borrow the money at, is also evidence of an unfair relationship which taints the priniple credit agreement as well as the full and final which she had to sign to get the refund.

 

The problems are - is she able to bring the claim in her own name? And also what is the value of the claim? I have no doubt that it would be over the small claims limit - even the new one to be introduced - unless there was some way of dividing it into smaller bits. It might be posible to simply take a smaller loan agreement and to pilot it through.

[BankFodder]

To confirm, it would be useful to have a more detailed history including:-

How much of each loan had been paid off - meaning how much of it had been rolled over.

Was the amount of each loan just enough to consolidate the debt incurred so far or were they adding a bit of spending cash on top.

How was the PPI refund calculated. I understand that the PPI element was added to the loan so that, say, the 2003 loan for £2100 had an addtional £361 added to it to pay for PPI which means that the true loan was £2461.

The PPI part of the loan attracted interest of whatever %. Did the PPI refund include a figure for that % as well or was she merely refunded the net £361?

 

As I have already said, it seems to me that there is a good basis for relying on s.140A here. They offered multiple serial consolidation loans to someone who they know had very limited means. Not only that bu they left the overdraft in place so that more debt could be incurred and they allowed this to continue repeatedly for 10 loans over a period of 6 years and I see that in 2007 year they did this four times when all the signs must have been that it was completely out of control.

 

Furthermore, in breach of a repayment agreement they have attempted to demand full payment.

The very blatant mis-selling of PPI adds to the unfair treatment.

Furthermore, they demanded a ff agreement without giving any explanantion of the refund. And to add to that I understand that for more than four months you have been trying to get an outstanding balance figure from them and they are either not responding or are causing delays.

 

This is definitley open to challenge on the basis of s.140A.

The problem is how to manage it without having to go on to the fast track.