taking old mortgage co. to court - moved to their local court?

[iconoclash]

Hiya - a quick question:

 

 

If an Unfair Term can be held in the consumer credit act re insufficient detail for example,

 

 

can the same be held for a mortgage company that makes "SUNDRY" charges to an account.

 

 

I am assuming that a charge has to be specified in more detail to be valid,

 

 

but wondering what Act/Satute/Regulation may be applied??

 

 

any ideas on this as I believe many of us are being charged extras

(and they simply point to their Tarriff) without any real information

 

 

and they are similiar to bank penalties,

 

 

probably for a service but totally out of proportion again... thanks

[iconoclash]

Info update:

Paragon Group of Companies plc, Tangent Court, Highlands Road, Solihull, West Midlands, B90 4PD.

 

Known to most of us as Paragon Personal Finance Ltd. St. Catherine's Court, Herbert Road, Solihull, West Midlands, B91 3QE,

this also being listed as their Registered Office.

 

The first address is listed with the law society and they employ 3 solicitors.

 

2 employees, one assistant: Richard Dominic SHELTON, Samantha Louise GARNER, Gurminder Kaur VIRDEE.

 

 

The second address is used on their court claims as the employers address of the employee/solicitor handling the case.

 

My questions are:

who are Paragon?

Are they a DCA?

Have they bought 'en masse' the general publics debts?

If so, for how much? -

 

 

I've heard about 1/4 of the amount.

AND, if they have bought them,

 

 

don't they need to show OWNERSHIP of debt to enforce any?

 

 

Sounds like buying money?!!

 

 

any ideas/answers/thoughts.....

[iconoclash]

Hi - been going through my papers and looking at a secured loan agreement with SPPL.

 

 

It seems to include a brokers fee within the total loan with interest on all for 120 months at APR 11.4% (monthly or annual) OR 9.65% ,

 

 

sorry two rates are being quoted here and neither box says anymore!

 

 

This loan is finished but it seems it was converted into a mortgage with SPML.

 

 

Not sure whats gone on here but the loan was £10k and the settlement figure was £10,677.52. ?

 

 

As provided by WCD Law, Liverpool, acting for Southern Pacific.

 

 

It seems to me that they paid themselves somehow but cant get my head round it.

 

 

The new mortgage with SPML was £182,885 back in 2004

but was later sold to MAS2.

 

 

Any ideas as to where to start ?

 

 

I have sent out a SAR today for the files to see if they shed any light

and have added up what I've already paid off the loan before settlement/conversion which is about £2600.

 

 

Many thanks.

[iconoclash]

Hi - I sent a DSAR to Capstone as they have taken over the SPML stuff - had a few scrappy pages back but I was expecting a full file for a secured loan with SPPL plus the old mortgage stuff with SPML. There is a letter which says:

 

"as I have requested details of any agreements between lender/broker/packager, written or unwritten, in relation to commissions or other payments - this is not data relating to the account holder(s) and as such we do not consider ourselves under an obligation to provide this pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998 and subsequent guidance published by the Information Commissioners Office."

 

but, the secured loan had a broker fee of £500 shown and added to the loan, this was paid for a short while and then coverted into a first charge mortgage, so, the original loan was settled. I'm looking to see the figures for settling that and how it was incorporated into the mortgage. They havent sent any of the costings and this other stuff about not having to tell me if there were other amounts paid to brokers is a bit odd. I thought they had to send everything that related to the cost to the customer??

 

any advice welcome -thanks:)

[iconoclash]

Hi - I think I posted this somewhere else a while ago but cant find it:confused:

 

Can I ask again about this please.

 

 

We had a secured loan with SPPL but less than a year later had it converted to a mortgage

- at their suggestion and it has since been paid by remortgaging again to someone else.

 

 

However - the full ERC was paid off from the loan to SPPL and Im kinda thinking that since this is really the same company

 

 

they aided themselves into a few thousand with this deal and added the loan balance to the mortgage

 

 

- thus it included the erc twice - if u see what I mean - any ideas??

[iconoclash]

anybody??

[ricardusacapoux]

Dubious company with overseas connections. It operates many many other companies which it uses as in-house*

 

- debt-collectors (Receiver of Rent) AKA RedBrick

- mortgage securitisators AKA First Flexible No. 6 plc

 

 

All highly incestuous*

One of the originators of buy-to-let mortgages (See Mortgage Trust) currently UNREGULATED by the FSA (of which Richard Shelton is a member)*

 

 

For information Richard Shelton is a director of all 3 companies (4 if you count Mortgage Trust)

 

 

I hope this helps

[sillygirl1]

Paragon Finance are a 'third level' finance company, along with the likes of Welcome and Progressive Financial Services who are part of the Shopacheck lot. They are not very nice to deal with.

[iconoclash]

Hi - our Rooftops mortgage was sold to Future Mortgages but was introduced to us in the first instance by a broker. The broker sent a KFI and we said no to that offer as it included a 6% ERC - we asked for it to be re-issued, the broker then produced another report in which it states that "the customer wants a reduced ERC and says NOT to issue a new KFI to the customer". I have now realised that the mortgage terms were unaltered and a whacking fee at 6% (over 11k) was charged when we exited the product plus approx. three thousand went to the broker (at inception)- am I right in thinking there's something amiss here? Have written to Future and their reply says the usual: "you signed for it so its your fault" response. I thought new KFI should have been issued at the very least??

[iconoclash]

anybody??

[iconoclash]

Hi - I've been charged a fee I believe shouldnt have been on my mortgage account but Future are refusing to acknowledge saying its nothing todo with them. The mortgage was Rooftops till sold to Future. The broker company gave us an offer but it showed a 6% ERC so we rejected it. The broker then produced a report which I have a copy of and in this he asks them to re-issue the mortgage offer to us with a reduced ERC and says not to re-issue the KFI to the customer. Looking at the settlement of that mortgage now I see that they did charge us the 6% which resulted in a whacking fee of 11k+ - they also paid 3k to this broker. Future say they dont issue the KFIs and its nothing todo with them but I think they have ripped us off. Is there anything I can do? thanks

[iconoclash]

Hi - I recall Carmel Butler saying something about mortgage companies/third party administrators and their actions:

that one cannot be taken into court for charges and fees.

I am sure she wrote this up somewhere but cannot find it.

Anyone recall this?

 

We are being taken to court for all sorts of imposed fees by an unscrupulous mortgage management company and I am livid.

 

 

I probably owe about a month or a month and one half of actual mortgage

but the rest if highly questionable and subject to tests of reasonableness etc etc,

 

 

also no pre action protocols have been followed so will be preparing our defence soon,

 

 

just wasnt sure about this business of charges, especially when the product is GMAC and FSA fined them about all this.

thanks.

[silverfox1961]

This is way out of my league but I do know of this article which may be of interest to you

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?700-Hot-news-for-anyone-who-has-suffered-mortgage-arrears-charges-irresponsible-lending-or-other-unfair-lender-conduct

[iconoclash]

Hi

 

 

- does anyone know what the rules are regarding adding legal fees on the mortgage?

 

 

It appears that legal costs have been added to my mortgage account

but into a separate column/account where they put all the other types of fees

 

 

BUT, having been originally ordered to pay the monthly mortgage payment due plus £50 towards arrears that is what we did,

and all the time the legals were sitting in another account

so no payment was ever going towards that and

 

 

of course they were adding a charge of £50 per month also for that debit balance

- in other words not only would it never be paid off,

it would increase vastly as interest would then be charged on the £50 charge ad infinitum!

 

Isnt this an unfair practice - any help much appreciated!

thanks

lyn

[Lea_HTH]

There are no 'rules' per se - it will depend entirely on the terms and conditions of your mortgage contract. You need to check the contract terms prior to working out whether the term is unfair or not.

[caro]

This article may be of interest to you campari. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?700-Hot-news-for-anyone-who-has-suffered-mortgage-arrears-charges-irresponsible-lending-or-other-unfair-lender-conduct

[iconoclash]

Hi - thanks -have done some more reading but still cant get the answer I need - the crucial point for me is whether a sum of money set by the judge as being legal costs for the lender can then attract interest when there is no specific mention of interest in the order?

my lender sold on my mortgage to another outfit who have added interest to these legal fees, which I should never have had to suffer in the first place and are with the FOS now as part of the whole product investigation, and this latest servicing company has taken a repo action against me for all these fees and charges and interest and managed to rack this up to over £9000 ! - in reality i have gotten behind with the actual mortgage by a month or two due to the 13 week wait period when claiming JSA. Any help much appreciated.

[caro]

I would suggest that you add that information to your defence. Have you got a thread going about the repo?

 

I don't believe that they can add to the amount of the judgment which is what they're doing by adding interest.

[iconoclash]

Hi - thanks for the prompt response - I am hoping that either the FOS or the solicitor will pick up on this as it seems to be one of those open ended things that would never ever actually be paid if left the way it is set up now - arrrgh. I suspect that the serciving company will say it is an expense and therefore added to my balance of fees and charges and as such will then attract interest, but, this would be contrary to what the court order says, and furthermore, the court order doesnt prescribe any way to pay this off but simply deals with the mortgage arrears themselves - so I am a bit lost at the moment as to whether our own solicitor failed, at that time, to address this matter properly.

Of particular interest to me is that it says: to be added to the security. well what does that actually mean? thanks again

[caro]

Again this is just guess work, but I'd say that it means that it's added to the debt secured against your property, so maybe it is allowed.

 

What did your solicitor say about this?

[Bona]

Under most motgagess there is a clause imdeminifying them against fees. These Must be reasonable and what is reasonable is open for interpretation we got a lot of fees back but ours were in a legue of there own. They have to give you a breakdown you need to ask them for a breakdown of all 3rd party costs applied to your account when you have those you need to look and see what is reasonable having been through a cost court I can probally help. Fees cannot be added to the areas but have to be put on one side and accounted for seperatly you should have been told this and are only repayable on completeion of the mortgage Thats how I understand it anyway if they dont add it to the mortgage then Im not sure about interest usually a court will say cost in the event which means at the end the cost are sorted ( no interest is added at that point. I think that if you go back to court you need to bring the costs matter up. addedd to the security means that if you sell they have to be paid than you need to look at your agreement but I think that you will have to pay reasonable cost at the end of the case or the mortgage

Let me know if I can help further

[iconoclash]

Hi and many thanks for your responses. I have telephoned the company and they say they are adding interest - to the tune of £500 per month ! since they have added so much to my balance it is hard to know what is what anymore and so i telephoned the previous company (before they sold it on) and they say it they will not answer any questions as they no longer own the mortgage. So frustrating. So, I have given all my latest information to the team at the FOS and included the question about interest on costs, capitalised sums, transfer of balances, fees and charges, and the fact that they owe me a refund as this a GMAC mortgage (following that fine laid down by FSA), and copied all this to the solicitor acting for us too. It would be great to get it all sorted out and interesting to see how they are gonna justify their behaviour and charging policy - even making late payment fee charges as the DWp take a while to sort out the JSA and they even said they dont care they will carry on making those charges!! Horrors they really are. Will keep you posted and thanks again.

[Bona]

Ours was a gmac Mortgage and we are still fighting 6 years later they took a fortune of us were still fighting but they certainly rougues and the FSA dont do a thing you cant even grt a straight answer to your letters will let you know how we get on

[iconoclash]

Under most motgagess there is a clause imdeminifying them against fees.

 

Hi - I'm pretty sure that a company cannot ask a consumer to indemnify their losses

[rdm2006]

It is a term in your mortgage - i have just found something similar in my mortgage and the term says

 

Payment of Fees, Expenses, and Costs

 

You must pay on a full indemnity basis all fees, expenses, liabilities and legal and other costs incurred or charged by the (organisation) in or incidental to: -

 

the preparation, completion, registration, administration, protection and enforcement (including the cost of any proceedings) of this mortgage

 

the "including the costs of ANY proceedings seams to be the killer bit

 

so if the mortgage company cock up and you need to take them to court to correct it, you have to pay their legal fees no matter what the outcome

 

This should be classed as aggressive behaviour under the CUPTR as it is a deterrent of the consumer exercising his/her rights