mortgage balance issues

[gwenlillian]

Hi - I am in dispute about what my actual mortgage balance and how interest is charged in certain scenarios,

Oakwood Homeloans took me to court in the past over arrears, then capitalised the arrears shortly after, putting the cart before the horse, and imposing legal costs. While there were arrears I was charged interest on them, so one side I was charged interest on the outstanding mortgage balance, and in parallel paid interest on the arrears sum, the arrears were then moved from one column to another when capitalised, so if say 4000 was outstanding, due but not paid and still attracted interest, doesnt that become subject to interest again as soon as it is added to the mortgage and is therefore attracting interest twice?
I was also overcharged on legal costs, in excess of court ordered amount, but product was sold to another company before being resolved.
The other company, MTR are charging me interest on the whole lot even though I have settled the erroneous legal costs issue by taking OHL to court. MTR say that they are entitled to keep charging me interest on that overcharged fees as it was refunded to me not them and remains on the balance sheet as legal costs added, despite the court ordering OHL refund me under the rule of disgorgement. (which they have but only on threat of bailiffs arriving). There is no provision for this scenario in the original contract which is with GMAC and if they continue to charge me this interest I will be paying in excess of £10k to MTR for OHL's mistake. This is crazy but MTR are now talking repossession while I am not paying til they sort it out.

[charitynjw]

Re: mortgage balance issues

:bump:

[gwenlillian]

Re: mortgage balance issues

Hi - so I've had a few calls from my lender asking me what I am "gonna do about it" and I can see they are working up to a repo order. They say they can execute an old order that the previous lender had but that lender capitalised the arrears and at that time I considered the order obsolete. This question will no doubt arise again when they start their action based upon it and I don't see their name on any documents so not clear why they think it is their order since they didn't apply for it. Meantime the issue of them adding charges will also be aired along with their changing the payment dates to suit their additional charging regime, so if a contract calls for a sum of money in advance for one month it cannot be in default until that month has expired. This lot think they can charge extras by mid month to suit their accounting dealing. Wonder how many lumps they've added to the account with this sham in the past 4 years. I am absolutely not going to roll over with this and would be grateful if any one has any more info - thanks.

[PlanB]

Re: mortgage balance issues

so I've had a few calls from my lender asking me what I am "gonna do about it" and I can see they are working up to a repo order. They say they can execute an old order that the previous lender had but that lender capitalised the arrears and at that time I considered the order obsolete. This question will no doubt arise again when they start their action based upon it and I don't see their name on any documents so not clear why they think it is their order since they didn't apply for it. Meantime the issue of them adding charges will also be aired along with their changing the payment dates to suit their additional charging regime, so if a contract calls for a sum of money in advance for one month it cannot be in default until that month has expired. This lot think they can charge extras by mid month to suit their accounting dealing. Wonder how many lumps they've added to the account with this sham in the past 4 years. I am absolutely not going to roll over with this.

My first reaction is that you would be better off sorting this out with your lender asap rather than finding yourself in a vulnerable position once possession proceedings have been issued. This is common sense not "rolling over".

I'm in some difficulty with identifying the players in this story from the abbreviations you've given and I'm not clear on who is responsible for what. This is my interpretation of what's going on and my initial response:

* You took out your original mortgage with GMAC who sold it on (they always did) to Oakwood Homeloans (who is still your lender).

* You got into arrears in the past and Oakwood Homeloans obtained a suspended possession order against you.

* After that order was made Oakwood capitalized all those outstanding arrears identified in the order, but you didn't get the order cancelled by the court at that point, so in effect it's still a 'live' order albeit one a court may not find satisfactory for granting an Eviction Warrant. In other words at this moment in time the court doesn't know you cleared those original arrears. Oakwood (?) are threatening to use that suspended possession order as a legal vehicle to seize full possession and evict you from your home.

* You're unhappy with the way you are being charged interest on the capitalized amount and you feel this is double-charging or compound interest. If that is a concern then raise it as a complaint and progress it to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you cannot settle this issue direct with your lender. Normally interest is NOT charged on mortgage arrears and no admin fees either if you enter into an arrangement plan or have a court order for those arrears. So you need to be sure that you have been charged twice before kicking up a fuss. You'll need a spread-sheet and all those things I don't understand.

* I have never heard of a lender called "MTR" or perhaps they are not a lender who has bought your loan from Oakwood? Maybe they are a mortgage servicing company acting on behalf of Oakwood.

* Who are OHL are where do they fit into this complicated scenario? Why did they deal with the legal costs and what reason did you have to take them to court and threaten bailiffs? Did you get a county court order against them to have legal costs refunded? More info needed please.

* You are unhappy with the way you are being charged interest on a portion of your loan which includes legal costs which I presume the lender added after the court hearing which is normal. You challenged the total amount and got a refund. But from what you say you didn't use that refund to reduce the "overcharged" amount which had been added to your loan. Unless I'm missing something this means that that "overcharged" amount is still outstanding to the lender and they are perfectly within their rights to charge you interest on it until such time as you repay them.

* You are unhappy with the way that your lender has changed the monthly due date of your mortgage repayment. This will require checking the Terms & Conditions of your original loan from GMAC because they are still in force. Most GMAC mortgages charged interest monthly not daily. So if your was a typical loan then the date of the month for payment will not impact on the amount of interest you are charged, albeit it could be an inconvenience to you if it falls before pay day.

The all important question is do you have mortgage arrears at the moment? Because if you do then your lender can take you to court and that means you will have to put forward all your arguments and resentments to the judge who may not have a sympathetic listening ear. GMAC loans were mean-spirited and unfair, but sadly they are almost always legally watertight


:faint:

[PlanB]

Re: mortgage balance issues

What good timing I see PT2537 has just posted some case law on instances when a lender cannot charge compound interest on a loan:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...343#post362343

Here's the full judgment:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...286#post155286

[FlamingParrot]

Re: mortgage balance issues

What good timing I see PT2537 has just posted some case law on instances when a lender cannot charge compound interest on a loan:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...343#post362343

Here's the full judgment:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...286#post155286

Plan B is always on the ball :yo:

As the posts above are in the VIP area and the OP is not currently a subscriber, I'm re-posting below for their convenience: :thumb:

Tinks

Terry Armstrong v American Express Services Europe

The High Court said if the agreement doesnt state Compound Interest, then it is not chargable, the Consumer Credit Agreements Regulations 1983 state plainly the Rate of Any Interest to be applied to the Credit must be stated in the agreement.

Id suggest having a read of Armstrong on this point.

[gwenlillian]

Re: mortgage balance issues

Hi - thanks - I was having trouble getting to those. I need to clarify this issue better as it is not quite so straightforward. MTR is Mortgage Title Resolutions Ltd, a subsidiary of Crown Mortgage Management, who are currently administering my mortgage. OHL is Oakwood Homeloans Limited. They added legal costs that were false and non-existant but added them to my balance so attracted interest. Sold on to MTR, who charge interest on absolutely everything and I have that in writing from them. back later