Extended Mortgage term and Buildings Insurance Premiums.

Hi again, got my reply this morning. I've found it confusing and contradictory:
Todays letter:




Some of that we had already worked out. Slight change of tack now though. You've seen the 1997 and 2002 letters. Here is the 1999 letter, that just confuses stuff more:




I get the feeling that they don't really know but are just stabbing about at anything ?

[The Tech Clerk]

Ah! the Iron Mountain incident!

Still Waving thats my assesment up to now. I'll have to try narrow all this down for the FOS. Thanks a lot, i'll give myself a rest now as its sending me round the twist. Be back when i got some more info or unearth anything else. I spotted some anomalys in the early statements but i'll go over them in a few days. Never bashed a calculator so much!!


*Edit to add no answer to that question. I raised it as a query as well after my complaint refusal and they said 7 to 10 days they'll get back to me.......... still no answer. I asked them that on 22nd Nov.

[Still Waving]

Hi again

There are various things jumping out at me from various posts which are scattered throughout the thread, so it's not easy to bring them all together.
Anyway it may help to bring some of them closer together so -

Their letter from 1997, shown in post #33 says
"..... your mortgage did not actually complete until January 1989. At this time you were quoted an instalment of £118.69 based on an interest rate of 12.75%. Later in the month the interest rate increased to 13.5%, however you continued to pay £118.69, and as a result the term extended."

We now know that this statement is not true, as you have the February '89 letter quoting an instalment of £118.69 AFTER the rate had increased. So the 1997 letter was either a deliberate misinformation, or the author had misunderstood the actual position.

Further their letter of March '89 does not suggest that you are underpaying, in fact it confirms that the February and March debits were £118.69. That blows their contention right out of the water.


As an aside, you said in post #44

Ok, i still havn't recieved response letter, and TBH i couldn't be bothered to wait any longer I know my complaint has been declined as they told me on the phone. I've asked them one simple question as an existing mortgage holder : My mortage commenced on 23rd Jan 1989, it was for £13,301.xx , i was quoted and paid £118.xx . "What calculation did they use to arrive at that figure, when i know that i can work out my shortfall and set my mind at rest."

We now know that your question contains an incorrect original loan amount. I take it you haven't had a direct response to that question?

You said in post #47 "Now the Mortgage commenced Jan 1989 and it was somehow re purposed and given an extended term on the 1st Jan 1993." Their 2015 statement shows original loan as £13301.72 which was the balance at 31/12/92. So it looks like their repurposing includes sweeping past figures under the carpet.

[Still Waving]

Well frankly if they are NOT in the SAR how can produce them? It means they don't hold original information!
I wonder does the name IRON MOUNTAIN appear in the SAR?
Big thanks to Still Waving for sterling help here!

We are talking about basically only statements for a couple of years (and maybe some more correspondence). But they have provided some letters from 1989, so I don't think Iron Mountain data losses come into it.

[Roger]

Well frankly if they are NOT in the SAR how can produce them? It means they don't hold original information!
I wonder does the name IRON MOUNTAIN appear in the SAR?
Big thanks to Still Waving for sterling help here!

Their original excuse for not being included was flimsy.

Possibly someone had the initial statements out to investigate your separate question regarding the early years of the account.

The Complaints investigators words are :

Reviewed customers account information and there is limited information regarding documents and correspondance from the time period the customer has raised

Thats the place my question went to. I gather from the sound of that , that the investigator was suprised there was no more ?

[Still Waving]

Their original excuse for not being included was flimsy.

Possibly someone had the initial statements out to investigate your separate question regarding the early years of the account.

There appears to be confusion on your account at the outset. Referring back to your post #76, and their letter (date not shown) which refers to their letter dated 20/2/89. Their confirmation of your alleged credit balance shows a payment of £223.27, which appears to breakdown as follows -

118.69 monthly instalment, plus
29.01 payment in respect of the period 23/01 to 31/01, plus
75.67 of the insurance premium 80.30(?), shown in their letter 20/02

Which would mean there has actually been an underpayment of £4.63. The actual breakdown of the £223.27 amount may be different from my assumptions. Their letter of 20/02 asked that you send a letter requesting transfer of your insurance payment out of the account. Is there a record in the SAR bundle of a letter from you, as requested? If so, what date, and is there a confirmation that it was actioned prior to their letter showing a breakdown of your balance position?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm trying to get a clear understanding of how your account got into such a confused/confusing state after just two months. They initially got your start date wrong and then said that they had mis-stated the (credit) position after you had made just two payments.

No, nothing more in the SAR about it. The undated letter is 31st March. I've been on the phone to them today to enquire about the missing financials for 1989/1990, agreed it seemed odd that they are not included and said he is right on it to try and find them for me so fingers crossed

Hi again

You've confused me with your post #'s 80 and 81.

Why have you chosen 2015 in particular?

In the mortgage calculator you are using the balance at end of 1992/beginning of 1993, and applying the rate of interest at 2015, but at end 2015 the balance was £6776.80. Also I don't follow your rationale for the two term of years you have used?

Ignore my calculations, i think i was over tired. I chose 2015 statement because thats where it says "original loan amount", makes no sense ?

[Still Waving]

Hi again

You've confused me with your post #'s 80 and 81.

Why have you chosen 2015 in particular?

In the mortgage calculator you are using the balance at end of 1992/beginning of 1993, and applying the rate of interest at 2015, but at end 2015 the balance was £6776.80. Also I don't follow your rationale for the two term of years you have used?

[Still Waving]

There appears to be confusion on your account at the outset. Referring back to your post #76, and their letter (date not shown) which refers to their letter dated 20/2/89. Their confirmation of your alleged credit balance shows a payment of £223.27, which appears to breakdown as follows -

118.69 monthly instalment, plus
29.01 payment in respect of the period 23/01 to 31/01, plus
75.67 of the insurance premium 80.30(?), shown in their letter 20/02

Which would mean there has actually been an underpayment of £4.63. The actual breakdown of the £223.27 amount may be different from my assumptions. Their letter of 20/02 asked that you send a letter requesting transfer of your insurance payment out of the account. Is there a record in the SAR bundle of a letter from you, as requested? If so, what date, and is there a confirmation that it was actioned prior to their letter showing a breakdown of your balance position?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm trying to get a clear understanding of how your account got into such a confused/confusing state after just two months. They initially got your start date wrong and then said that they had mis-stated the (credit) position after you had made just two payments.

Thanks again Still Waving. I've come to the same answer. MIRAS was 25%, i double checked and its easy to reference off them bits of statements. So its straightforward to work out. I get the correct even at 13.5% to be as near as dammit £118.69. As i glance back you can see where they say my 1989 insurance payment was made, then years later say it never was. The missing portions of 1993 is odd. I'm a bit more concerned about the 1989/1990 statements now. I still can't understand how they extended it, is it something i'm missing ?

[Still Waving]

It's late, but just some quick thoughts from my ruminations.

How it now seems to me. Their letter to you dated 13/2/89 (NOTE: After the rate had increased to 13.5%) advised that your repayments were to be £118.69. They haven't specified a rate in the letter, but I think they are basing the repayment on the NEW rate (ie current rate at the time of writing). The additional £29.01 they are asking for is, I think, to cover the interest for the part month (Jan - at split rates).

The fact that you now say you had MIRAS changes everything as regards the monthly repayment. You were paying net interest (after relief). I am not sure what the MIRAS rate was in '89, but I have done some rough calculations based on my assumptions, and it brings the monthly repayment very close to the £118 odd which they quoted to you.

I'll have to go to bed its sending me crackers looking at it. There is something badly wrong and i just can't see it.....................