The funds were used for home upgrading and yes it has now been repaid (share appreciation mortgage scheme)
Optional Information: System of Law: England-and-WalesAlready Tried: Wriring to the Financial Ombudsman
I would like to take legal action against the institution who:
1- Failed in their duty of care to advice me of the implications of signing the document.
2- Using a wrong name and date of birth to process the documents
3- Had the agent made sure I was part of the negotiations He would have had my corrct name and date of birth
Good day Clare
75% of the sale price of the property appx £253000
Thanks for your responses so far
Please forgive me but let me explain:
Shared Ownership mortgate in1979 allowed retired home owners to borrow money using their home as collateral.
The loan amount £50,000 interest free to be repaid when the property is sold.
The condition attached is the lender is entitled to 75% of any increase in the value of the property. Property value increased.
So the final repayment on the sale of the property was £50,000 plus 75% of any increase in the value.
My late husband was the one who applied for the loan. After his death the property was sold. I had to repay not only £50000 but also an additional £243,750. Total = £293750.
Unfortunately I signed papers but I was not made fully aware of the additional 75% payment. As I said before had I been party to the original negotiations I would not have signed. I signed only when the lenders returned the documents to say the Title has two names therfore requires two signatures. Later documents from the lenders that I had not seen before revealed my incorrect name and date of birth.
This is just a summary of events
Hope this explains a little further my reason for wanting to take legal actions to recover my lossess.
Yes I was aware of the loan before the money was received
Yes I did sign because I understood at the time that on the sale of the property the loan of £50,000 would be repaid. I was quite happy to repay it.
What was not explained to me was the additional 75% increase of the value of the property, which had to be repaid in addition to £50,000.
As I said before the application was signed by my late husband as he conducted the initial discussions with the agent who sent the documents off to the lenders. The agent failed to take into account the joint ownership, document required two signatures and as such failed to advise me of the implications. The lenders returned the document saying my name is XXXXX XXXXX Title of the property and that requires that I sign the document as well. That was the first time I saw the application.
If I understood the implications I would not have signed as it left me unable to purchase even a small flat. I was left lodging with neighbours. I now owe the lenders £50,000 again which they offered as compassionate loan to be repaid when this new property (a retirement flat) is sold.
The loan is interest free. Repayment is not conditional on death but when the property is sold.
See Share Ownsership mortagae scheme 1979.
The issues raised here are:
1- I was not advised of the additional 75% payable
2- The application that the agent completed has my name and date of birth wrong, this is because he did not consult with me when he completed the form himself.
3 - I was not party to the original discussions he had with my late husband.
Thanks for getting back to me
Yes I was coerced into signing the documents
Yes I have the document I signed with the agent witnessing my signature
The only evidence is the agent saying if I did not sign my husband would not get the loan. So maybe more pressured into signing than coerced.
In FOS letter dated Jan 10th 2013, I quote
"You will see from the papers that the advice to take out the plan was given by a representative of .................(I have ommitted the company's name for now). I am sorry to have to tell you that it appears we cannot consider the complaint. In simple terms this is because the provision of a mortgage advice was not a regulated activity at the time.
Mortgage advice did not become a regulated activity until 31 October 2004.
Other paragraphs of this letter:
Although parliament intoduced transitional order, this company was not a member of the Mortgage Code Compliance Board when it provided advice. The company neede to have held membership immediately before 31st October 2004.
I don't know.
I have his address at the time my husband did business with him, I would have to put a trace on it to find out, not sure how though
No not really