Not upheld: Mortgage administration / arrears handling complaint against Godiva Mortgages Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-4836522 of 2024-06-06T00:00:00+00:00. Mortgage administration / arrears handling complaint against Godiva Mortgages Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-4836522 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2024-06-06T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Godiva Mortgages Limited |
| Product | Mortgage |
| Claim type | Mortgage administration / arrears handling |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. The complaint was not upheld. The ombudsman encouraged Mr W to present all available evidence to Godiva directly, including evidence of the change in the basis on which the property is let, and to allow Godiva to reach a decision on that basis. The ombudsman offered to forward copies of the council's letters to Mr W to assist him in obtaining proof of compliance from the council. |
Summary
Mr W complained that Godiva Mortgages unreasonably required written proof of compliance with local council enforcement notices (improvement and prohibition notices served in 2019) before allowing changes to his Buy To Let mortgage, when Godiva had previously accepted his verbal reassurance. In 2023, when Mr W wanted to change his mortgage interest rate, Godiva requested written confirmation that the notices had been complied with. Mr W argued this was unfair as it had been almost five years since the notices were served and he was having difficulty obtaining written confirmation from the council. The ombudsman found that Godiva's requirement for written confirmation was reasonable given that the notices affected the security of the mortgage and would be visible on the local land charges registry. The ombudsman noted that Mr W had not presented all available evidence to Godiva or requested it to review its decision, and encouraged him to do so directly with the lender.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while Godiva may have initially accepted Mr W's verbal reassurance in 2019, it was reasonable for Godiva to require written confirmation of compliance with the enforcement notices, particularly given that these notices would affect Godiva's security as the mortgage lender. The notices recorded serious council concerns and would be visible on the local land charges registry to future purchasers. The ombudsman noted that Godiva's requirement for written confirmation was a reasonable commercial decision and that Mr W had not presented all available evidence to Godiva or requested it to review its decision based on the evidence he had gathered. The ombudsman also found it unclear whether the change in the property's status from HMO to single dwelling would automatically render the notices irrelevant, and noted that Mr W had not made a formal application to revoke or vary the notices.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Godiva Mortgages Limited, all decisions | 34 | 0% |
| Mortgage administration / arrears handling, all decisions | 13,247 | 19% |
| Mortgage, all decisions | 24,695 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website