Upheld: Mortgage administration / arrears handling complaint against Lenvi Servicing Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5975994 of 2025-11-25T00:00:00+00:00. Mortgage administration / arrears handling complaint against Lenvi Servicing Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5975994 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2025-11-25T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Lenvi Servicing Limited |
| Product | Mortgage |
| Claim type | Mortgage administration / arrears handling |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Lenvi Servicing Limited is directed to: (1) Start a new redemption process for Miss D and Mr M's loan; (2) If a second valuation is required, arrange and pay for it at no cost to Miss D and Mr M; (3) If the redemption sum based on a new valuation is higher than it would have been based on the 2024 valuation, Lenvi must pay the difference so that Miss D and Mr M are not charged more to redeem than they would have been based on the 2024 valuation; (4) Pay Miss D and Mr M £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused. |
Summary
Miss D and Mr M obtained a help to buy shared equity loan in November 2016 and sought to redeem it in 2024. They appointed an approved surveyor who valued the property at £275,000 in July 2024, accounting for cladding issues and confirming leaseholders' non-liability for remediation costs per a tribunal decision. Lenvi rejected the valuation in December 2024, citing concerns about the valuation being too low compared to comparable properties, and offered alternative options that the complainants rejected. The ombudsman found that the loan agreement terms made the valuer's decision final and binding with no provision for challenge, and that the valuation complied with the lender's guidance. Lenvi, as a regulated debt administrator, was obligated to act fairly and allow redemption based on the final valuation. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and directed Lenvi to restart the redemption process, arrange any necessary new valuation at its own cost, and pay £350 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the loan agreement terms explicitly state the valuer's decision 'shall be final' with no provision for challenging or disagreeing with a valuation carried out by an agreed properly instructed valuer. The surveyor was properly approved by Lenvi and the valuation was carried out in accordance with the lender's guidance notes, including proper investigation of cladding remediation liability. As a regulated debt administrator, Lenvi had an obligation to act fairly and reasonably in performing the lender's duties, which included allowing redemption based on a final and binding valuation. The ombudsman clarified that it was not making a finding on the appropriate property value but rather whether the valuation met the contractual requirements and should be treated as final and binding. Lenvi's disagreement with the valuation was insufficient grounds to reject it. Additionally, Lenvi took months to communicate the rejection to the complainants, which was unreasonable even if rejection had been justified.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Lenvi Servicing Limited, all decisions | 28 | 48% |
| Mortgage administration / arrears handling, all decisions | 13,042 | 19% |
| Mortgage, all decisions | 24,740 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website