Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Lenvi Servicing Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6076106 of 2026-01-22T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against Lenvi Servicing Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6076106 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-01-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Lenvi Servicing Limited |
| Product | Mortgage |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Lenvi Servicing Limited directed to pay: (1) £238.40 for one month additional SVR interest (15 January 2025) plus 8% annual interest; (2) £238.40 for one month additional SVR interest (15 February 2025) plus 8% annual interest; (3) £250 compensation for increased mortgage offer interest; (4) reimbursement of February 2025 valuation costs plus 8% annual interest from date of payment; (5) £300 contribution to additional solicitors' costs (£250 plus VAT); (6) £450 compensation for distress and inconvenience. Lenvi may deduct income tax from interest elements and must provide tax deduction certificate. |
Summary
Mr D complained that Lenvi Servicing Limited, administrator of his Help to Buy shared equity loan, caused unreasonable delays in issuing a deed of postponement needed to remortgage his first charge mortgage. The process took from August 2024 to March 2025, during which Mr D's valuation and mortgage offer expired, requiring costly renewals and resulting in a higher interest rate on his replacement mortgage. While the ombudsman found the initial August draft deed was incomplete and some delays were caused by B's changing requirements and solicitors' errors, Lenvi was held responsible for delay between mid-January and mid-March 2025 due to poor communication and slow responsiveness. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and ordered Lenvi to pay compensation for two months additional SVR interest, increased mortgage interest, valuation costs, solicitors' costs contribution, and £450 for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while the August draft deed was incomplete and could not have proceeded, Lenvi was responsible for delay between mid-January and mid-March 2025. Although B's changing requirements and solicitors' formatting errors contributed to some delays, Lenvi could have communicated more responsively. If Lenvi had communicated the changed requirements promptly in late October, Mr D could have applied for a new mortgage offer in November rather than December/January, avoiding the need for a second valuation and reducing the impact of the higher interest rate. The ombudsman held Lenvi responsible for approximately two months of delay and the cascading costs that resulted.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Lenvi Servicing Limited, all decisions | 28 | 48% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 32,767 | 33% |
| Mortgage, all decisions | 24,740 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website