Not upheld: Debt collection practices complaint against Topaz Finance Limited trading as Melanite Mortgages

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained that Melanite Mortgages unfairly threatened legal action to recover an outstanding interest-only mortgage balance that remained unpaid after the mortgage term ended in January 2024. Mr A had been attempting to repay the debt through a property sale, but the sale became unable to proceed in October 2025 due to a title restriction related to divorce proceedings. Melanite requested evidence of court proceedings and timescales for resolution, threatening legal action if not provided by 12 November 2025. The ombudsman found the threat was not unfair given the time elapsed and changed circumstances, though recommended Melanite consider Mr A's particular circumstances when deciding next steps.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged Mr A's frustration but found that Melanite acted fairly in requesting evidence and timescales after nearly two years had passed since the mortgage ended and the sale became unlikely to proceed. While sympathetic to Mr A's circumstances, the ombudsman determined that Melanite was entitled to be transparent about potential recovery action and that Mr A should have been more proactively engaging with regular updates. The ombudsman noted that although the threat itself was not unfair, Melanite should take account of Mr A's particular circumstances and the title restriction issue when deciding next steps.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website