Partially upheld: mortgage administration failure, failure to respond to correspondence, delay in establishing third-party authority complaint against Topaz Finance Limited trading as Rosinca Mortgages

Decision detail

Summary

Ms G complained about her buy-to-let mortgage with Rosinca Mortgages, raising issues including alleged property overvaluation in 2007, failure to respond to correspondence, mortgage prisoner status, and an unwanted field agent visit. The Ombudsman found jurisdiction limited by time restrictions, preventing consideration of the valuation complaint. Of the remaining issues, the Ombudsman upheld the complaint regarding Rosinca's failure to respond to letters and delay in setting up third-party authority, ordering £150 compensation. The mortgage prisoner complaint was rejected as the property is an unregulated investment mortgage with no contractual barriers to exit, and the field agent visit was appropriately appointed as Ms G did not clearly request its cancellation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Ombudsman found that Rosinca made administrative errors in failing to respond to letters and delaying the setup of third-party authority once proper documentation was received in October 2025. However, the Ombudsman determined that Ms G did not clearly request cancellation of the field agent visit, and Mr F lacked authority to make such a request at the time. The mortgage prisoner complaint was rejected as this is an unregulated investment property mortgage with no contractual barriers to exit, and external factors (service charges, property value decline) cannot fairly be attributed to Rosinca. The valuation complaint could not be considered due to jurisdictional time limits.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website