Complaint upheldOfficial source – Financial Ombudsman

DRN8820419 – Arrears and legal fees; Ombudsman ordered £300 of charges reversed

What happened: A complaint about the level of arrears and legal fees added to a mortgage account administered by Rooftop Mortgages Limited. Rooftop had already removed £230 of fees. The adjudicator recommended a further £250 be removed. The Ombudsman identified one additional monthly arrears management fee of £50, applied in July 2010, and ordered a total of £300 of charges to be reversed.

What the Ombudsman decided: Complaint upheld. Rooftop Mortgages Limited ordered to reverse £300 of charges, in addition to the £230 it had already removed.

The published decision records that the complaint was upheld.

What mattered to the Ombudsman

  • Whether the full contractual monthly payment had been made in the month a fee was applied
  • That a fee applied the day after the contractual payment was made could not stand
  • That the business had already removed £230 before the decision

These are the factors this particular decision treated as important. Ombudsman decisions are not precedent and another case can turn out differently.

What this does not prove

It does not establish that arrears fees are unfair in general. The decision expressly accepts that a lender may apply a fee in a month where no payment, or a reduced payment, was made.

Source details
Source type
Financial Ombudsman Service decision
Source
Financial Ombudsman Service, final decision DRN8820419 (Ombudsman: Suzannah Stuart)
Date
3 December 2013
Reference
DRN8820419
Mortgage type
Unknown
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Organisations
Rooftop Mortgages Limited
Source quality
Official source
Last checked
2 September 2026
Added
2 September 2026

What happened

A complaint about the level of arrears and legal fees added to a mortgage account administered by Rooftop Mortgages Limited. Rooftop had already removed £230 of fees. The adjudicator recommended a further £250 be removed. The Ombudsman identified one additional monthly arrears management fee of £50, applied in July 2010, and ordered a total of £300 of charges to be reversed.

What the borrower complained about

The complainant said the arrears and legal fees added to her mortgage account were unfair and too high, and asked for most or all of the fees applied in relation to the arrears and court proceedings to be refunded.

What the Ombudsman decided

The Ombudsman recorded that this service takes the view that a lender is entitled to apply a fee when no payment, or a payment of less than the contractual monthly payment, is made, and that she could only require reversal of fees applied for the months where the full contractual payment was made. She found the £50 fee applied in July 2010 unfair, because the contractual payment due had been made the previous day.

Outcome

  • Complaint upheld. Rooftop Mortgages Limited ordered to reverse £300 of charges, in addition to the £230 it had already removed.
  • Reversal of £300 of arrears and related charges, itemised in a schedule to the decision.
  • Amount stated: £300 ordered reversed (£230 already removed by the business)

Charges recorded in this source

Charge typeAmount statedOutcomeInterest recalculated
Monthly arrears management fee (Apr 2009)£37.50Ordered reversedNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (May 2009)£37.50Ordered reversedNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (Jun 2009)£25.00Ordered reversedNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (Jul 2009)£50.00Ordered reversedNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (Oct 2009)£50.00Ordered reversedNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (Jul 2010)£50.00Ordered reversed; contractual payment had been made the previous dayNot stated
Monthly arrears management fee (Jan 2012)£50.00Ordered reversedNot stated

Key extracts

I can only require it to reverse the fees applied to Miss R's account for the months where she made the full contractual payment due.

Ombudsman, final decision DRN8820419

Why this record may be relevant

This decision concerns arrears management fees applied in months where the contractual payment was made.

Source

Financial Ombudsman Service, final decision DRN8820419 (Ombudsman: Suzannah Stuart)

View original source

The date shown is the date stated in the published decision by which the consumer was required to accept or reject it.

If you believe this record is inaccurate or incomplete, see corrections and right of reply.