# Should we have told the bank not to contact us by home visits or telephone calls?



## Ireland.1 (5 Sep 2012)

Hello, 

My mortgage provider wants to do business by telephone rather than the written word.

I wrote to them last week asking them very nicely that we would prefer to receive updates on the status of our mortgage by post. 

We are experiencing financial problems and would prefer to deal with the bank this way.  We have also asked them not to call to the property.  

We've been since told that maybe we were a bit out of order by asking them not to contact us verbally.  We are a bit worried now and concerned that this may backfire on us.


----------



## Mrs Vimes (5 Sep 2012)

I can't see how they could hold it against you that you have requested all communications to be in writing - many people are just not good on the phone - can't take proper notes, easily pushed into agreeing payments they can't afford, etc.

Just stay polite and if they call again say "We have asked not to be called as we need to take time to digest what you are saying, please drop us a line."

Someone else might know whether this is covered in the MARP code of conduct.


----------



## Bronte (6 Sep 2012)

Ireland.1 said:


> . We've been since told that maybe we were a bit out of order by asking them not to contact us verbally. We are a bit worried now and concerned that this may backfire on us.


 
No -  you were in no way out of order, the bank official who told you this is out of order, you have categorically stated in writing that they are only to correspond with you in writing.  That official's job is to bully you, to pressurise you, to get you to do what they want, but never will they put it in writing.  What the game is this person wants you to agree to something, and when you do then they'll put it in writign, but they'll word it so it looks like you asked for it.  And then you'll have no comeback.  

They need to tell you in writing what they want.  Basically they want you to pay everything to them and live on a dole amount.  Stand your ground.   

If you post further on your dealings with them and your financial issues you may get some further advice.  

If is not an easy thing to go cap in hand to a bank when under financial pressure.  But it is better to be open and honest and try and come to a mutually beneficial solution.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2012)

Why not go one step further and ask them not to communicate with you at all?  Tell them that you will repay the money at your convenience. 

Come on lads...be realistic.  The bank is entitled to contact the borrower by phone and personal visit.  This is set out in the Mortgage Arrears Code.  The borrower is not entitled to refuse to take calls or visits.

When I had a business and people owed me money, invoices and statements were fine for most of them. But for a few the only way to get payment was  through phone calls and personal visits.


----------



## Bronte (6 Sep 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Come on lads...be realistic. The bank is entitled to contact the borrower by phone and personal visit. This is set out in the Mortgage Arrears Code. The borrower is not entitled to refuse to take calls or visits.
> 
> .


 
So you are saying that an ordinary person can not refuse to correspond in writing only.  That doesn't make sense.  What is wrong with corresponding in writing, why should people in unequal circumstances agree to have a meeting.  We've heard stories on here of people going into banks to be surrounded and intimidated by a room full of bankers.  That cannot be right.  

We also had stories of credit card companies phoning people morning noon and night. 

Nobody said not to communicate. Only saying where a person feels under stress and would prefer to deal with companies in writing that they should be allowed to do so.


----------



## Ireland.1 (6 Sep 2012)

Thank you all for your feedback.  Its sobering to hear both views.   Neither myself or my husband are great at meetings or dealing with  bankers on telephones or for that matter being caught off guard at the  hall door.  We have made foolish commitments in the past that we could  not meet because we were rail-roaded into them.


----------



## Kerrigan (6 Sep 2012)

I am more than surprised by your post Brendan.  Do we want more cases like this 
We need to draw a line somewhere.

Bronte, you have hit the nail on the head.  Regarding rooms full of bankers you can also add bank security parked outside the door as the meeting with the bankers is in motion.  The average Joe Soap cannot compete. 

The OP is well within his/her rights.


----------



## demoivre (6 Sep 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Why not go one step further and ask them not to communicate with you at all?  Tell them that you will repay the money at your convenience.
> 
> Come on lads...be realistic.  The bank is entitled to contact the borrower by phone and personal visit.  This is set out in the Mortgage Arrears Code.  The borrower is not entitled to refuse to take calls or visits.



This is wrong.  The only people entitled to be on your property *without *your permission are the gardaí if they suspect you of a crime or a sheriff acting on behalf of a court order.




> When I had a business and people owed me money, invoices and statements  were fine for most of them. But for a few the only way to get payment  was  through phone calls and personal visits.



You had no entitlement whatsoever to be on someone's premises without their permission, even if they did owe you money. Since when did trespassing become legal?


----------



## Bronte (6 Sep 2012)

http://www.keepingyourhome.ie/mortgage_arrears_resolution.html.en

This is the first thing that came up when I googled Marp, and every second paragraphy refers to the bank corresponding in WRITING.  

This bit has me in stitches:

____________________
It requires lenders to handle all such cases sympathetically and positively, with the objective at all times of helping people to meet their mortgage obligations.
____________________

As far removed from the current actions of bankers as I can tell.  I know exactly what the bankers are doing when they call to people's homes as I have a relation who has had to deal with these 'lovely' people physically calling to their home as they check out everything in your house, what your kids are wearing, what car you drive, etc.  They may look nice, speak nice, seem kind, act on your side.  They are well trained.  They have one aim and that is to extract every cent off you while leaving you to live in fear and poverty.  For goodness sakes the banks have written the useless insolvency bill, and they hav suggested that people should hand over everything except a dole amount. 

I do not mean that people shouldn't pay back everything they can, but they shouldn't be forced to feel like a criminal, feel broken, driven to suicide etc.  

Demoivre I don't think a creditor calling to someone to pay up his invoices is the same thing.  That's just business.  One business to another.


----------



## dereko1969 (6 Sep 2012)

demoivre said:


> This is wrong. The only people entitled to be on your property *without *your permission are the gardaí if they suspect you of a crime or a sheriff acting on behalf of a court order.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Would you get over yourself! 

It's not like he was breaking in! Calling to someone's front door can in no way be viewed as trespassing.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2012)

Here is what the Mortgage Arrears Code Guide says



> Unless you have asked your lender to contact you or given them your permission to contact you in relation to your arrears situation, they are only allowed to contact you three times per month in relation to your mortgage payments (this limit applies to unsolicited or unasked for contacts). This includes contacts by* phone, by email, by text message, or by letter* but does not include missed calls.



So a lender is allowed to make three unsolicited phone calls a month. 

I don't see any reference to visits, but I am pretty sure that if a borrower is not taking calls or responding to letters, they are fully entitled to call on the borrower. 

They only make these calls when the borrower is not responding to other forms of communication. 

The issue of trespass is a red herring. If they call to your door and you decline to let them in, they can't barge their way in. They can't and they don't.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2012)

Bronte said:


> This bit has me in stitches:
> 
> ____________________
> It requires lenders to handle all such cases sympathetically and positively, with the objective at all times of helping people to meet their mortgage obligations.
> ...



Hi Bronte

Your sample is from people who are not having good experiences. Many people have successfully rescheduled their loans. Many people have had a sympathetic and postive experience with their banks. But they rarely call Joe to tell him about it.


----------



## bugler (6 Sep 2012)

Bronte said:


> This bit has me in stitches:
> 
> ____________________
> It requires lenders to handle all such cases sympathetically and positively, with the objective at all times of helping people to meet their mortgage obligations.
> ____________________



What you've quoted, from the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears, is a load of touchy-feely fluff. Why should banks have to be "positive" or "sympathetic"? 

Banks, and everyone else, should be professional and courteous, they  should not be aggressive and they should communicate politely. Sympathy  doesn't need to come into it - nor positivity.

It's no wonder the banking/mortgage crisis isn't being progressed toward  resolution one bit with the amount of state sponsored faffing going on. There seems to be far more thought dedicated to flowery language and sympathetic posturing then actually tackling the issues at hand.


----------



## Bronte (6 Sep 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Here is what the Mortgage Arrears Code Guide says
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
As I'm not good at quoting I wanted to copy this key word:

_______________

Unless

_______________

To me this means that if you've told them it's ok then they can of course talk to you by whatever method you agree to. 

In the failure of an agreement I would expect everything to be done in writing. I would not in any circumstance expect an uninvited personal call to my door by a bank official. Furthermore were I in the situation of the OP and I had categorically told the bank to only correspond in writing, then the bank should respect this Marp or no Marp. And that's only a code, not a law.  It is only proper professional conduct to correspond in writing.  Particuarly where one is stressed, feels pressurised by bank officials, feels intimidated and is designedly put in that position.  OP has not said she is not willing to engage, merely to be offered the courteousy of dealings in writing.  

Of course one on one meetings have their place.  I've recently negotiated face to face myself, but it's not for everyone and where a poster comes on here clearly in enough distress to have to post and have felt they cannot deal otherwise with the bank than in writing then I will give them every sympathy.  

My consistent advice to all people who deal with officia ldoom is to only do so in writing. Not just banks.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2012)

Hi Bronte

It's badly worded, but this is what it means

A lender can make three unsolicited contacts a month
It can obviously respond to contact from the borrower and they are not included.

If someone is paying their mortgage on schedule, there is no need for phone calls.
if someone is not paying their mortgage on schedule but responds to the notices of arrears, there is no need for phone calls.

A big problem for borrowers is that they are burying their head in the sand and not dealing with their problems. If a call from the lender or a visit helps them face up the issues, that is to be welcomed.

Brendan


----------



## elcato (6 Sep 2012)

I read this post a while back and didn't check since but the impression I got from the OP was that someone said in passing that they may have annoyed the bank, not  the actual bank themselves. 


> We've been since told that maybe we were a bit out of order by asking them not to contact us verbally.


Why has everyone decided that it was the bank that told them this ? 
BTW I agree fully with communicate in writing only and if you get caught out always state that you want anything said here in writing.


----------



## Bronte (7 Sep 2012)

If a borrower is engaging in writing and has requested correspondance only in writing then the bank should not make unsolicited phone calls. 

I would be very interested in OP outlining to us what the bank official said to her as outlined in the first post.  The bit about 'out of order'


----------



## bugler (7 Sep 2012)

Bronte said:


> I would be very interested in OP outlining to us what the bank official said to her as outlined in the first post.  The bit about 'out of order'



There is nothing yet to suggest it was a bank official who made that remark, or anything like it. That's a leap you have made yourself!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Sep 2012)

It is certainly not appropriate to tell your lender not to contact you by phone or by calling. They have a right to contact you to seek repayment of the money up to three times a month.

If someone in arrears avoids contact with their bank, they leave the bank with few options. The bank is much more likely to take a tougher line with them. The written correspondence you have asked for may well be a court notice.


----------



## Ireland.1 (7 Sep 2012)

Just to confirm that the comment was made in passing by a banker.  We knew at that point we had shot ourselves in the foot.  We simply thought negotiations would be best if they were in the written word so both parties could cross reference should there be a repossession order.  We are currently paying interest only.

As harsh as Brendan's posts sound these are the sentiments of the banks.  Its simply their way or the highway.


----------



## Bronte (7 Sep 2012)

bugler said:


> There is nothing yet to suggest it was a bank official who made that remark, or anything like it. That's a leap you have made yourself!


 
Fortunately or unfortunately I've been dealing with banks in one way or another all my life, starting with opening my mother's bank statement from my earliest memories as she was afraid to do so.  At that time as a women she would have been unusual enough in having a bank account.  So long before this bust I can smell what bankers say.  It appears easy on the ear but is far from it.  I've even had a senior bank manager in a main branch in one of the main cities lie straight to my face.


----------



## Peter54 (7 Sep 2012)

Banks have brought this state to the point of destruction.  Why should we believe anything these people tell us?  

The OP was 100% accurate in telling the bank to deal in writing.  How are they suppossed to proove they are negotiating if they have nothing in writing.  Its absurd to think otherwise.

I agree with Bronte.  I've had bankers lie to my face also.  In fact the biggest lie I've been told was I was not answering their calls when they phoned me.  They NEVER did phone me.  I've seen people's businesses being destroyed by lies told by banks.  Come on everybody if you think these guys are Saints you must be living on cloud cuckoo land.


----------



## elcato (7 Sep 2012)

> Just to confirm that the comment was made in passing by a banker


By a person you deal with in the bank ? By someone dealing with this specific request ? or a person who just happens to work in a bank ? Either way I would not worry about upsetting them.


----------



## demoivre (11 Sep 2012)

dereko1969 said:


> Would you get over yourself!
> 
> It's not like he was breaking in! Calling to someone's front door can in no way be viewed as trespassing.



It is if you have told that person not to come on to your property.


----------



## 44brendan (11 Sep 2012)

Generally if a client is communicating with their Bank in writing and there are no issues of concern or clarification required, the Bank will be happy to agree to this. There is no Bank policy of harassment or intimidation of mortgagors in difficulty. There can always be difficulties with certain individuals who do not abide by the general rules but Banks have a complaint process and any such complaints are taken seriously. In the majority of cases if a client has a preference for written communication only, that preference will be satisfactory, unless there is a communication breakdown.


----------



## dereko1969 (11 Sep 2012)

demoivre said:


> It is if you have told that person not to come on to your property.


 
What law allows you to claim that a person knocking at your front door is, ipso facto, trespassing?


----------



## Magpie (12 Sep 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The bank is entitled to contact the borrower by phone and personal visit.   The borrower is not entitled to refuse to take calls or visits.
> 
> .



The bank may be entitled to contact you by phone, however there is no legal obligation on anyone to ever answer that phone! A ring phone is an invitation, not a summons, and I don't have to speak to anyone on my phone if I don't wish to. 
Of course the borrower is entitled to refuse to take calls. Same with visits. I don't have to let anyone into my home if I don't wish to (other than specific legal exceptions).


----------



## Shuttleworth (8 Oct 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Here is what the Mortgage Arrears Code Guide says
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was going to start a new thread on this but probably it's best to keep it here.

A despicable practice has now arisen, of which I am one "victim" (for want of a better word!), where a letter arrives out of the blue accusing the borrower of not responding to "numerous attempts to contact you" and that an external "Debt Agent" will call within five working days to your home.  I received one of these last week.  I have arrears on my property but an arrangement in place since last June which is being kept and I haven't heard diddly squat from them since then.

For personal reasons my phone is on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, I check my email three times a day and check post daily.  When I immediately rang the Bank on Friday morning to ask what attempts had been made to contact me, the girl (with the obligatory faux-Friends American accent) told me that no notes were on the system indicating contact in recent months.

What I think is happening here needs urgent investigation - it is clear that false customer profiles are being built with a view to an unfavourable impression of a borrower ultimately being given in Court, i.e. that the Bank did everything they could to facilitate the borrower but the borrower refused to co-operate under MARP.

It's a disgusting practice and I'm so angry I'm thinking of going to the papers with it.

So to the OP - insist on ALL communications in writing and writing alone.


----------



## Kerrigan (8 Oct 2012)

Hi Shuttleworth, go to the PTSB section of this forum.  You may find more information there, that's assuming it is PTSB we are talking about?

These letters have been sent out to both investment and residential customers in arrears.  It seems they did not take into account people who had agreements in place.


----------



## Wishes (8 Oct 2012)

Shuttleworth said:


> I was going to start a new thread on this but probably it's best to keep it here.
> 
> A despicable practice has now arisen, of which I am one "victim" (for want of a better word!), where a letter arrives out of the blue accusing the borrower of not responding to "numerous attempts to contact you" and that an external "Debt Agent" will call within five working days to your home.  I received one of these last week.  I have arrears on my property but an arrangement in place since last June which is being kept and I haven't heard diddly squat from them since then.
> 
> ...



I agree with your post.  Banks have been telling lies since time began but in the past couple of weeks this seems to have accelerated.  

For the past 2 to 3 years, since I fell into arrears on my mortgage, I had to deal with them telling me I was not communicating with them.  This was a complete and other lie.  they said they were unable to contact me and I was not answering phones etc.  Absolute hogwash.

I wrote to them regularly, took on a second job and left myself short each month.  The frustration around this time was immense.  I am embarrassed to say at this point I felt like ending my life.

I decided not to let them win and wrote a  letter of complaint.  I have never complained about anything in my life, apart from the odd rant on here!  Since the complaint they have never spread lies or send me misleading letters again, all in hope of making their court case for repossession look better.

Make a letter of complaint.


----------



## Shuttleworth (8 Oct 2012)

Kerrigan said:


> Hi Shuttleworth, go to the PTSB section of this forum.  You may find more information there, that's assuming it is PTSB we are talking about?
> 
> These letters have been sent out to both investment and residential customers in arrears.  It seems they did not take into account people who had agreements in place.



No it's not PTSB actually, but thanks for the tip - I'll have a look over there.  Looks like all the banks need to get their IT systems overhauled - given all the "errors" being made.


----------



## BOOM2BUST (8 Oct 2012)

I experienced difficulties in requesting information on phone records that we had made to PTSB only to be told that there were no such records. We keep details of all correspondance in a diary and were truely shocked at some of the responses from PTSB. I am all for written correspondance seeing as banks cannot be trusted. They have told lies from the very first day they started business. They are the ultimate poker players never showing their hand. A bank is only as good as the peoples confidence in said bank and the tied is begining to turn with more people withdrawing their funds on a daily basis


----------



## mark12 (8 Oct 2012)

By the same token, can a taxpayer ring a state owned bank and ask for an update on the debt owed to the public? BOI and AIB and TSB together owe us 30 Billion, Anglo owes us 35 Billion, it would be nice to receive an explaination from time to time as well, can we call in as well?


----------



## Bronte (9 Oct 2012)

Shuttleworth said:


> it is clear that false customer profiles are being built with a view to an unfavourable impression of a borrower ultimately being given in Court, i.e. that the Bank did everything they could to facilitate the borrower but the borrower refused to co-operate under MARP.
> 
> .


 
I'd say your bang on the money there Shuttleworth, but you wasted your time telephoning last week.  Instead write them a letter back stating what you've just written about being contactable and asking them to document what actual efforts they made to contact you.


----------



## Shuttleworth (9 Oct 2012)

Wishes said:


> I agree with your post.  Banks have been telling lies since time began but in the past couple of weeks this seems to have accelerated.
> 
> For the past 2 to 3 years, since I fell into arrears on my mortgage, I had to deal with them telling me I was not communicating with them.  This was a complete and other lie.  they said they were unable to contact me and I was not answering phones etc.  Absolute hogwash.
> 
> ...



Thank you...



Bronte said:


> I'd say your bang on the money there Shuttleworth, but you wasted your time telephoning last week.  Instead write them a letter back stating what you've just written about being contactable and asking them to document what actual efforts they made to contact you.



And thank you.

I wrote a stinging letter stating blatantly what I thought they were at.  I'll report back when (and if) I get a response.


----------



## pc7 (9 Oct 2012)

Tell them they can ring you but all calls will be recorded. I had a family member with an agreement arranged with the bank to make repayments. The bank rang and were saying 'its not enough' even though there was a written agreement, the bank staff member was quite agressive and rude and for over 5 minutes kept saying 'its not enough' to everything my family member said. That was until they told them they'd been recording the phone call and were going to the Financial Ombudsman, funnily enough the tone of the conversation changed extremely quickly and it was suddenly enough. 
Cover yourself, record the phone calls and take note of date/time and what was discussed.


----------



## Wishes (2 Nov 2012)

I've been getting the odd call from an unknown number that would ring for a few seconds and then stop.  Each time I would miss it but today I was on the ball and caught it in time.  Low and behold it was one of my creditors.  Putting two and two together I am guessing that each time my phone rang they were registering this as a missed call so they could accuse me of not answering my phone.  If it wasn't so serious it would be hilarious.


----------

