Washed Up

Irish playwright, journalist and co-founder of the London school of Economics, George Bernard Shaw once said, “Cruelty must be whitewashed by moral excuse and pretence of reluctance” and unsurprisingly my experience in the ineffectual hands of the Financial Ombudsman Service has amounted to nothing less.

Established in 2001 by parliament, the Financial Ombudsman Service is supposed to be an impartial and independent body which settles disputes between consumers and UK based businesses providing financial services. We are encouraged to believe the law requires the ombudsman to take into account relevant law and regulations, regulator's rules, guidance and standards, codes of practice, and (where appropriate) what he/she considers to have been good industry practice at the relevant time, in order to make decisions which are fair and reasonable. From a current case load of over 500,000 each year (a level which has swelled its ranks by four fold since the onset of the banking crisis in 2008), it is estimated the FOS rule in favour of the complainant in approximately 49% of cases.

I am not one of the lucky ones.

As a result of my appeal to have my case against HBOS reviewed by an ombudsman, my FOS Final Response has not only dismissed the majority of my case as immaterial and irrelevant but my ombudsman states she has “difficulty in accepting” my claim that either HBOS or their mortgage broker acted fraudulently in order to secure my mortgage business.

I am told she, like my adjudicator, is;

“Not required to respond at ... length or to respond to each and every point raised” but instead has “considered the case in the light of the lending climate at the time [having] noted that the bank has said it will not be pursuing Mr and Mrs [Life after Debt] for the shortfall debt" (a statement which is completely untrue).

Despite the basis of my complaint being that my mortgage application was submitted on line by a broker I never met using an application form I never saw and information I did not supply, I am further advised;

• “ The bank could not have been expected to know the information about the purchase price and date was untrue”
• “The [brokers signature] on the application form [and the photo copied passports] confirms there was a face to face meeting”
•  “The factual inaccuracies in the application...were signed as being true”

What is more she has also informed me, with complete disregard for my protestations that her findings are based on false assumptions and not the evidence, the FOS will be publishing her travesty of a ruling on my case on their website.

Former Chief Ombudsman Walter Merricks once said, “The FOS is an unusual creature. One I would suggest parliament would not have dared to create had the ground work not been laid by a series of voluntary initiatives. It is a one sided scheme offering an unlevel playing field broadly supported by those playing up hill...We do not have to pretend to find what the law is. We unashamedly make new law”.

After six whole years engaged in battle with HBOS which now includes a shambolic, whitewashed FOS investigation into my case of complaint, I have now been thrown straight back into the lawless clutches of one the most infamous banks and their debt collectors.

I find this not only to be immensely cruel, but also wholly immoral and completely unjust.

Astonishments

Yorkshire born Canadian serviceman Harry Banks and reputedly “the crucified soldier” of the First World War once said, "If at first you don't succeed-try to hide your astonishment" and although the events of recent weeks have provided me countless opportunities to follow this advice, hiding my astonishment has been nothing short of impossible.

• I have been astonished to discover my now severely disabled eighty seven year old mother has been required to stay in hospital for two whole weeks as a result of the mismanaged administration of her medication and a shortage of mobility assessment appointments with the community physiotherapist.

• I have been astonished to discover my Incapacity Benefit assessment is subject to an appointment system which not only allows operators to cancel my designated time slot after I have already left home but then puts my benefit in jeopardy if I am unable to attend on a computer generated date which is allocated without consultation.                                                                    

And once again facing homelessness as a result of an unreasonable and violent landlord,

• I have been astonished to discover our neighbours not only own an additional house in which my family and I can be accommodated but, having had five years to observe us care for our current home, would (as of 1 December) like us to become their tenants in a very attractive property in a neighboring village.

However, despite feeling exceptionally relieved to find I no longer face the prospect of  being without a roof over our heads for Christmas, I remain astonished to find ,

• Eleven months have passed since I initiated my second attempt at lodging a complaint against HBOS with the Financial Ombudsman Service,

• Nine months have passed since I originally requested all records held by HBOS pertaining to my mortgage be sent to me via my Data Subject Access Request

• Fourteen weeks have passed since my FOS adjudicator declined to answer my emails for a period of almost three months,

• One month has passed since I reported said adjudicator to his line manager and

• Two weeks have passed since I placed an official complaint with the ICO as the result of HBOS’ non compliance in respect of my Data Subject Access Request.

I am further astonished and nothing short of astounded to learn that, without warning and ahead of the timescales previously agreed by the FOS themselves (and in the absence of the further evidence I have been waiting for the above mentioned nine long months for HBOS to produce) the FOS have now reviewed my mortgage miss selling case and, in the interests of "being fair" to HBOS, have ruled there is insufficient evidence to support my claim that HBOS have been guilty of miss selling my mortgage! 

Famed for his ridicule of the most banal of situations for European based Theatre of the Absurd in the late 1950's, contemporary Romanian playwright Eugene Ionesco once said is it "explanation [which] separates us from astonishment". However, still reeling from both shock and astonishment at the way in which I continue to be dealt with by both HBOS and the Financial Ombudsman Service, it is "explanation" which now separates me in unadulterated astonishment from any understanding of a regulatory culture which prefers to permit the infamous HBOS to with hold evidence and use repeated delays to obliterate my case of complaint rather than take the time to investigate!  

Fines and Punishment

Psychiatrist, social critic of moral and scientific foundations of psychiatry, author and academic, Thomas Szasz, once said, “Punishment is now unfashionable...[instead] we prefer a meaningless collective guilt to meaningful individual responsibility” and little illustrates this more effectively than the regulatory approach to the fraudulent actions of the banks.

Over the past three decades, a fraternity of banksters have systematically condoned, endorsed and turned a blind eye to illegal activities which have made them multi-millionaires but, to date, not one of them has personally paid their dues for crimes which include;

•  Money laundering for drug cartels
•  Money laundering for terrorists
•  Mortgage fraud when initiating loans
•  Repackaging toxic loans and selling them as low risk investments
•  Betting against these investments to make themselves money
•  Engaging in insider trading and market manipulation
•  Misrepresenting their losses and their loan books
•  Miss selling vast numbers of financial products
• Rigging Libor ratings

As a result of their actions, a culture of criminality has permeated the core of what was once a service industry and when the consequences of banking avarice rendered too big to fail institutions insolvent, the UK was faced with the prospect of economic collapse and public anarchy or picking up the pieces with tax payers money.

Told we had no reasonable alternative but elect the latter we,

• Committed to spending up to 1.162 trillion pounds on bailing out the banks,
• Allocated 10 billion pounds to banking reform,

And,

• Were promised those responsible would be taken to task

As a result of investigations into the skulduggery of the banking crisis both the UK and the US regulators have levied the following fines;

      HSBC (2012). Fine: £1.1 billion. Reason: Money laundering

      JP Morgan (2013). Fine: £572 million. Reason: 'London Whale' trading scandal 
      

     UBS (2009). Fine: £485 million. Reason: Tax evasion

     Standard Chartered (2012). Fine: £415 million. Reason: Anti-sanctions

       ING (2012). Fine: £385 million. Reason: Anti-sanctions

       Goldman Sachs (2010). Fine: £359 million. Reason: Misleading investors

        Credit Suisse (2009). Fine: £333 million. Reason: Anti-sanctions

        ABN Amro (2010). Fine: £311 million. Reason: Anti-sanctions

        Barclays (2010). Fine: £280 million. Reason: Libor manipulation

        Lloyds Bank (2009). Fine: £218 million. Reason: Anti-sanctions

But opting for a meaningless collective punishment funded wholly from banking profits and not the pockets of perpetrators has done nothing to arrest the greed which has driven us to a banking crisis and has instead allowed those responsible to;

• Keep their jobs
• Keep their ill gotten gains
• Avoid prosecution
•  Enlist George Osborne to fight the EU bonus caps in court.

And this year,

• Share a bonus pool of nearly £4 billion which amounts to a shade less than all the larger fines of the US and UK banks put together and gives the recipients an estimated 82.2% rise on the bonus pool  of last year.

In complete contrast to the collective luck of the UK’s banksters, over the past five years,

•  3.7 million UK jobs have been lost
•  35,000 to 50,000 people in the UK have lost their homes each and every year
•  Debt fueled suicide has increased and in some areas has risen by as much as 64% 

And,

•  It has become all too evident that there is no incentive for either the Financial Ombudsman Service or Halifax Bank of Scotland (now disguised as Lloyds) to give my five year old mortgage "miss selling" complaint the attention it deserves.

Ancient Greek philosopher, author, teacher and polymath, Aristotle once said, “The generality of men are naturally apt to be swayed by fear than reverence, and they refrain from evil rather because of the punishment that it brings than because of its own foulness” but if the penchant for collective and meaningless punishment continues to leave those responsible for the banking crisis unaccountable for their crimes, then fear and foulness may well be all we, the victims of the banking crisis, can anticipate.

This is quite simply unjust.

Real Life Revisted

American writer EB White once said, “If the world were merely seductive that would be easy. If it were merely challenging that would be no problem. But I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy it. This makes it hard to plan the day” and, having returned refreshed from a very welcome family holiday to the demanding tasks of the real world, I fully understand White's sentiments.

Torn between getting back to blogging, revisiting my duties of domestic goddess and taking up my role of debt fighter extraordinaire or simply enjoying more time with my family I have,

·        Washed, dried and relocated nothing short of eight loads of washing

·        Unpacked four suitcases and distributed the contents to their rightful owners.

·        Opened and replied to ten pieces of correspondence as well as sent four birthday cards complete with presents.

·        Read, answered, deleted or blocked 340 emails lurking in my inbox.

And,

·        Taken my soon to be eighty six year old mother to the garden centre, assessed a leak in her roof, chosen an outfit for her to wear at a christening and ordered a mirror she has need of from the internet.

In addition I have,

·        Expressed my discontent to our external decorators, who, while we were away, saw fit to remove our tower scaffolding from where it was stored, assemble it at the front of the house and leave it there unattended for two weeks, to provide both aid to potential intruders as well as a tempting acquisition for a passing thief.

·        Told my landlord I did not take kindly to having his finger wagged at me in fury when informing him it was his tradesmen who had seen fit to appropriate equipment belonging to us without permission.

·        Advised my seventeen year old son it is not only unacceptable to allow his friends to take and damage the prized possessions of his eleven year old brother in our absence but it is nothing short of outrageous to believe he can use my Amazon account (and my card details) to fund his purchase of six computer games without asking me.

·        Confiscated my new tenant’s electric fire because he saw fit to leave it on unattended in temperatures of 25 degrees and insisted he remove the tortoise I found roaming, free range in his bedroom, using my cream fitted carpet as its litter tray.

·        Secured a very apologetic response from the Spanish legal administrators for our apartment’s community for the cyber bullying I endured at the hands of their volunteer community president.

And,

·        Ignored yet another letter from Lloyds Banking Group which, after enquiring yet again if I wish all future correspondence to be in Braille, insists I settle the balance forthwith and completely ignores the fact that the account remains the subject of an ongoing Financial Ombudsman’s Complaint.

EB White also says, “One of the most consuming things in life is to have an enemy” and while I am determined not to let family life be consumed by my ongoing battle with the banks, now that domestic, administrative and family obligations are suitably attended to, I am, at last, at liberty to dedicate some time to improving the world.

Lloyds Banking Group, along with the infamous Halifax Bank of Scotland who continue to hide amongst the sumptuous skirt's of LLoyds executive elite, remains firmly in my sights!

Fall Guys

Napoleon Bonaparte once said, “The people to fear are not those who disagree with you, but those who disagree with you and are too cowardly to let you know”.  After reading last week’s report that Swiss bank UBS have found someone to blame for their two billion dollar losses, along with many an article lamenting the government’s tepid support of banking reform, I cannot help but reflect on the impact the cowardly fears of the greedy have had on the current economic crisis both at home and abroad.  Feeling aggrieved that regulatory bodies and governments alike prefer to leave ethics and moral obligation out of their investigations, I can only conclude their cowardly consent to banking malfeasance is set to continue while the perpetrators remain unchecked.

Not wishing to follow suit or suffer at the hands of HBOS in silence while believing that disobedience is the rarest and most courageous of the virtues, I have decided not only to disagree with the Financial Ombudsman Service’s recommendation to accept their findings, but also to insist they reply to the many unanswered questions they saw fit to neglect within my original compliant.

Fully aware that it seems to be common practise amongst regulators to leave out more than they put in when it comes to contentious banking issues, I have asked the Financial Ombudsman to address the following simple questions,

·        Why did HBOS choose not to inform me, at outset, of the arrears on my mortgage?

·        Why did HBOS neglect to offer me any form of debt counselling in an effort to explore the merits of alternative solutions other than forcing a sale on my home?

·        Why did HBOS refuse to allow me to secure a three year tenant whose rent was more than enough to pay my mortgage interest plus regular and substantial sums towards the arrears?

·        Why did HBOS choose to force me to sell my home and create a massive unrecoverable shortfall as opposed to follow their own guidelines which state they must secure the best return possible for their shareholders?

I await the Ombudsman’s reply.

In addition, I am delighted to report that sending my “All I need is you letter” to Antonio Horta Osorio and the HBOS company secretary Harry Baines (at Ian Fraser’s suggestion) has at last secured me a meaningful, albeit incomplete reply.

 It appears HBOS’s Mortgage Recoveries Team leader plans a full investigation into their appointed solicitor, Merrils Ede’s handling of my case.  Having been greatly relieved on receipt of the Ombudsman’s news that Merrils Ede are to be removed from my case, it didn’t occur to me that Merrils Ede might actually be the subject of an investigation themselves.  Remembering all too clearly the two years of verbal assaults I have endured at the hands of Merrils Ede’s resident Rottweiler, I cannot help but raise a smile as write these words.

So, with many things in hand but still awaiting the replies, I am all the more determined not to let regret for the past and fear of the future steal my life. To this end I am embarking on a number of  more domestic issues for next few days as I wait hopefully, but not very patiently, for some resolution on the debt fighting front.

This week I plan to,

·        Write “Friends of the school” letters of welcome to all parents letting them know of our numerous forthcoming fundraising events.

·        Escort my daughter, her two overseas school friends who board, and my mother to a local fashion show.

·        Take delivery of a kindly donated and much needed garden shed

And

·        Battle with our insurance company because we have no independent witnesses to the fact that we were stationary when another vehicle piled into the front of our car.

Hoping that my ongoing trials and tribulations at the hands of HBOS have not prevented me from learning more from looking for life’s answers rather than finding the answer itself, it has amused me to read that “democracy is the process by which people choose the man who’ll get the blame”. While, for the moment, my personal concerns rest with whether or not our insurance company will accept we are not to blame for the damage to our car, I cannot help but wonder who really believes, in the case of the UBS fraud or the HBOS Reading scandal that these examples of gross misconduct are truly the responsibility of a few misguided individuals rather than a greedy but cowardly corporate banking initiative.

Stamp of disapproval

In 1928 Josiah Charles Stamp, former President of the Bank of England said,“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. If you want to continue to be slaves of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit. “It seems to me, not only have Stamp’s observations gone unheeded for nearly a century but the enslavement he talks of has been globally embraced while governments have merely stood by and applauded. 

After reading Ian Fraser’s recent blogs along with Barry Ritholt’s article in the Big Picture which begins, “The US banking sector is not healthy” I can imagine Josiah Stamp saying, “Tell me something I don’t know.” Ritholt tells us the US government failed to “repair what ailed our financial institutions.  Indeed, pouring billions into nearly identical management teams that mismanaged the risk, over-leveraged exposure, and drove banks off the cliff in the first place was an invitation for another crisis” and as far I can see our own government has done no different.

While contemplating my response to the Financial Ombudsman's service and the implications of their HBOS eighteen month respite offer, I am left wondering how ongoing banking mismanagement will impact on my future if  I capitulate with regard to my belief the shortfall I have acquired is not of my making and instead sign an agreement for the sake of some much needed and immediate peace and quiet.  Furthermore, I seems evident the chances of  a write off my mortgage shortfall on compassionate grounds are set to reduce while a “deny, deny, deny” culture persists and the true levels of flawed lending continue to prop up the balance sheets to provide lucrative asset reaping bonuses for those who are eliglible?

HBOS and Lloyds’ refusal to write off my unrecoverable debt from their lending book only provides further evidence the smoke and mirrors culture within banking is alive, well and perpetuating the aforementioned sleight of hand which has led to economic enslavement. I cannot help but feel this leaves me a lifetime of enslavement to HBOS’s harassment to look forward to over a mortgage shortfall they chose to create and one I have no hope of ever being able to repay.

Josiah Charles Stamp also said, “It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities” and as I continue to wait  for Antonio Horta Osorio’s reply to my letter and ponder my response to the Financial Ombudsman’s Service, I wonder if anyone at HBOS and Lloyds are even aware of the 1st Baron Stamp or his words.

The Others

Knowing much of human life is lost in waiting, I appreciate I must not be tempted to rest on my laurels in anticipation of a response to yesterdays flurry of letter writing.  While day dreaming of exposing HBOS’s ongoing penchant for the persecution of the financially bereft I can only wonder at the sums the Lloyds Banking Group spend endeavouring to keep their public image sweet and promoting their wholesome “You first” and “For the journey” campaigns when in reality they appear to persecute their shortfall victims for sport. 

It appears the coffers are exceptionally well stocked when it comes to the HBOS and Lloyds TSB advertising budget. This a clear indicator of the extent to which their public image is of value to them. What's more, in recent years, the groups funding for advertising has substantially increased in an effort to protect, as well as enhance, their public profile and counterbalance the less than endearing headlines which have dogged them since the early days of the economic recession.  At a time when many businesses are being forced to tighten their belts and economic growth is made harder by increasingly stringent lending criteria, Lloyds TSB and HBOS “increased their advertising spend by “76% and 65% year on year respectively equating to a combined £82m,” spent on avertising according to More about Advertising’s March 2011 issue.

Regardless of exactly how many millions are spent on the marketing of this banking giant, it doesn’t surprise me in the slightest to hear that the Lloyds Banking Group are prepared to shell out huge sums of money on business promotion and public awareness in order to maintain their market share.  Nor does it surprise me to hear them being accused of being “happy to poor money down the drain with digital marketing”.

Nevertheless, what continues to amaze me is how one department of this huge corporate machine is rewarded exceptionally well to do the vital job of keeping the Lloyds and HBOS name squeaky clean and at the forefront of every potential consumers mind, while another department, belonging to the very same Lloyds and HBOS corporation, are paid equally well to ride roughshod over the victims of an irresponsible HBOS culture without compassion or integrity risking public disfavour;

·        By denying them the opportunity to save their houses from repossession.

·        By declaring these same individuals do not qualify for debt counselling or even arrears notification because they are married women.

·        By insisting, due to past experience, the reason they have not bothered toddress either of the above is because most people in debt do not wish to talk to their creditors.

Surely someone at HBOS or the Lloyds Banking Group understands it is irrelevant whether £82.00 or 82 million pounds is spent on promoting a positive corporate image because it is completely wasted if HBOS letters such sexist and inprofessional statements reach the public domain, regardless of how much Antonio Horta Osorio talks of resilience in a difficult market, slimmed down balance sheets and improved customer service in his press releases?

They say the wise understand themselves while fools follow the reports of “others”. Believing Antonio Horta Osorio to be nobody’s fool, I cannot imagine he will be either happy or humorous when he discovers his efforts are being undermined by the actions and reports of the HBOS “others”.

Busy Bees

Still hoping that success comes to those who are too busy to go looking for it, I have been occupying myself with a number of widely varied tasks.  In the last twenty four hours I have,

·        Accepted delivery of three grandchildren for an indeterminate  period of time while my grown up daughter trains for a new job

·        Prepared, served and cleared up four meals for six people to eat “al fresco” while providing endless towels for mid meal swims in our paddling pool and refereeing numerous disputes

·        Arranged transport for my sixteen year old son to a youth hostel that, it now transpires, is two hundred and fifty miles away

·        Argued with said sixteen year old, who, having gone for a sleep over at a friends house, has arrived and discovered he has taken no money with him

·        Answered a phone call from a Gok’s fashion fix researcher who, having got my details from a neighbour, wishes to offer me and two friends a makeover, only to find the majority of my friends are running for cover at the very thought.

And,

·       Sent yesterdays blog, “All I need is you” to Antonio Horta Osorio at Lloyds Banking Group, James Quinn business editor of the Telegraph and Sharlene Goff retail banking correspondent for the Financial Times along with Ian Fraser's article about Lloyds sins of the past.

Here’s hoping they are not too busy to read them.

All I need Is You

It has annoyed me intensely to be repeatedly accused of “using delaying tactics” and “ignoring a problem which is not just going to go away” by HBOS’s henchwoman at Merrils Ede Solicitors.  It is a statement which could not be further from the truth. I have never enjoyed a disposition which allows me “a head in the sand” approach to anything.  Nor do I have the patience for delaying tactics.

Despite my best endeavours over the past three years, my HBOS trouble's have not only remained unresolved but I have been aggressively pursued by their solicitors for a shortfall which arose from their fire sale of my home. Racking my brains for a solution which would allow me to move on with my life while despondently sifting through the numerous letters both written and received from HBOS, I have concluded it is probably time to write one more, This is because, in my heart of hearts, I know full well the toothless Financial Ombudsman Service will do one of three things, 

• Sidestep the issues I have outlined in my complaint, 
• With-hold their opinion a on a technicality or
• Wriggle out of making any meaningful judgeme 

However strong my argument against HBOS is, I can not see the Financial Ombudsman’s Service setting a precedent which would open another set of misselling flood gates hot on the tail of the recent PPI ruling and, without a face that fits or a high profile case currently in litigation (and supported by a lengthy list of fellow victims) I still believe I am extremely unlikely to be heard. It is for this reason I have decided to give writing to Antonio Horta Osorio chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group another shot. I am, after all, one of “his dead” and I have been waiting without patience to be brought out “from under the drain cover” for a very, very long time.

I strongly suspect Mr Horta Osorio, if made fully aware of my case might well agree that spending more taxpayer and investor money chasing people like myself (who have been left penniless as a result of the banking crisis) for mortgage shortfalls which have already been proven to be unrecoverable, is not good business practice. My problem is not what to write but how to get my message in front of him. 

My previous attempts have repeatedly failed.

However, in the unlikely event that Mr Horta-Osorio's inner circle might finally allow my message to reach him, this is what I would say,

Dear Mr Horta-Osorio,

In October 2008, having previously been kept completely in the dark by my husband and having had no contact with HBOS until this time, I was informed by Dryden’s (HBOS' solicitors) of their plan to repossess my home.  I immediately contacted HBOS to discuss my options and informed them I had secured a tenant who was willing to sign an assured shorthold lease and pay £2,200 a month to rent our property for a three year period. By the time the HBOS' possession order was due to take effect, this sum not only covered the mortgage but would have provided a substantial contribution towards paying off the arrears.  However, HBOS flatly refused to accept this solution when we found ourselves without an income (as a consequence of the banking crisis and our Icelandic business banks collapse) insisting my proposal was made too late for them to consider. 

In November 2008 HBOS to us to court, secured an order for possession which came into effect in January 2009 and completed a forced sale on my home in April 2009.
They were aware from outset neither my husband or I had the means with which to pay any shortfall arising from the discounted sale yet we are now being pursued aggressively for a shortfall which was not only of HBOS' making but for funds they know full well we do not possess.

Furthermore, HBOS’s actions escalated an arrears problem of £27,000 (which I could have been resolved by my proposal) into an unrecoverable mortgage shortfall of £217,000. Despite this, I am now being hounded for this shortfall by HBOS' appointed debt collection solicitors Merrils Ede.  Both HBOS and Merrils Ede have repeatedly been told by both myself and the Citizens Advice Bureau that my husband’s income of £15,000 plus assorted state benefits is simply insufficient to service any of the £1,000,000 unsecured debt we were left with when our property development business failed in 2008.

Following the receipt of our financial evidence from the CAB, the Bank of Scotland has already very kindly offered to write off my husband’s Bank of Scotland credit card (amounting to £15,000) on compassionate grounds, but your  mortgage collections department say that a shortfall of £217,000 can never be written off  whatever our circumstances.  I cannot understanding the thinking behind this let alone work out a solution for demands which are simply beyond our means.

Over the last two and a half years I have been persistently harassed by Merrils Ede Solicitors on HBOS’s instruction. I can only assume our file has proved a means of milking the HBOS cash cow because Merrells Ede, like HBOS, know full well there is no financial resolution I can offer them. Merrils Ede have repeatedly advised me of your plans to issue legal proceedings towards bankruptcy “without further notice” which I can only see as another illustration of how happy they are to recommend the unnecessary spending of HBOS money when both I and the CAB have made it crystal clear we have no capital wealth to offer and no income with which to make a payment arrangement.

On previous occasions I have,

·   Written to your predecessors to explain our circumstances asking for a compassionate write-off in the light of our financial demise.  It has been repeatedly denied.

·   Asked why HBOS did not contact me about our arrears, nor sought to offer me any debt counselling advice or even include me in any conversations at either the inception of our mortgage or later when arrears became a problem. I was told that people in debt rarely want to talk to their creditors and because I am a married woman, they assumed my husband dealt with our finances.

·   And, I have repeatedly asked myself why I was not allowed to save my home and our financial future by renting out our property but I struggle to understand the logic behind an HBOS decision that turned £27,000 of arrears into a shortfall of £217,000.

When you took up the helm at Lloyds banking group this year you famously commissioned your executives to “bring out your dead” asking them to leave no stone unturned.  A “sense of humour failure” was promised if, in twelve months time, more skeletons were found in the Lloyds and HBOS closets. However, I and my family remain one of your concealed dead, festering on an HBOS desk where I lie in a purgatory which has not only put my life on hold but consists of repeated and relentless financial persecution for money I simply do not have.  I have remained in this position for nearly three excruciating years while those at the Lloyds Banking Group move on with their lives. I desperately need the luck of the Irish buy to let borrowers or perhaps the vision of HBOS funded businessman David Murray in order to secure a mortgage shortfall write off and free my family from the continued bullying of HBOS debt collection agents.

On the other hand, if this letter does ever reach you, all I may need is you.

Yours sincerely

Life after Debt

End of terms

My husband never speaks of what he sees, does or feels but only of what he knows. While hovering patiently on the edge of every conversation he listens with intent, void of any expression waiting for a prompt on which to hang his factual download. On finding his mark he pounces with a carefully assembled nugget of information and in an instant, the conversational flow is altered and his audience scrabbles to politely cover the seams.

If asked he would say he is good at social interaction.

I find it both isolating and frustrating that conversing in any other way is alien to him. He continues to treat any question as an effrontery to his integrity leaving me to struggle to understand why how far the airport parking is from the terminal is as an insult simply because he does not know the answer, or why enquiring as to the delivery date of the roaming simcard he has ordered is so contentious.

If asked, he would say that is I who am unable to solicit information without antagonism.

However, it is not his inclination to anger I struggle with most but his frequent and extended periods of silence along with his refusal to engage with any warmth at any time. Last night, at our children’s end of term school concert, was no exception.

The hot and humid summers evening promised to turn the school hall into a sauna but the discomfort that lay ahead did not deter the number of proud parents who decided to attend. Throughout an hour and half of musical recitals I repeatedly turned to my husband to share a smile at the remarkable expertise of the young artists. Not once did he return my glance in acknowledgement let alone reveal a flicker of a smile in return. It is this way I am continually denied the opportunity to share any mutual enjoyment. 

If asked why he behaved in this way he would simply reply that it was not the case and merely my perception.

So, this morning, I sit alone at my kitchen table while my husband occupies another room. My task today is to prepare the papers to wind up our insolvent property development company. Heritable Bank's administrators have now sold all our company assets and thankfully plan to write off our £209,000 company mortgage shortfall. This leaves me at liberty to finally put an end to our company's trading days without creditor objection. While folding the paperwork I consider what is to become of my marriage when my HBOS battle, our last remaining adversary, eventually reaches its conclusion in however many more years to come.

I cannot help but wonder if my husband's retreat into his emotionally impervious shell might have been halted had it not been for the heartless and negligent actions of the HBOS.  Unlike Heritable Banks administrators, HBOS have been unable to show compassion at anytime. Perhaps, my husband's demeanor might have been very different if they had at least allowed us to salvage our home when the economic crisis  turned our property portfolio of 4.5m with equity of £1,200,000 into an overall shortfall of £500,000.

It is during these episodes of loneliness that I begin to doubt my ability to keep my marriage alive and our family together throughout more years of HBOS harassment.  It has become clear to me that if I am unable to save my relationship and our family life, HBOS will have succeeded in taking all that we ever had and all that we had  ever hoped for, and not just our money.