The Court of Appeal has ordered Woolwich plc to repay £2,800 to two of its borrowers after a dispute over the amount of interest due under a mortgage.
The decision follows a challenge by Isaac and Shoulamit Tuvyahu to a ruling by Judge Stephen Hockman QC in Central London County Court in January 1999, in which he dismissed their counterclaim for a refund of interest on amounts that they had paid in part redemption of their mortgage.
The couple have since paid off all amounts owing and the mortgage has been discharged.
Simeon Thrower, counsel for the borrowers, argued that the judge should have found that Woolwich was in breach of contract or negligent in failing to accept or credit the account with part redemption payments. He said that the appellants had been willing to pay off the mortgage but that Woolwich had never been able to provide a proper redemption figure.
Accepting those arguments and allowing the appeal, the court rejected the contention of Woolwich that it had provided figures on several occasions but that the borrowers had not accepted them. Thorpe LJ said that evidence of a conversation between a member of the bank’s staff and the borrowers, in which the staff member had admitted that Woolwich’s computer could not cope with substantial redemption payments, was devastating to the bank’s case.
He said that the borrowers were entitled to a refund in respect of overpayments of mortgage interest made during the periods when part-redemption capital lay in the hands of the bank.
Woolwich Building Society v Tuvyahu and another Court of Appeal (Thorpe and Mantell LJJ) 8 February 2000
Simeon Thrower (instructed by Rakisons) appeared for the appellants; Stephen Acton (instructed by Marsons, of Bromley) appeared for the respondent.
PLS News 8/2/2000
