Nedbank Deliberately Forcing a Home Loan Client Into Default?

<p>Or is this an example of *******ion in the public sector? More detailed info available on www.nedbankbullies.co.za. My husband originally posted this on his Hello Peter account, but Nedbank is demanding that I post it under my own name because the contract is in my name &ndash; how pathetic! If you are close to paying off your bond, it appears that you can become a target to be forced into default. This will mean that the bank can sell your home cheap as they set the reserve price according to the outstanding loan and not the property value. Friends of staff in the know and other insiders can then pick up desirable homes at rock bottom prices. The outstanding loan of the property in question is about 15% of market value, so the bank has NO risk. Since my husband&rsquo;s retirement, cash flow is tight. Occasionally I may be a few days late paying the entire monthly payment, but I always pay something. This is how they know we are financially stretched. Contrary to their public statements, appeals for indulgence and other assistance to financially distressed clients as they advertise publicly, has fallen on deaf ears. If I am just two days late in only a partial payment, the harassment starts.&nbsp; The account has never been in sufficiently in arrears where a court will allow repossession, but this does not stop the bank. They appear to have embarked upon a strategy to chase up costs as high as possible, presumably to force me into default for the reasons set out above. They have done this in three ways: 1. Frivolous legal action A few months ago, they issued summons when the account was just 15 days in arrears with only half a payment. No formal letter of demand was issued. Fortunately, the outstanding half was paid before the summons was served and, even though they tried, they could not hold me accountable for legal costs. 2. Forcing unnecessary expenditure on me Their next trick was to try and force me to obtain a Borehole Certificate and an Engineers certificate to certify that a relatively minor crack off a per-designed and engineer&rsquo;s approved expansion joint did not threaten the entire structure. Combined cost would be in excess of R25,000, money I do not have. When I refused, they sicced their lawyers on me; who threatened to apply to court for a &ldquo;Compliance Order&rdquo;. When challenged, they based their alleged right to demand these certificates on a clause in the loan contract that even a schoolboy can see did not confer upon them that right. We have Senior Council confirmation of this fact. They justified their ******** action on their &ldquo;right&rdquo; to &ldquo;protect their investment&rdquo;.&nbsp; It was pure bullying and ************ as just the property without the home is enough security to cover the outstanding loan more than twice over. 3. Increasing the Insurance Payment The biggest farce was threatening to go to court to force me to provide a copy of the insurance policy of the property. A farce because Nedbank is the insurance broker. We have since stupidly provided them with a copy, only for them to now falsely claim that the policy wording does not cover the thatch roof and demanding to increase the premium: from currently R 1,166.98 to R 3,823.81 &ndash; more than three times! They are refusing to provide a copy of the original insurance application, which they are by law required to keep, in spite of having been requested thereto - many times! We have demanded the contact details to discuss the matter in person and was provided details of a Regional Manager of Legal Collections and Retail, Relationship Banking. They also gave us his Tel No. should we &ldquo;wish to escalate this matter&rdquo;. I phoned him. He was pre-primed and prejudiced and refused to see us. &ldquo;Corporate arrogance in SA has become all too common&rdquo; read the headline to a Business Report Opinion. Nedbank was not mentioned in this article, but they should have. More detail on the website www.nedbankbullies.co.za. Quo Vadis?</p>