Loan Settlement

[danchip]

My mother in law had a loan through Satsuma loans, she contacted them in march to get a settlement figure which she was given and she paid it and closed the account.

She has been contacted by Satsuma today to say that her account is in arrears, when she explained that she had paid off the account and they told her that she was given the wrong settlement figure and she needed to pay an extra £19 to clear the arrears.

Is she liable for the £19?

[black_cat51]

did she get anything in writing?

[danchip]

she got a letter stating the settlement figure and she thinks she's had a letter saying the account has been paid in full

[RATTER15]

If she owes to them, yes, if she doesnt, no! We dont have all the details here to make that judgement.

If they made an error then she still owes them the money.

[Buenchico]

If they lender inadvertently quoted the wrong settlement figure then your MIL still owes the money but a bit of hassling (e.g. by suggesting that she'll contact Radio 4's 'Money Box' programme) might be enough to get the debt written off.

It could be worse though. The Woolwich Building Society managed to lose their record of my payment of around £35k, to pay my mortgage off, and subsequently tried to repossess my house!

[factor-fiction]

The answer is that it depends on the fine detail of how this situation arose.
What explanation have they given for the £19 still being owed.?
If the overall amount written off by the lender was in the hundreds (maybe thousands) of pounds then in the scheme of things another £19 may be worth paying (in return for an unequivocal statement that it is repaid in full) for peace of mind

[danchip]

the loan was due to finish this week, she paid it off in March so it was only £160 that they wrote off. The reason they are saying that the additional money is owing is that she requested a settlement figure which arrived on March 11th, she phoned to pay it on March 17th and was given a different settlement figure, the lady said that because it was still within 7 days of her receiving the original settlement figure they would stick with that one, the £19 is the difference between the 2 settlement figures

[factor-fiction]

Is she saying she would have rejected the higher figure and not settled if they had told her the higher figure at the time?
It also depends on what she was told when she was given the first offer - was she clearly told on 11 March it would be valid for 7 day? If so. I'd dispute the£19. if not I'd probably just pay up and be glad to have put it all behind me rather than get into a dispute over what may be a misunderstanding