The route from MAS5 to Topaz · 2023–2025

How independent is Topaz?

The move out of MAS5 was being planned while my mortgage complaint was still being decided. I want the Service to examine that plan alongside the Bank’s argument against continuing the interest-rate correction—and the account Topaz now enforces.

“Topaz has acted independently since becoming your lender in October 2025”

Topaz/Aspiro’s final response, 8 June 2026, p.2.

Topaz rejects my allegations of coordinated or dishonest conduct. I ask it to explain the arrangements, communications and decisions behind this chronology.

I maintain the position set out in my notice of 11 August 2025: I accepted the Bank’s repudiatory breach and treated the contract as terminated. I seek disclosure and correction of the records, not terms for continuing the contract. Nothing in this account affirms the contract or acknowledges any sum as owed.

Which decision and accounting evidence does Topaz rely on for its claimed right to enforce?

25 August 2023Investors are told of a plan to move legal title out of MAS5.

Western Mortgage Services is the intended new holder, subject to agreement and conditions.

16 December 2024Capita announces an agreed sale to Topaz.

The agreement covers the mortgage-servicing business assets, with staff and offices to transfer.

13 October 2025My mortgage is assigned to Topaz.

The transfer of the charge is registered on 11 November 2025.

When did Topaz enter the discussions—and what was the Ombudsman told while my complaint was still open?

The dates matter

The transfer plan and my complaint, side by side

  1. Investor disclosure

    A published plan to move legal title

    The Avon Finance No.3 prospectus says the interim legal title holders had notified the issuer that they “intend to transfer legal title to the loans to another provider”. It names Western Mortgage Services Limited, a Capita company already servicing the loans, as the intended new holder. Another provider could be selected if terms could not be agreed.

    The stated target was to act “as soon as reasonably practicable” and by 25 August 2024, or a later agreed date, subject to the specified conditions. The published plan was already in place more than a year before my final decision.

    Avon 3 prospectus, 25 August 2023, printed pp.12 and 206; E-SEC-08.

    Read the prospectus pages
    Avon 3 prospectus page 12: intended transfer of legal title to Western Mortgage Services or another providerAvon 3 prospectus page 206: transfer timetable, conditions and 25 August 2024 target date
  2. My correspondence

    MAS5 announces changes to administration and contact details

    MAS5 wrote to me about changes taking effect on 27 November 2023. A contact-details notice, also dated 26 October, gave its new correspondence address as PO Box 628, Darlington DL1 9FY. Its footer still gave the registered office in Manchester.

    Body of MAS5’s 26 October 2023 notice directing correspondence to Darlington from 27 November 2023
    Contact-details notice, Topaz Batch 8, p.76; related administration letter at pp.69–71.
  3. My FOS complaint

    Continuing rate relief is challenged

    On 16 November the investigator proposed continuing the 1.25-percentage-point correction going forward. That day MAS5 requested more time, referring to the lead decisions it had received on 6 November.

    MAS5 responded on 28 November. It argued that its decisions not to pass on all the Bank Rate rises in 2022 had “balanced out” the earlier unfair increases. This argument was being made while the published title-transfer plan was in place.

    My FOS file, pp.624–625; Final Decision, pp.3–4; E-FOS-18, pp.2–3. Set out together in my reconsideration Ground 10.

  4. My credit file

    MAS5 and Capita appear in same-day alerts

    Experian issued one alert for “MORTGAGE AGENCY SERVICES NO 5” and another for “CAPITA - COTX206”. Each says that the named firm “has added or removed a MORTGAGE account”. I kept this screenshot the next day.

    Experian screenshot showing mortgage-account addition or removal alerts for MAS5 and Capita, both dated 6 February 2024
    My screenshot: alerts dated 6 February 2024. The display says “added or removed” for both firms.

    What I saw was Capita going on and MAS5 coming off. The screenshot records the alerts; it leaves the reporting arrangements to be explained. Who submitted my account, in whose name and in what capacity? On 1 October 2025 I asked the Bank’s solicitors who changed the reporting entity and whether the ongoing FOS investigation was a factor. Their 28 April 2026 response did not answer those questions.

    Experian screenshot supplied by me; my 1 October 2025 correspondence and the Bank’s solicitors’ 28 April 2026 response, recorded in Ground 10. The notified legal-title assignment was in October 2025.

  5. My FOS complaint

    The proposed correction now stops in November 2022

    The investigator’s revised outcome ended the correction in November 2022. On the same day, he said the firm’s evidence about its rate-setting reasons had been accepted in confidence because it was commercially sensitive. I was not given that evidence.

    Which submissions changed the outcome, and what did they say about the group’s position, the planned transfer and responsibility for redress?

    E-FOS-18, pp.2–3; my FOS file, p.776. This was information supplied in my FOS investigation.

  6. Capita’s report

    Capita’s decision to exit mortgage services is public

    Capita’s half-year results, issued on 2 August 2024, said: “The Group intends to exit the Mortgage Services business”. That was six weeks before my final decision.

    Capita’s half-year results, issued 2 August 2024 →

  7. My final decision

    The November 2022 endpoint remains

    The decision relied in part on the rate charged by other lenders in the Co-operative Bank group and on a greater cost to the group when a MAS5 mortgage defaults. It said its reasoning concerned the position in 2022.

    My reconsideration asks the Service to establish the actual ownership, costs and liabilities behind those submissions—and explain how the transfer arrangements bear on putting my account right.

    Final Decision, pp.11–13 and 21–24; reconsideration Ground 10, with the rate-setting argument in Ground 5.

  8. My correspondence

    My letter to Manchester is refused

    I sent a tracked letter to MAS5’s registered office at 1 Balloon Street, Manchester. Royal Mail recorded that the recipient refused it and that it would be returned to me. Why was post to the registered office being refused while correspondence was being handled through Darlington?

    Royal Mail tracking record, 3 December 2024; my retained returned item.

  9. Topaz agreement announced

    Capita names Topaz as the buyer

    Capita announced agreed terms to sell Western Mortgage Services’ mortgage-servicing business assets to Topaz Finance Limited. It expected completion in the second quarter of 2025, subject to operational conditions. Staff and offices were to transfer with the business.

    The 2023 prospectus had named Western Mortgage Services as the intended title holder. This announcement names Topaz as buyer of its servicing business. I ask the firms to explain when the discussions with Topaz began and how the two arrangements connected.

    Read Capita’s 16 December 2024 announcement →

  10. The Bank’s public account

    The Bank says it does not hold the beneficial interest

    FTAdviser reported that the Bank held legal title and was transferring it to Topaz. The article also reported the Bank’s clarification that the transaction did not sell the beneficial ownership, because it “does not hold the beneficial interest to the MAS5 portfolio”.

    This matters to the account the Service accepted about the cost to the Co-operative Bank group when a MAS5 mortgage defaulted. The Bank’s own 2020 accounts had already described beneficial ownership as belonging to the Avon entities.

    FTAdviser, 6 June 2025 → · The Co-operative Bank’s 2020 Annual Report, printed pp.173 and 210; current Ground 10.

  11. My mortgage transfer

    Topaz becomes the legal title holder

    MAS5’s 2 October letter described a planned transfer. Aspiro’s welcome letter confirmed assignment on 13 October and said it was now responsible for setting and varying the rate. The transfer of the charge was registered on 11 November.

    Topaz subsequently said it had not assumed liability for MAS5’s past acts or omissions. It now relies on the account and records produced during that past. I say the history and the current demand must be examined together. The Bank’s own account of beneficial ownership makes that question more pressing.

    MAS5 letter, 2 October 2025 (E-CON-17); Aspiro welcome letter, 14 October (E-TOP-01); Topaz letter, 2 December, pp.2–3 (E-TOP-03).

The ownership behind the rate argument

Whose mortgage—and whose cost?

My Final Decision · September 2024

A greater cost to the group

“there is a greater cost to the group when a MAS5 mortgage defaults”

The decision relied on that proposition when assessing the rate and ending the 1.25-point correction in November 2022.

Final Decision, p.12; the response concerning the position in 2022 is at p.21.

The Bank’s own accounts · 2020

Beneficially owned by Avon

“The Group continues to hold the legal title of the mortgages beneficially owned by the Avon entities on a commercial basis”

The Bank described a paid legal-title role after Warwick One and Two were refinanced into Avon. That account predates 2022.

2020 Annual Report, printed p.173 → · Full report

I say the group-cost reasoning cannot stand without reconciling these accounts. Which company in the group bore which default-related cost in 2022, and under what arrangement? The firms must identify the actual exposure, and explain how it justified the rate charged to me. A fee for holding legal title, the investor’s mortgage risk and a liability to correct earlier overcharging are different things.

By the time MAS5 was arguing my case in 2024, it had itself told the issuer, as the 2023 prospectus records, that it intended to transfer legal title. In 2025 the Bank publicly explained that it did not hold the beneficial interest anyway. The Service needs the ownership and liability records behind the argument, and the Bank’s dated explanation of them.

Selected ownership provisions: Avon 1 in 2020 and Avon 3 in 2023
The issueAvon 1 · 2020Avon 3 · 2023
The economic interestThe equitable or beneficial interest is sold to the issuer by Isle of Wight Home Loans, following its purchase from Warwick 2. Printed p.iv.The prospectus records the route through Avon 1 in 2020 and the onward transaction into Avon 3. Printed p.v; current Ground 10, section 1(a).
The notes and retained riskThe notes and certificates are the issuer’s obligations alone. Barclays is the named retention holder. Printed p.vi.The same separation appears: the notes are the issuer’s obligations alone, with Barclays as the named retention holder. Printed p.vii.
Holding legal titleThe title holders are paid a fee for holding title on trust for the issuer. Printed p.110.MAS5, MAS4 and Platform are described as interim title holders, with an express plan and timetable to transfer the title to Western Mortgage Services or another provider. Printed pp.12, 150 and 206.
Read the Avon 1 source pages
Avon 1 prospectus page iv describing the sale of equitable or beneficial interest to the issuerAvon 1 prospectus page vi identifying issuer-only note obligations and Barclays as retention holderAvon 1 prospectus page 110 describing the legal title holders fee

Avon 1: E-SEC-07. Avon 3: E-SEC-08, full prospectus. The firms should confirm my loan’s precise route and identify the arrangements on which they rely.

The contractual question remains

My case remains that the interest rate breaches the terms and conditions governing my mortgage. A transfer does not enlarge the contractual power to charge interest. I ask the Service to assess the full contractual account, alongside the ownership, funding and liability evidence.

The arrangement included the past

Investors were told who would pay for correction

The Avon 3 prospectus also explains how established borrower claims for earlier acts would be paid. It places finally adjudicated or agreed pre-closing claims with the interim legal title holders, and describes indemnities for required balance or interest-rate adjustments. It also describes a Co-operative Bank guarantee of their payment obligations.

These provisions matter to the correction I am asking for. The firms should identify the arrangements applicable to my loan, produce the executed documents and explain who must fund and implement the correction now that Topaz holds the account. The loan-level route into Avon 3 is a question I have asked them to confirm.

Read the correction-liability and guarantee provisions
Avon 3 prospectus page 205: pre-closing borrower claims and required balance or interest adjustmentsAvon 3 prospectus page 208: Co-operative Bank guarantee of interim legal title holder payment obligations

Avon 3 prospectus, printed pp.205 and 208; E-SEC-08. These are the transaction arrangements described to investors.

Why this belongs in my reconsideration

What was the Service told?

The final decision does not explain the published transfer plan, the allocation of correction liabilities or the February 2024 reporting change. I ask the Service to establish what the Bank disclosed about those matters while arguing against continuing rate relief in my complaint, and what its confidential submissions actually established.

That is part of my current Ground 10: Who holds the mortgage now, and who must put it right. The timing has to be read alongside the documents. My case is that the firms’ accounts of ownership, risk and responsibility need to be tested against the arrangements they made.

Confidentiality does not establish truth

Saying that information was supplied to the Service “in confidence” does not establish that it was accurate. The Bank gave the Service a false 2007 account of the transfer and covenant date for my 2006 mortgage, as the documents compared on the acquisition and covenant page show. I say that documented false account is a reason to test the reliability of its other submissions, including the group-cost argument.

The Service should identify the evidence it accepted, test it against the transaction documents and explain its conclusions. Where confidentiality is maintained, I ask for an intelligible explanation of the material case so I can answer it.

  1. When did Topaz enter the discussions? Identify the dated agreements and explain the route from the 2023 plan for Western Mortgage Services to the 2024 Topaz announcement.
  2. What did MAS5 tell the Service? Produce the dated submissions made after the 16 November 2023 outcome, including what was said about the intended transfer and correction liabilities.
  3. Who reported my mortgage from February 2024? Explain the Capita alert, the reporting company’s role and the names used afterwards.
  4. Who must correct the account Topaz now enforces? Identify who holds the relevant records, who pays for an upheld correction and who ensures it is applied to the balance and credit reporting.

Changing the company handling my mortgage must not make responsibility for correcting it disappear.

The position I am challenging

“Topaz has acted independently”

Topaz’s 8 June 2026 final response rejecting coordinated or dishonest conduct and saying it acted independently since October 2025
Topaz/Aspiro’s final response, 8 June 2026, p.2: its denial and its independence statement.

I dispute that account of its conduct. Alongside this commercial chronology, I rely on its handling of the disputed consent records, credit reporting, my injunction application and the file it received. Those events are documented on the linked pages.

What Topaz knew Coordinated conduct The transferred file