Mis Sold Mortgage HELP!!

vette376

Thanks for the input guys, I guess most of the outcome is my fault. However I feel that my house my have been serioulsy undervalued in an attempt to bully me into the mortgage I chose. And as regard staying on a cheaper variable rate, that was never an option given to me. I had just come out of a fixed rate for 6 years, and was told I had to remortgage in September. I was unaware I even had the option of continuing onto a variable rate, that is why I feel hard done by.

dunstonh

However I feel that my house my have been serioulsy undervalued in an attempt to bully me into the mortgage I chose.

Everyone always thinks their house is worth more than it is.

And as regard staying on a cheaper variable rate, that was never an option given to me. I had just come out of a fixed rate for 6 years, and was told I had to remortgage in September. I was unaware I even had the option of continuing onto a variable rate, that is why I feel hard done by.

When you took the mortgage out you took it out for 25, 30 years whatever. You had a deal for a short period of years. Your mortgage offer/contract signed when you did the mortgage would have told you about the deal and what would happen when the deal expires. What did you think would happen when your old deal finished?

What you have done is a bit like going to Currys saying what TV can you sell me. Currys give you the options you can buy. Not one of those options is keep the TV you have. You have then bought that "TV" without considering what you have.

Had you used a mortgage adviser/broker, then they have a responsibility and requirement to compare what you are buying against what you have (or will shortly be on) and point out the pros and cons and justify the product being bought. If you dont buy via an adviser/broker then there is no requirement to do that. Did you use an adviser/broker or a non-advised bank clerk?

getmore4less

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

People should not be allowed to get a mortgage if they do not pass a test to prove that they are financially competent.

GG

I was thinking that but then there would only about 10 of us with a mortgages:D

I don't think a lot of mortgage adivsors could pass a decent competance test.

Even then if you can do the numbers, decent risk analysis is not so easy and crysal balls are hard to find.

I am not sure there is a solution.

One option might be to remove SVR which gives lenders to much control over rates. All rates must be fixed or tracker to an independant base.

Another might be that all lenders much offer a no fee lifetime tracker as a reference.

The current market is geared to churn with short term deals, It is very easy to get a borrower to change to a new fix without risking a misselling claim and earn commision.

Another is that all deals MUST be compared with the current one when remortgaging.

Comparisons must be like for like(add fees and same payments for the initial promotioanal period) to make them easier to compare.
Even then not so easy for deals with different promotional terms.


Even then the basic problem seems to be that too many people do not understant the terms they have are for the full term and not just the promotional period which means they are not heyying their mortgages explained to them properly or they just foget.

getmore4less

vette376 wrote: »

I had just come out of a fixed rate for 6 years, and was told I had to remortgage in September. I was unaware I even had the option of continuing onto a variable rate, that is why I feel hard done by.

This would have been clear in the original terms,

It is a good idea to re read them every few years to remind you of what you have agreed to.

I occationaly refer to mine for some subtle details on payments and interest.

opinions4u

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

People should not be allowed to get a mortgage if they do not pass a test to prove that they are financially competent.

I giggled smugly when I read that.

Then I thought about my own mortgage choices as a first time buyer.

- I took out a 95% mortgage
- I allowed the lender to charge my buildings and contents insurance premiums to the debt and charge interest on top of this
- I took out a low cost with profits endowment policy
- I arranged for the lender to charge the premiums to the debt and then charge interest on top of this for 5 years.

I made some truly appalling financial choices, despite considering myself fairly clued up at the time. We learn from our mistakes though, most of the time.

While there is more consumer protection available these days, the market place is a lot more complex than it ever was.

The problem with a perception of consumer protection is that it can often lead people to make naive decisions based on what they see as "advice" rather than to ask questions, research throughly and look for pitfalls - simply because they think that's somebody else's responsibility.

fdm

opinions4u wrote: »

I giggled smugly when I read that.

Then I thought about my own mortgage choices as a first time buyer.

- I took out a 95% mortgage
- I allowed the lender to charge my buildings and contents insurance premiums to the debt and charge interest on top of this
- I took out a low cost with profits endowment policy
- I arranged for the lender to charge the premiums to the debt and then charge interest on top of this for 5 years.

I made some truly appalling financial choices, despite considering myself fairly clued up at the time. We learn from our mistakes though, most of the time.

While there is more consumer protection available these days, the market place is a lot more complex than it ever was.

The problem with a perception of consumer protection is that it can often lead people to make naive decisions based on what they see as "advice" rather than to ask questions, research throughly and look for pitfalls - simply because they think that's somebody else's responsibility.

I could not agree more with this post!!!