Guardian in touch again re;misselling

vinno65

Hi Tanith,

read all about it here.
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2006/003.shtml

regrads Vinno

dreamylittledream

dwsjarcmcd wrote:

Mortgages into retirement is exactly the area where the Ombudsman has changed opinion. Again without getting your hopes up, you can be cautiously optimistic

Sadly in the wrong direction.

The Ombudsman now tends to take the opinion that it is reasonable for you to have realised that the mortgage would have extended beyond your normal retirement age at the time you took the policy - as such you must havebeen hapy with the term.

Previously this was not the case but that is a whole other story...

dunstonh

The retirement age excuse was overused by many. The valid cases probably outswamped by the false ones.

tanith

I am not holding my breath obviously...... being naive I was under the impression that the information given by the Abbey representative was reasonably reliable in that we were told that we would reach our target by my retirement age..... of course now I realise that this was not the case and in fact we would never reach our target.... but like many I trusted someone who was selling me something and I only have myself to blame for lack of knowledge that would of maybe changed the decisions I made back then....

As I say I am not holding my breath........ thanks everyone for your input...

dreamylittledream

dunstonh wrote:

The retirement age excuse was overused by many. The valid cases probably outswamped by the false ones.

I would think it has more to do with the fact for every 18 months a calculation is reduced due to a sale into retirement the amount of compensation roughly doubles.

As a result firms have always done anything they can to avoid upholding retirement.

Worrying the Ombudsman now seems to agreeing - political pressures methinks

vinno65

dunstonh wrote:

The retirement age excuse was overused by many. The valid cases probably outswamped by the false ones.

Hi Dunstonh, can you explain why anyone in their right mind would agree to a mortgage (of any kind) extending into their retirement. Why would you want to continue with what is for most people their single biggest monthly outgoing, when your monthly income is generally down by a third or in a lot of cases halved?

regards Vinno

dunstonh

Lots of people still go with mortgages past their selected retirement age and many have in the past on repayment basis as well.

If it comes down to being able to make the mortgage affordable now by extending it a few years into retirement, then many have done that. The hope being that future pay rises and the effect of inflation on the amount borrowed will reduce the debt in real terms. Plus some would use their pension lump sums to pay the remainder.

Many people do things which may give them problems later on if things dont go to plan just to get on the mortgage ladder now.

Even now you still have people doing it. The difference now is that it gets documented better than it used to. However, it still occurs and is still requested.

vinno65

Hi Dunston,
Requested or suggested?? that is the question.

regards Vinno

dunstonh

Requested or suggested?? that is the question.

Required would be closer.

I know you want to keep blaming advisers but you have people out there who are doing interest only mortgages with no means of repaying the capital on the hope that they will earn more later and be able to make up for it then. The same applies for extending into retirement. It makes the monthly cost lower which makes it easier to begin with but they have the hope of earning more later to make up for it.

vinno65

And firms are giving them mortgages??
regards Vinno