Claiming money back for a mis-sold mortgage?

albo2002

_Andy_ wrote: »

Self-certs weren't just for self-employed people.
I would assume though that the application form you signed did state an income.

it's possible, I don't recall being asked it and certainly didn't lie if I was asked it.

ILW

albo2002 wrote: »

The bit about the economy dipping is irrelevant, I only mentioned it to explain the whole story.

I'm trying to ascertain whether the companies that invite you to cash in on mortgage lenders and / or brokers that act irresponsibly are worth the risk.

Still cannot see the irresponsible bit. You agreed you could afford it at the time so you could possibly sue yourself for irresponsible borrowing, or possibly just being a bit greedy.

albo2002

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

As you have stated you had the knowledge at the time your borrowing was 6 times your salary....you had the opportunity then to say no thanks...Nobody forced you to take that level of borrowing...If that was GMAC criteria at the time, they did nothing wrong...but as you said...
"Obviously, at the time, I was pleased to get the mortgage".....Now to start claiming mis sold and "which means either the broker acted fraudulently or GMAC failed to behave as a responsible lender (or both)"...Why didn't you say that in April 07.....It is obvious who is acting fraudulently!!

it's probably my fault for not writing my points clearly enough, but I don't think you understand what I've been saying.

You have, though, answered one point I wanted to know, which is that GMAC criteria at the time was to offer 6 times a salary, therefore they did nothing wrong.

I did not know then whether this was their criteria or not, which is why I could not have been privy to any fraud. As you've stated that this was their criteria, then clearly I do not have a case to make a claim.

I only assumed recently that 6 times a salary mortgage was not permissable - it's obvious from this thread I was ill-informed about that, so I wont be wasting my time looking into getting any money back.

albo2002

ILW wrote: »

Still cannot see the irresponsible bit. You agreed you could afford it at the time so you could possibly sue yourself for irresponsible borrowing, or possibly just being a bit greedy.

as I stated, I recently (as it now seems - wrongly) assumed that mortgages offered at 6 times a salary were not allowed.

Leon_W

GMAC, at that time, didn't really have any application criteria to be honest, so if you'd asked for 10X salary you would probably have got it. It was just a sign of the times. Lenders, in order to stay in business have to lend, and what with every Tom !!!!!! and Harry shovelling money out the door like there was no tomorrow, it was fringe lenders like GMAC that had to have the really lax criteria to get any business.

At one point GMAC had mortgages available that didn't require any income details at all (at least with self cert you had to put a figure down !) they just required a signed form stating that you could afford the repayment, and based your success or failure on your credit score.

It all seems a little crazy in hindsight, but if lenders were willing to lend and borrowers were willing to borrow then they basically deserved what they got. The crazy lenders got the crazy borrowers and went out of business through defaults and reposessions. The conservative lenders got the conservative borrowers and stayed to fight another day.

No misselling to see here. Just another case of missborrowing.

albo2002

Leon_W wrote: »

GMAC, at that time, didn't really have any application criteria to be honest, so if you'd asked for 10X salary you would probably have got it. It was just a sign of the times. Lenders, in order to stay in business have to lend, and what with every Tom !!!!!! and Harry shovelling money out the door like there was no tomorrow, it was fringe lenders like GMAC that had to have the really lax criteria to get any business.

At one point GMAC had mortgages available that didn't require any income details at all (at least with self cert you had to put a figure down !) they just required a signed form stating that you could afford the repayment, and based your success or failure on your credit score.

It all seems a little crazy in hindsight, but if lenders were willing to lend and borrowers were willing to borrow then they basically deserved what they got. The crazy lenders got the crazy borrowers and went out of business through defaults and reposessions. The conservative lenders got the conservative borrowers and stayed to fight another day.

No misselling to see here. Just another case of missborrowing.

cheers mate, that explains it all nicely. And you're absolutely right!

Good bit of life experience, just a shame my wallet took such a battering

Dan_1976

I normally hold back on these but thanks to lenders like GMAC, brokers like yours and people like you a lot of brokers and bank staff have lost jobs and probably homes.

KFI's have an interesting section about how much your payment goes up if the rate goes up by 1% did you read it? No, to busy thinking about the profit you will make after watching relocation relocation!

And now you want money back!

ILW

albo2002 wrote: »

as I stated, I recently (as it now seems - wrongly) assumed that mortgages offered at 6 times a salary were not allowed.

I think the lesson to be taken from this is, do not believe everything the rep from a claims company tells you, whilst trying to get you to pay an up front fee.

dunstonh

I'm trying to ascertain whether the companies that invite you to cash in on mortgage lenders and / or brokers that act irresponsibly are worth the risk.

There are no known cases of success on this front. The FSA is taking some interest in some cases but thats on widespread fraud rather than on individual cases. There may be the odd case where some redress is paid although the amounts are likely to be very small as at the end of the day, most of the people that borrowed beyond their means have a property that is worth more than they paid for it, even with last years drops.

The problem with cases where you accuse the broker of fraud is that you are also accusing yourself as you signed to say its right. There is nothing to say that a lender should check what you say. Also, there is nothing to say how much a lender can lend to you. i.e. 2x income over a 10 year period may be more expensive than 6x income over 30 years.

Claims companies are failing all over the place with consumers who thought they could get "free money" realising that they are now losing even more money.

The problem is that you applied for the mortgage, you accepted the risks (which appear clearly on documentation) and you have the product you applied for. The future economic cycle is not something a broker can be held responsible for.

There have been 8 financial crisis since 1956. They occur on average once every 7 years. You would have to be pretty dim to think that a 25-30 year mortgage was not going to have at least 2 or 3 recessions or similar events in there.

Dan_1976

I forgot to add estate agents, letting agents, builders and tradesmen.