First Direct - Valuation required TWICE in 6 months!!!

Evilm

Unfortunately they have to protect their position and in six months things could have changed. Its not just about the value of the property, its about the condition as well. For all the lender knows there could have been a fire, a structural accident or anything happen to the property in that time. Even in boom times Valuation Surveys had to be done no more than six months apart so saying that the market is stable and therefore they shouldn't need to check it again isn't sufficient.

Its a shame that you have to pay out more money but its not like you weren't told at the beginning about the requirement.

Cash-Is-King

Evilm - they actually said prior to the 1st that it would be good for a year at least. They are now offering an external survey to keep things sensible, so they are not too concerned with the internal condition.

Signing off.

PS, this board seems infested with self righteous, click my thanks button types. It's a real shame. People don't like being told off, especially when they asked for others who experienced the same to comment only. If you have nothing constructive to add to threads, step back and let the thread sink.

pararct

Cash-Is-King wrote: »

Evilm - they actually said prior to the 1st that it would be good for a year at least. They are now offering an external survey to keep things sensible, so they are not too concerned with the internal condition.

Signing off.

PS, this board seems infested with self righteous, click my thanks button types. It's a real shame. People don't like being told off, especially when they asked for others who experienced the same to comment only. If you have nothing constructive to add to threads, step back and let the thread sink.

No need to chuck your teddies out of the pram simply because no one agreed with you that the charge was unfair.

Pincher

Do you mind keeping £50k sitting around for the next six months, I might want to borrow it? What! You want me to pay a fee! what kind of loan shark are you! Forget the last time I asked you to keep £50k around and didn't use it, it's not really relevant, is it?

Cash-Is-King

Another stupid comment.

The issue is not to do with fees for holding a loan over, the complaint is the need for two in depth surveys within 6 months.

inca_2

Unfortunately you posted on an internet forum so it's not really up to you to tell people whether or not they can reply to your post. As already stated even when times are good you would still be likely to need a new valuation after 6 months have passed. You want someone to lend you their money so they have every right to check that their security is still fit for the purpose of lending against, it would be irresponsible not to. If you were lending someone money against something they owned that you hadn't seen for six months would you not want to check it was still worth the same and in a decent condition to lend your money against? I know I would and you would be a fool if you wouldn't IMO.

pjread

£200 for an 'in depth survey'? Geez you'd struggle to get a basic valuation for that down my way...

dlk

In the last 7 months your roof could have fallen in, you could have developed a major damp problem or the house might have burnt to the ground. I don't blame them for wanting to check the present condition

Evilm

Cash-Is-King wrote: »

Evilm - they actually said prior to the 1st that it would be good for a year at least. They are now offering an external survey to keep things sensible, so they are not too concerned with the internal condition.

Signing off.

PS, this board seems infested with self righteous, click my thanks button types. It's a real shame. People don't like being told off, especially when they asked for others who experienced the same to comment only. If you have nothing constructive to add to threads, step back and let the thread sink.

my comments about condition include things that could be spotted from external as well and internal issues.

the fact they said the first one would be good for a year does change things a little and having said that upfront you would have got far more sympathy.

unfortunately you are in the position that you want their money so if you can't get them to not make you pay for the second valuation then you either have the choice of not taking the money or coughing up an extra £200.

Wish I could change the situation but none of us can.

Cash-Is-King

Evilm - I never posted for sympathy, I posted for people that had experienced similar to me to comment.

This is a public forum, this was a specific query, if you are able to provide assistance, that is great - if you are going to weigh in with nonsense like "you should have took it before" etc, please save it. Do you know the terms of the offer I was given? No, and I can assure you that I couldn't just take it when I wanted - a solicitor's letter was required, a house purchase was also required before, and an honest vendor who wouldn't collapse the sale on the 11th hour was needed before that again. So - stick to the questions being asked, and don't try to lecture on the obvious issues as they are not of any importance to the query at hand.

What I do find funny is the trail of sycophantic 'Thanks' clicks to some really daft posts left by some (not all) contributors. That to me has been gold, so thanks! Eg Where is _Andy_'s post? I can't see one, yet he has thanked all and sundry, brilliant!

As for the other guy who kindly let me know this is a public forum, cheers for helping me with that - I will click your 'Thanks' button later for sharing that pearl with me.

There you go, hope you are all enjoying the world cup, Holland to win at 14/1 for me, Van Persie to get the Golden Boot - that would be fantastic.

Conclusion, Valuations every 6 months is proper order. Maybe you should lobby for MOT's every 6 months to protect the public from dangerous cars that may have had a serious structural problem, or have been fire damaged etc.

:money: