75 year old sold 25 year mortgage

dunstonh

Agree but went from unsecured debt to secured with no life insurance

life assurance was his choice.

However, it doesnt make the slightest bit of difference whether it is secured or not. The executors of the estate have to clear both secured and unsecured debts from the assets. So, whether it was mortgage, credit card, personal loan or whatever, it would still need to have been cleared.

The transaction was probably easily justified as mortgage rates are lower than short term credit and it probably saved your friends father a lot of money in interest. Therefore making your friends father's later years a little bit easier as well as increasing their inheritance.

Any attempt of claiming it as mis-sale is misguided and quite disgraceful to be honest.

Even so it does seem outrageous that a broker or someone can't be held accountable for this

The broker didnt spend the £175k. Your friends father did. He is accountable for his spending. No-one else. What is outrageous is the attempt to try and blame someone else. Someone who probably made the life of that person easier in their last years.

opinions4u

toddle2u wrote: »

Agree but went from unsecured debt to secured with no life insurance

Have you priced up life assurance for a 75 year old?

Out of interest, who was financially disadvantaged by his death with debts?

Gorgeous_George

Refusing a mortgage to a 75 year old purely on the basis of age would be considered ageist.

I hope he spent his money enjoying his life while he could. It is odd that a close family failed to notice dad committing to such a deal. Maybe they weren't that close.

GG

toddle2u

Came on here asking for genuine advice for a friend and instead get abuse from a load of wanabee's and IFA's who condone such behaviour as rightful. Luckily the mortgage market is now regulated and selling a mortgage (using a broker) where the term extends past retirement age can be classed as mis-sold.

Monitor I have stared open mouthed at this thread three time now - and couldn't think of a polite way to answer it !

Well don't bother then as you have nothing constructive to say old timer

So, during the 5 years that he did repay the mortgage I assume his relatives did not have any concerns.

They knew nothing about it nor did his wife

Refusing a mortgage to a 75 year old purely on the basis of age would be considered ageist.

Sorry I would have called it responsible lending not ageist

Senior_Paper_Monitor

As an 'old timer' (actually just a couple of years in the finance world but using the benefits of a contractual/business background at fairly senior level in another industry to research products/regulations and design new applications for a regulated firm, while studying for Trust and Estate Planning Qualifications for the next couple of years) I am most grateful for your attempt to educate myself (and of course the other comentators here with many years experience and a fist full of qualifications obtained in the regulated financial world).

However - selling a mortage (with or without a broker giving advice) where the term extends past retirement age is not a case of misselling (it might be missold at the same time for other reasons, but not because of that).

Now I suggest that you listen to the clear advice being given to you by people (such as opinion4u, ILW, betmunch, getmore4less, dunstonh - who I can assure you didn't become or stay an IFA by not knowing the definition of misselling) who appear to be better placed than you to know what the regulations actually say and offered you clear polite advice (which frankly was considerably calmer than the usual response to another member of the 'I don't like it and having read the Daily Mirror legal advice section am fully qualified in bar room advice' brigade arriving in here) before you insisted on telling everyone they were 1) wrong 2) part of a profession acting "outrageously".

And having left Tiddlywinks and Gorgous George off the list I ought to clarify that is because they didn't actually offer specific advise about the rules - just moral comment (with which I also fully agree). So perhaps you should calm down and realise that you are a 'voice of one' in what certainly appears to me to be a knowledgeable and logical group.

_Andy_

well, the OP is certainly a charmer, isn't he?

getmore4less

toddle2u wrote: »

Came on here asking for genuine advice for a friend and instead get abuse from a load of wanabee's and IFA's

They knew nothing about it nor did his wife


Sorry I would have called it responsible lending not ageist

I think you have to agree you started giving limited info angling for support for a "misselling" on age grounds.

as has been pointed out this probably not the case and some more informations has been provided.

I think it is significant that this was done in secret without the knowlege of those that should have been close to him.

Did anyone know about the debts prior to this mortgage

Was the house in joint names if so how did he secure a loan without the wife signing for it.

If you stay openminded about what happened you may be able to get to the bottom of it and there may be something that can be done.
But focusing on a age based misselling will I fear not get you very far

Again I ask what is your goal with this enquiry.

I suggest start with finding out the truth and go from, there there is clearly more investigation to do.

opinions4u

toddle2u wrote: »

Came on here asking for genuine advice for a friend and instead get abuse from a load of wanabee's and IFA's who condone such behaviour as rightful.

Actually it hasn't been condoned. All that has been established is that providing a mortgage to somebody who's getting on a bit doesn't automatically mean that it has been sold inappropriately.

Call me a "wannabe" by all means. I never had the guts to become an IFA. But I did spend 20+ years in the industry which included time as a mortgage adviser, managing mortgage advisers, underwriting mortgages and a hell of a lot more.

Luckily the mortgage market is now regulated and selling a mortgage (using a broker) where the term extends past retirement age can be classed as mis-sold.

Selling a mortgage beyond retirement age can also be classed as perfectly reasonable. It depends on the specifics of the case.

So far you haven't explained why you think the loan was mis-sold. If you are struggling to cope with the (fair) challenges from an internet forum, should you choose to try and take somebody to court over this you are really going to struggle.

You need to establish why the mortgage was inappropriate for this gentleman's needs. If he already owed £175k in other forms, it would be fairly straight forward to justify the sale of a mortgage to consolidate that debt on the grounds of making a significant reduction to the applicant's outgoings.

Even in today's regulatory environment, selling mortgages to people because they are/will be beyond retirement age is not automatically inappropriate.

So what do you hope to achieve? You really need to draw out the like outcome if the mortgage hadn't gone ahead to be able to quantify any loss that the gentleman or his estate has incurred.

WhiteHorse

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

So, during the 5 years that he did repay the mortgage I assume his relatives did not have any concerns.

Now, they have an inheritance hanging in the balance they suddenly want to take a closer look? Maybe they should have been there sooner when the original decision was up for discussion.

Presumably he knew the implications of his decision - if not, then his family should already have been around to help.

Hm. This assumes that the family did know. I would guess that they didn't. After all, if they are as grasping as has been intimated, surely they would have tried to prevent it.

dunstonh

Came on here asking for genuine advice for a friend and instead get abuse from a load of wanabee's and IFA's who condone such behaviour as rightful.

You didnt ask for advice. You made some incorrect assumptions and clearly dont like the answers. Probably as they blow the case of mis-sale out of the water.

Luckily the mortgage market is now regulated and selling a mortgage (using a broker) where the term extends past retirement age can be classed as mis-sold.

It can be classed as mis-sold if it was bad advice but most of the time it isnt. In this case, the father was already past retirement age. So, "going past retirement age" doesnt apply. Plus, he already had £175k of debts. So, there was no addition to the debts. So, no mis-sale there.

Sorry I would have called it responsible lending not ageist

Nothing irresponsible about lending a 75 year old money in principle. You will find no rules or regulations that prevent it.

Lets look at a complaint and lets assume its successful. That would be to put the estate back into the position it was before the transaction too place. Before the transaction he had £175k of debt on higher interest products. after the transaction he had a lower interest rate product and was therefore saving money. So, to go back into the position it would have been, the estate would have to pay more money back and reduce the value of the estate even more.