Complaint letter to Santander

hillcats

KAMT wrote: »

...Fair enough if A&L made poor lending decisions to some people, but we aren't one of their bad decisions.

KAMT wrote: »

We are trying to address the issue of negative equity...

Hmmm, I actually think you may be one of their bad decisions as you have either borrowed / been lent MORE THAN the property is worth.. or have the house prices tumbled that massively where you live ?!

KAMT

hillcats wrote: »

Hmmm, I actually think you may be one of their bad decisions as you have either borrowed / been lent MORE THAN the property is worth.. or have the house prices tumbled that massively where you live ?!

We bought in June 2007 and got a 95% mortgage - paid £119k for the house which Santander are now valuing at approx £102k.
What defines a 'bad decision'?

dunstonh

KAMT wrote: »

We bought in June 2007 and got a 95% mortgage - paid £119k for the house which Santander are now valuing at approx £102k.
What defines a 'bad decision'?

Lending greater than 75% increases the risk. Whilst you are not sub prime or massively in negative equity, you are effectively a negative on their mortgage book.

interest only cases with no known repayment vehicles are another. Or those that they know had higher income multiples than Santander would have used.

It doesnt mean all of these will go bad. However, it will be expected that a greater proportion of them will go bad and create a loss compared to say someone with better than 25% equity.

If they know the figures and apply an actuarial calculation to the A&L book they they can see what the projected cost of losses will be. If they don't know the figures they have to assume these things and given that A&L failed, they would almost certainly use higher failure rates on their projections than they would on their own mortgage book.

You are paying for those greater failures that are expected. Once Santander have had a chance to get the information they need to bring the risk of the A&L book down to the risk level of Santander book, they will almost certainly equalise the rates.

Peter_L

As others have said - mortgages are about risk - risk to you (decrease in value and higher interest rates) and risk to banks (you defaulting on your repayment). Let's also not forget that banks are in the business of making money - like any other business, they are not charitable. The risk game sways one way then another, people who bought 10 years ago and then fixed low are winning, those that bought recent and fixed high are losing.

Santander acquired another business with their risks and are not obliged to do anything - look at the company who buys another failed company but (legally) refuse to honour the debts and outstanding orders. Santander acquired A&L in the hope of making profits in the future and is not obliged/willing to reduce their profit.

I don't think what you are proposing makes much sense and from a legal perspective, Santander haven't put a single foot wrong. I feel that your action is borne solely from frustration and unfortunately (and I am trying to be nice) is best forgotten.

Remember there will always be winners and losers in the property game - better luck next time ...