Miss-sold Mortgages Help

holly_hobby

magpiecottage wrote: »

Having recently seen a case upheld because the IFA did not explain the tax implications to a Chartered Accountant, I wonder if FOS assumes that everybody except an IFA is a moron.

If this was an adjudicator decision - doesn't surprise me in the least !!

Would hope that the decision has been challenged and referred to the Ombudsman.

H

magpiecottage

Senior_Paper_Monitor wrote: »

This is becoming the scourge of this industry - fueled by these half witted claims companies.

I think you are overestimating their mental capacity by about 49% of a brain!

Three quarters of our recent network compliance visit was detailed discussion of exact processes and wording to 'defend', both pro-actively and retrospectively, against spurious claims of this nature.

Unfortunately so. Worse, you will have to pay a £500 FOS fee each time! I suggest you complain to your MP each time and make clear that this is UNFAIR and UNREASONABLE. One complaint from one IFA will not make any difference but if they start getting dozens they might take notice.

The sad thing is - the volume of paperwork being generated is actually confusing and off putting for the client with the result that it is less likely to be read and/or understood by the average client.

How long before FOS use that as an excuse to uphold complaints?

Our product confirmation letters are now running at a minimum of 6 pages and the purpose is rapidly moving a simple concise explanation to client to a confusing legalese defence document to protect against future claim company generated complaints - this is getting ludicrous.

It will also be used as a reason to uphold complaints in due course - mark my words.

kingstreet

I know we're getting a bit off-topic here, but I avoid the use of standard paragraphs altogether. I type up my discussions in a free-format in the fact-find and also quote them into the suitability letter so they are exactly personalised to the individual client.

I ask the client to sign the FF notes right at the point they end, so nothing can be added and get the Suitability Letter signed too, as I'm sure we all do.

My letters are still less than three sides of A4, even with the product/lender details included.

Probably the only thing I have standardised is the Own Occ/ADW definition explanation for the TPD in a demands and needs.

ViolaLass

mensrea01 wrote: »

Other half even though on mortgage in name only, has no financial interest in house.

Don't banks usually insist that someone named on the mortgage has to be named on the deeds?

You've had a baby with him, but you don't trust him enough to own a house with him?

opinions4u

ViolaLass wrote: »

Don't banks usually insist that someone named on the mortgage has to be named on the deeds?

I've arranged mortgages where all those on the deeds are on the mortgage, with an additional borrower included on the mortgage who was not named on the deeds.

holly_hobby

Yes thats absolutely correct .. all those named on the deeds have to be party to the mortgage, but you don't have to be named on the deeds to be a named mortgagor. (not all lenders are happy, but there a couple of select lenders whom do permit this)

H x

mensrea01

Sorry Guys,

What I meant was that because I put the deposit down and stumped up the money for the repairs to the house that had to be done as a request on survey. I own the largest share of the house after mortgage company.

yes other half is on the deed and on mortgage but has signed with the solicitor that it is in name only. I am currently in the process of taken other half off deed with the permission of Acenden but its not all signed and seals as yet. However, they will not take his name off the mortgage only deed. I would not be able to afford mortgage on my own on paper. But can in real terms.

Because of an changes in legislation with regards to co-habiting couples, if there is a breakdown of relationship and a split of assets the court will take into consideration what each party has contributed.

This is good for me because i will most likely retain property being the biggest contributor and having a child of school age. The court will not take into consideration cost of living.

As for the whole trust issue brought up, I trust him enough to have a baby but not to buy a house with. I already had a house before meeting partner and I am intelligent enough to protect my assets. In this day and age you cannot be blinded by love. I had worked hard for what I had and was not going to loose everything if we broke up.
As it happens I did the right thing because 2 years after buying this house other half started getting into debt. It was not obvious and did not come to light until last year. How it happened I am still unsure of and don't think that there is more too it than I am being told. So in my opinion there is a fine line between trust and stupidity ladies.

holly_hobby

Listen it happens to us all .... we go out and buy a dress, we hide it in the wardrobe (knowing we'll be shouted at for buying again!), and then bring it out a week later singing "ooh had it for ages dear !". We sometimes only know what peeps want us to know, the rest they hide and hope it will go away ... you're neither silly, stupid or blinded by love .. just human and in a relationship !!

With regards to apportioning of assets to contributions - make sure that you keep clear records of everything you pay for, mortgages, B&Cs, repair bills, utility bills ..etc .. etc ... etc.

That way if ever required, you may happily produce all the evidence reqd. (this is not sneaky, just being organised and emotionally detached from the money situ for the benefit of all).

I do hope though that the above is never required, and that you are able to stabilise your finances, discuss the debt issues, and positively move forward.

Holly x

wigeon_2

The new emerging market of miss sold mortgages and insurance products takes more than a form and a short paragraph to complete a claim. Our company has recruited a mortgage and insurance compliance officer from one of the big companies to correctly identify claims in all the areas of mortgage and insurance miss selling. It is a very complicated and involved area of investigation which is now resulting in a current claim level of over £14,000 reclaim per client. Yes we charge and yes we challenge companies but we win and we don’t give in............!!

holly_hobby

A mis-sale is a mis-sale, a claims company have no influence or direction on the decision - to say or infer otherwise is complete mis-representation, the very matter which they claim to be acting against !

For the benefit of all, the same individuals who perform in such investigative roles, also freely advise on this board (for NO financial gain), so the OP has no need to incur fees from such companies, who only generally serve to reduce any compensation the individual is awarded, and have no more experience or expertise than the professionals who participate on the FREE MSE forum.

Hope this helps

Holly