Bank accepted mortgage application from unauthorised broker

dunstonh

On the intermediary issue, have you tried the CCL route, rather than the "P" number? To submit business, the intermediary should also have a Consumer Credit Licence number.

A CCL is not required on first charge mortgages. However, with NR together including a loan, I dont know if that would mean a CCL would be required.

However, Occident has already said that the con artist doesnt have a penny so going after him is pointless.

The "broker" had a CC Licence as a Sole Trader. Let's say the licence's trading name was "Caramel Mortgage Services". No such firm ever existed and he didn't trade as Caramel Mortgage Services - he traded as "Caramel Mortgage Solutions." There were two entries on the FSA register for Caramel Mortgage Solutions. One was an insurance network who were not authorised as a mortgage network and it was their name and number he had on his business card. The other was a Sole Trader authorised in her own right. Both are now defunct. The insurance network is scheduled to be struck off at Companies House.

The FSA register doesnt show mortgage authorisations (bizarrely). It will show principle firms but not individuals or permissions relating to mortgages.

Occident

I spoke to the FSA about the register entries. They told me the insurance network was not authorised as a mortgage network.

opinions4u

_Andy_ wrote: »

88 miles per hour!

I guess you're not quite ready for that. But your kids are going to love it!

holly_hobby

Thats absolutely fine happy to help in any way ..

To cap this off for me, the facts of the case appear to be;-

• The adviser cold called the individual without prior agreement - which is against FSA regs.
• The adviser failed to provide correct POS docs - such as IDD, KFI, Illustration, RWL - or indeed complete any assessment of the individuals personal circs, needs or requirements - in contradiction to know your customer/best advice and FSA compliance regs.
• The individual now feels that the recommended mortgage and lender were inappropriate to her requirements. That she was pressured by the adviser, into borrowing more than she wanted to, with overall the arrangement having been more costly than if she had selected another broker and mortgage lender - which she squarely puts onus of blame onto the adviser and mortgage lender. Claims unable to be substantiated, due to lack of POS docs, and in knowledge that the extra funds were used to redeem existing personal borrowing.

• An attempt of a subsequent complaint has been made - but both the borkerage and adviser are no longer active.
• You say the adviser is not in a position to offer any financial reward, even if pursued through the courts.
• Your attempt of pursing this through FSCS, has revealed that it appears the adviser held no professional registration at POS - and as such FSCS are unable to assist with any evaluation of the mortgage complaint.
• Your Friend is now considering how she may have NR take responsibility for the mortgage offered and accepted by her - which further to postings here - she now recognises and accepts that there is no merit to such a claim.

So the facts are that she is unable to pursue either the adviser or brokerage any further in the matter, and it is established that the lender holds no responsibility for the effected mortgage.

I think her next move is pretty clear unfortunately ...

Her and your effots (of which you have done a sterling job trying to assist her), would be now best placed in planning how to redeem the unsecured borrowings with NR, and further rememdy any remaining negative equity situation (of which you say she has a good income and employment) - so hopefully this will prove easier than pursing the complaint aspect.

Which I don't believe would result in any monetary reward to her, (even if circs were different and duly investigated and upheld). Although the advisers reg issues, and trading without licence, would certainly be an issue for FSA to appropriately deal with as a seperate matter.

Whilst not ideal, your Friend needs to try and put this behind her now, and move on to how she may positively address the neg equity issues to hand, to permit her switch of lender or property sale/move. Using the experiences discussed, as a valueable and positive lesson for future dealings with Financial or Mortgage Advisers.

Hope this helps, I do wish both you & your Friend well for the future.

Holly x