Mortgage Exit Fees successes and failures

GeorDai

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

Nope, I think it suggests that it isn't worth their time arguing about £50 to be honest. Still doesn't make it right to demand more than you are due.

I think you're wrong - paying out £50 to any customer that asks for a simple explaination of the charges that have been levied doesn't appear to be sound business sense IMHO.

Preparing a simple breakdown of the costs involved that could be included in their reply letters should cost too much, certainly not £50 per customer.

The banks / building societies are reluctant to disclose this info because it will reveal how high their margins are on this type of charge. As to business / commercial sensitivities of the info, if they all were open about their costs then this situation would never have arisen abd the FSA wouldn't have had to get involved. The banks / building societies have seen an opporunity to increase their profits and have made a rod for their own backs - am I expected to feel sorry for organisations that do this ? OK the people that work for them may not get as large a pay increase / bonus than previously but they won't be any different to a good proportion of the rest of us !

As to claiming more than I'm entitled to - if someone offers you £50 for writing a letter that takes two minutes and thoughtfully providing you with a prepaid envelope they you'd be mad not to take it. It's the best rate of pay you'll get in a long while...... come to think of it £50 a go for dealing with documents that take a short while to process ??? Isn't this where the discussion started.
:rolleyes:

MarkyMarkD

No, it's not where the discussion started. The FSA ruling was very clear that lenders can charge anything they like, as long as they tell you up-front. They just can't increase the amount willy-nilly.

There is no requirement at all for the MEAF to be related to lenders' costs in dealing with redemptions - so it's irrelevant how long the documents take to process.

The reason they didn't respond with a breakdown of charges into their costs is that their costs are irrelevant; it's presumably pretty obvious to them that when they write to you saying "our costs are irrelevant, the FSA have said we can charge what we want as long as we tell you up-front" you'll STILL go back to them complaining and they'll end up paying up the £50.

Sound business sense, IMHO, to pay up the £50 one return set of letters earlier in the process.

But still not £50 you are entitled to!

teddyk

When redeeming my Stroud&Swindon mortgage I asked for my exit fee to be what was quoted in my original paperwork. However, S&S insist that it has had its position agreed by the FSA by reverting to its 2003 fee of £115. My mortgage was arranged in 1997 with a fee of £45 for redemption. Why are other lenders caving in?

MarkyMarkD

Some (most) just seem to have gone for the "easy option" (but a more expensive one for them) of agreeing to refund back to the level quoted at inception.

A few seem to have got the FSA to agree to a different approach, which fits in with the FSA's ruling as long as the increase (in your case, from £45 to £115) is justifiable based on cost increases.

£115 is still a very low fee, and that's probably why S&S are able to justify it. Most lenders were charging similar amounts in 2003, but increased them in 2004 (mainly) to levels typically over £200. It was those 2004 increases which led to this whole debate.

tunner53

Alliance and Leicester just sent me cheque for £245 as I had my mortgage with them for 10 years until I switched 2 years ago... 1 phone call thats all......RESULT

mayb_2

"The reason they didn't respond with a breakdown of charges into their costs is that their costs are irrelevant; it's presumably pretty obvious to them that when they write to you saying "our costs are irrelevant, the FSA have said we can charge what we want as long as we tell you up-front" you'll STILL go back to them complaining and they'll end up paying up the £50."

You are confusing yourself MarkyMarkD - the argument is that you are entitiled to be charged the amount agreed at the time you took out the contract unless the company can prove the increase is due to a justifiable increase in costs to themselves. The fact is they were not prepared or able to do that in the case of GeorgeDai means that they can only charge him the amount agreed in the original contract. They may be able to fix any charge they want at outset - that is another matter.

It doesn't mean that GeorgeDai was not entitled to the £50 - he was - it was not part of the original contract and they did not justify the increase.

MarkyMarkD

Mayb, you are confusing yourself, not me. The £50 WAS GeorDai's original fee amount which they have refunded, along with the difference, just to get him to stop bothering them.

GeorDai wrote:

My contract with you stated a MEAF of £50 ...

saskia_smith

Hi all - just a quick note to let you know of one success story !! I am in the process of re-mortgaging and leaving the West Brom, when I first called, they advised an exit fee of £295 !! then a couple of weeks later - £200 - - - my Solicitor called on Friday (13th) to advise they had received the final settlement figure and there was an £80 admin fee - yippee !!! Friday 13th definitely not unlucky for me - good luck to all reclaiming

mayb_2

Sorry MarkyMarkD I guess I missed that!

trokey81

I contacted Halifax after reading how to claim back mortgage exit fees. Halifax replied with an offer of £75 I checked the moneysaving website to see if this was a good deal, only to find out they were taking the mickey. With this i wrote back requesting a break down of the charges and how they could justify the prices. Within a couple of weeks I got a full £175 refund of my exit fee.

Thank you to everyone who works hard on this website and check out martins books they are a good read!!