Flexible Mortgage - bank gave incorrect advice

atopia02

Hi, I apologise if this is in the wrong place, as a first time poster, not sure where to post.

Wanted advice as to what to do re: mortgage. Hubby and I took out mortgage in June with sa*%ander. We took flexible offset mortgage as were informed we could change terms any time with no penalties, whenever we want. Eg if after a few months the payments were too much we could change to lower payments. :T

I realised soon afterwards I was pregnant and wanted to take a long maternity leave of 9 months (my pay isnt all the best)/ and am due to start maternity leave in Feb 2012 so went to the bank in October to change terms of 12 years to 25, reducing £1200 per month to £600 at least. Was advised that the "small print" states that we cannot change within 6 months and any changes are not absolute...the mortgage centre have to approve this. I complained to the area manager as my paperwork did not imply this and we specifically asked this question (as my husband had a list of questions and the answer to this was noted as no penalties, change any time with no time limits).

Long story short, mortgage centre looked at my complaint...and sent me a booklet (not provided originally but were unable to direct me to the "small print"). I argued and they said their decision is final. I read through all paperwork and could not find this. It said we were entitled to change and NO time frame given. They could not direct me to small print. This went on for 2 weeks, every time i phoned, they said to read the booklet. Bad customer service.

I went to bank, spoke with area manager - no help. I was told that my signed documents implied the terms and said I would accept this as my error, if I have overlooked the small print, but where is the terms they are referring to and again asked them to show me. They couldnt.

Anyways we complained and I said we have been lead astray by been given wrong information. The mortgage centre thanked us for bringing this to their attention but this is their policy and even though it is not noted, they will change the terms to reflect this. I argued how a customer is to know this if they are not directed to the so called small print. I argued it is a serious issue of misrepresentation to which they agreed but they said the matter should be looked at locally.

I think the bank are missing the point. At no point in any documentation does this clause exist. We can change at any time with no penalty, the advisor apologised for saying this to us before taking the mortgage and we explained this is what made the mortgage attractive to us. The mortgage refers to making changes to the mortgage at any time, with no time scales set.

I explained we need to change as 50% of my salary goes to the mortgage and I cannot afford to keep up payments as I have a loan to pay (took out to pay the deposit). The bank have said in Feb will be 6 months since we took out our mortgage and we can "apply" to change the terms (again this is not definite and usually the bank look at one year's worth of payments). I am so angry and upset and hormonal at the fact we may not be able to afford this now due to our change in circumstances.

The bank have accepted they gave us wrong information and have conceded that the terms and conditions referring to 6 months is not noted anywhere strengthening my claim but refuse to budge saying we should know what to expect when taking mortgage out.

They have not dealt with my complaint.

What I want to know is this:

If there is nothing in the mortgage booklet and our papers can they enforce something upon us that we were not informed about? they admit nothing is in writing and admit they should have told us?

What else can I do? I want to change the terms and the bank have said this is at their discretion but as we have already requested this and the have refused (due to the 6 month thing) we have to wait another 6 months before they will consider us.

We are being messed about by their mistake yet they have put the matter to bed. I am not happy. What can i do?



Sorry for my rant...I am panicking. Why is my complaint not been taken seriously?

GMS

atopia02 wrote: »

I explained we need to change as 50% of my salary goes to the mortgage and I cannot afford to keep up payments as I have a loan to pay (took out to pay the deposit).

Did you disclose to the lender at application that the deposit was coming from a loan?

betmunch

According to their criteria Abbey will accept a loan as deposit, although I am yet to actually see one go though, maybe this is the first?

I would be more interested to find out if it was an advised sale or not? Surely if it were an advised sale there is recourse for OP and if it were non-advised there is not. Surely its that simple?

GMS

Criteria will allow it but I wonder if it was declared. If not then the OP needs to be careful about making compaints about the lender.

Let_Us_See

Whether it was an advised sale or not doesn't come into it. Even if non-advised then the information provided to the applicants to make an informed decision should still be accurate.

Santander should have provided both a Key Facts Illustration before application and mortgage offer that form your contract with the lender. Read thoroughly all documents and if you feel you are in the right start complaint procedure and ultimately Financial Omsbudman.


Very surprised Santander excepted a loan as source of deposit.

betmunch

Absolutely, I have no doubt the OP is a fine upstanding member of their community and would be the last person to put in a fruadulent application.

Hopefully they will be back a some point to answer the questions so they can be helped

betmunch

I thought if its an advised sale the the adviser is responsible for making sure the product does what it should, in this case it doesnt so there should be redress.

If its non-advised then its the clients own responsibility to know that the product does what it should so there can be no redress as the client choose the product.

Happy to be corrected here if I have it wrong as every day is a school day!

Let_Us_See

Information provided for a non-advised sale should still be accurate as how else can applicant make an informed decision? Unfortunately, it will ultimately be difficult to prove 'who said what' and therefore applicant will have to revert to KFI, mortgage offer and any supporting documentation provided by Santander to plead their case.

Wh05apk

betmunch wrote: »

I thought if its an advised sale the the adviser is responsible for making sure the product does what it should, in this case it doesnt so there should be redress.

If its non-advised then its the clients own responsibility to know that the product does what it should so there can be no redress as the client choose the product.

Happy to be corrected here if I have it wrong as every day is a school day!

This is where the new proposals restricting non-advised sales will help, if the applicant has had a conversation with Abbey, they would have to go advised, how it will be policed I have no idea, if someone goes into one branch, asks a question, then applies elsewhere how would they know? hopefully it will lead to all applications being advised.

kingstreet

TBH I'd have advised them to take the longer term at the outset and then to voluntarily overpay as and when they choose.

Committing yourself to a higher contractual payment, then needing to change it (notwithstanding the "help" given by the lender at the point of application) is to be avoided at all costs...

Not sure what the borrower can do in these circumstances, other than wait until February.

Wh05apk

kingstreet wrote: »

TBH I'd have advised them to take the longer term at the outset and then to voluntarily overpay as and when they choose.

Committing yourself to a higher contractual payment, then needing to change it (notwithstanding the "help" given by the lender at the point of application) is to be avoided at all costs...

Not sure what the borrower can do in these circumstances, other than wait until February.

Agree, wanting to increase the term would require re-underwriting, which may then fall foul of current criteria, far better to keep commitments low, and be in control yourself.