"Mobility" clause in employment contract

smallpurplepill

Hello all

Perhaps someone knows the answer to this? I couldn't find anything related through a search.

I'm looking to apply for a mortgage and seem to have had more difficulties and obstacles than most (despite good credit history etc)... I've been through my employment contract again and have a "mobility" clause (You may be required to move to other locations for business needs... etc) which I'm informed is a standard term they put in all contracts. I think it's just a technicality as the role doesn't involve "moving around" and many of my department colleagues have been there for several years, the place we work is 'fixed' as such.

Is a clause like this likely to put off lenders? (I'm assuming it's material information I have to give) - due to the (theoretical) possibility that I may be asked to move and have to sell at a loss or have a longer journey into work and all the costs that would be entailed. Does anyone know?

withabix

What industry do you work in?

I work in the construction industry and this is a normal clause in a contract.

It has never put a mortgage lender off. They wouldn't ask or need to know anyway.

elsien

I work in care and we have a similar clause which has been used for some staff.
However in our case it would mean moving to another home within reasonable travelling distance, not upping sticks and moving house.
I'm not aware of anyone who's ever even thought to tell the mortgage company (I certainly didn't) and it's never been asked. It might be different if you knew it was definitely on the cards , but as it's not likely in the foreseeable future I shouldn't worry about it.

Southend1

I used to have a clause like that in my contract in a previous job and I always wondered how enforceable it would be in reality. One day I had a phone call from HR saying they wanted me to move to another part of the country. I just said no thanks, they made all sorts of verbal threats but I never heard any more about it. Surely it's an unfair term given potential to impact family life etc?

Thrugelmir

Southend1 wrote: »

Surely it's an unfair term given potential to impact family life etc?

If your employer were to relocate then you would expect to be offered the opportunity to move wouldn't you? Rather than being forced to take redundancy.

Two sides to a coin.

McKneff

Have you checked your credit file, there may be something on there that you are unaware of

Southend1

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If your employer were to relocate then you would expect to be offered the opportunity to move wouldn't you? Rather than being forced to take redundancy.

Two sides to a coin.

Yes but being offered the opportunity to relocate is different to being forced to!

Thrugelmir

Southend1 wrote: »

Yes but being offered the opportunity to relocate is different to being forced to!

The employee always has the option to resign.

Southend1

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The employee always has the option to resign.

Lol that is true.... If a little harsh!

betmunch

I can think of at least one lender that would not be happy with this, but in my opinion they look for reasons not to lend! They wouldnt ask for the contract as standard so would be unlikely to see it unless they had reason to ask for your contract, or you had your case auditted.

In gerenal terms this is unlikely to cause you a problem

smallpurplepill

withabix wrote: »

What industry do you work in?

I work in the construction industry and this is a normal clause in a contract.

It has never put a mortgage lender off. They wouldn't ask or need to know anyway.

Thanks for the reply!

It's an office job in one of the "service" type of industries - so we don't work in various 'locations' as such, there is just our office of several hundred people and I think one other office (different part of the business) in another city also in the UK. As far as I know no-one normally moves between the offices, unless an internal job advert comes up and they actually apply to go to another office that is.