Best 2 year fixed mortgage

absolute0

Can anyone give advice on the best 2 year fixed with minimal admin fees please? This would not be a remortgage, just wanting to move house and increase the mortgage.

I've been quoted so far:

C&G 5.09% 2 Year Fixed, no admin fees (applies only to existing customers) - but I have to pay £295 to close my EXISTING account down with LloydsTSB/C&G to open another one! Again, at the end of the term I would have to pay a further £295.

TIA

Dave

hairy_cornflake_2

I doubt if you will get a better deal than that currently. The alliance & leicester has a slightly lower rate, but you will have a valuation fee and a £295 redemption fee.

My advice is, if thats the deal your after then go for it

absolute0

Thanks. I have been looking at the A&L mortgages and was kind of put off by the valuation fees. The C&G mortgage only applies till end of April and I'm not sure we will be ready by then (subject to selling our house). Is it normal for lenders to ask for a closing fee when starting a new mortgage with the same lender?

Regards

Dave

stormCat99

Stroud and Swindon have some good deals with low up front costs. Free legals, free valuation, only the £99 fee to book the rate - https://www.stroudandswindon.co.uk. We're in the process of remortgaging with them (to a tracker), as we were attracted by no up front costs (no booking fee even for ours).

They've been great so far, really efficient.

Of all the mortgage comparison sites, I'd say you need to take a look at https://www.charcolonline.co.uk, as they are the only one I've seen where you can specify an option to look for mortgages with low up front costs (this is in the advanced options bit).

Good luck!

payless

The lender just above mentioned currently offer different deals for direct business than they do via brokers

Dare I say this is an example that sometimes paying a fee for totally independent reserach/ advice is better than taking the more common "free" / commission based advice- that whilst may (often) be called independent / whole of market is unlikely to highlight these factors.

I would be interested in - What people think whole of market means?

--

Ther broker site mentioned above is not whole of market - although in some ways I think at last this is being very honest
( its online service does not offer advice)

did you go via the site for this product or direct to lender? ( as I believe products are different)
However does show that the site is a useful tool in some cases

mzmoneypenny

I'm looking to remortgage asap - was going to head to the A & L until I saw a 2yr fixed rate @ 4.99% with no acceptance fee, free valuation & £250 cashback for purchase or easy remortgage service with Portman.

http://www.portman.co.uk/public/mortgages/products_at_a_glance.asp?type=3

dougk_2

payless wrote:

The lender just above mentioned currently offer different deals for direct business than they do via brokers

Dare I say this is an example that sometimes paying a fee for totally independent reserach/ advice is better than taking the more common "free" / commission based advice- that whilst may (often) be called independent / whole of market is unlikely to highlight these factors.

I would be interested in - What people think whole of market means?

--

Ther broker site mentioned above is not whole of market - although in some ways I think at last this is being very honest
( its online service does not offer advice)

Isn't this the problem- The whole of the market place is never the whole of the market place! Maybe brokers/IFA's should be made to provide a figure in % of the mortgages they are able to offer? Though practically speaking how this would be acheived is beyond me!

I would rather see the FSA regulate more fairly and make things clear for the end user, rather than the pages of crap they make brokers and mortgage lenders provide - we wnt facts not waffle and backside covering material.

Personally speaking I think mortgage companies should not be allowed to offer special deals by either going direct or for using a partiucular broker, without making it very very clear and advising you of the alternatives available.

hairy_cornflake_2

Well said Doug!!

payless

Thanks Doug- just the sort of response I was looking for.

I don't like the "Whole of Market" term

I personally think that all brokers should list the lenders they use ( and perhaps also highlight any lender that rec'd say over 25% of their business last year) and state that some lenders/ products may differ via different distribution channels.

Most people seem to want no fee basis - although to be classed as independent , a fee based service ( with commission rebated) should also be offered. I know Martin thought this was a bad piece of regulation , and L&C have not gone that route - but I think its about consumer choice, so I offer both routes.

I think fee based/ independent advice should also include non-commission earning/ direct products . - thats what I do if someone chooses my fee based option.
( although details of other exclusives are not always freely accessable)

payless

Doug- The bit about the reams of paper-

actually I think the new style KFI is a good thing-

yes it needs to evolve and get more standardised, with a few nip and tucks , but its a fairly clear product statement

dougk_2

I just find its a waste of our natural resources!

Now you get the same thing for insurance as well. Perhaps there is just a better way of providing the information that doesn't waste so much paper!

With regard to the Fee/ No fee bit perhaps brokers should be made to offer on a fee basis (i.e. no option). When doing a search based on the persons circumstances the customer should be told you can or cannot get a better deal if a £x fee was paid. This way the consumer/customer gets the most choice posssible.

I too agree it should be clear which lenders/investors a broker has access too (both or either of quantity and companies)

A good example springs to mind. When I took my first mortgage I took out an interest only one with Nationwide. Yes the broker had acccess to the majority of lenders. What he didn't say was with the endowment side of things they only dealt with AXA - I had no choice! (was this misselling????). I don't regret what I did and learnt much from the experience and am now more cautious and do investigations myself. Though I use a broker if there is no cheaper deal going direct as I feel they may as well get the comission rather than the company itself (I don't get a discount!).

This is where I would like to see the change personally - brokers who sell mortgages should also have a similar panel of insurance/investment companies... not be tied to a single company. I know this is how many make there money and often they are working for an insurance company etc, but you do feel slightly pressurised if they have done a good job on getting the mortgage to take out their insurance cover etc.

Sorry to those that are reading this - its a bit off topic!