mortgage broker charging me after deciding to not use him

kingstreet

No. When you start what might turn out to be a war you don't fire all your ammunition in the early salvos of the first battle.

The Ombudsman will be very interested in the paper trail, should you ever arrive at that point.

Write down all your conversations and list and retain the documentation you were sent and when it arrived. Keep this in case the Ombudsman referral is needed.

What I set out for you is a good opening. It sets out the facts, why you believe the fee should not be payable, why you decided not to proceed and how you intend to respond if the broker maintains its current stance.

If the broker is directly authorised, that's it.

If it's a network member (see S6 of the Initial Disclosure Document) you might want to cc a copy to the network's compliance manager, noting in your letter to the broker that you've done exactly that.

That's enough for now. Take copies and send recorded delivery.

ACG

Not signing doesnt mean its not legally binding, it just makes it harder to prove.

You have not met the criteria which would result in you having to pay the fee. Thats their contract flaw which is not your problem.

The letter seems to be a good start, your not paying, the reason why, if they persist then you will take the matter further (ie the FOS).

That should be the end of the matter, if they take it further theyre idiots.

magpiecottage

kingstreet wrote: »

Take copies and send recorded delivery.

Take copies but no need for recorded delivery. Get proof of posting (free from the Post Office) and FOS will accept that if necessary.

However, the from what the OP says, it seems that contact prior to the arrival of the invoice all correspondence had been by letter.

If that is so then the broker seems to be in breach of FSA rule MCOB 4.5.2

This rule requires the disclosure of the firm's services and costs to be made, in a durable medium, before the conclusion of the contract. A "durable medium" can be a letter or an e-mail but what it really boils down to is if it was not in a document provided personally to the OP (though not necessarily personalised) it is not compliant.

There is a further argument that if the firm has held itself out as a whole of market adviser but the OP has found a more suitable product then the adviser has failed in its contractual obligations and is therefore not entitled to the fee.

Either way, the firm seems to be rather lacking in competence.

kingstreet

Thanks mpc. You always give a slightly clearer perspective on the obligations than I can.

scotsbhoy1

what would i do without you guys,youve done me a great service.thank you

ACG

scotsbhoy1 wrote: »

what would i do without you guys,youve done me a great service.thank you

It was only last week we were being accused by someone of only being on here to generate more business for ourselves because we told him to go and see an advisor!

Good to see we can help

kingstreet

ACG wrote: »

It was only last week we were being accused by someone of only being on here to generate more business for ourselves because we told him to go and see an advisor!

I've had loads of PMs asking me to act for people and have never accepted any of them. I don't suppose it's ever occurred to them we might just enjoy "putting something back" as you might say.

ACG

Ive done business for 1 person on here. I would have earnt more money on minimum wage in a shop if i work out how long i must have spent on here.
Im a little more selfish than you i think...i come on here to learn and because ive only been self employed for 6 months im not as busy as id like to be so it helps to keep my brain functioning and thinking about situations.