arrangement to pay - mortgage application

AliceBanned

Oh I see what you mean now. If it is cleared from my file I am not sure what I would say. If by then it is 7 or 8 years ago that's ridiculous that I have to declare it.:(

didaiva

I totally agree, it should not have to be declared after it's dropped off the credit file but the way these forms are worded they have to be. It's not right as it's for ever going to stop us from going on the high street and being forced to use high rates from whole of market brokers.

Thrugelmir

AliceBanned wrote: »

Oh I see what you mean now. If it is cleared from my file I am not sure what I would say. If by then it is 7 or 8 years ago that's ridiculous that I have to declare it.:(

Time does heal. So will not impact for ever.

In the current lending market where funds are limited. Lenders have raised the bar higher and higher. As they can afford to be selective as to who they offer a new mortgage to.

didaiva

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Time does heal. So will not impact for ever.

In that case why do they ask the question if it's not getting credit scored?

Surely a much fairer question to ask if time does really heal should be along the lines of "Have you in the last 6 years been declared bankrupt or entered an arrangement with creditors"

Thrugelmir

didaiva wrote: »

In that case why do they ask the question if it's not getting credit scored?

Surely a much fairer question to ask if time does really heal should be along the lines of "Have you in the last 6 years been declared bankrupt or entered an arrangement with creditors"

An arrangement with creditors could last 50 years. If a repayment schedule of a £1 a week has been agreed for example.

Any history in the past 6 years is relevant. As this alone may result in a straight decline depending on the underwriting criteria at the time of application. Underwriting criteria does fluctuate it does not remain static.

A failure to declare tells the lender a lot about the applicant. No reason to be ashamed. As this a business transaction nothing personal.

didaiva

I understand that it's nothing personal but my concern here is there is no getting out of the fact that at some time in the past I entered an arrangement that is now completed and it's been more than 6 years ago but am forced to answer yes and that affects any mortgage offer.

taking on board your point though may be it could be changed to

"Have you in the last 6 years been declared bankrupt or entered an arrangement with creditors. Or in an arrangement that is still current."

Thrugelmir

didaiva wrote: »

I understand that it's nothing personal but my concern here is there is no getting out of the fact that at some time in the past I entered an arrangement that is now completed and it's been more than 6 years ago but am forced to answer yes and that affects any mortgage offer.

taking on board your point though may be it could be changed to

"Have you in the last 6 years been declared bankrupt or entered an arrangement with creditors. Or in an arrangement that is still current."

The lender sets the terms and conditions of the transaction. So can ask whatever they want. The applicant has the choice of accepting or not. Like any business transaction.

AliceBanned

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The lender sets the terms and conditions of the transaction. So can ask whatever they want. The applicant has the choice of accepting or not. Like any business transaction.

I think Thrugelmir is aware of this, as I am but they are playing God and they shouldn't be able to do what suits them all the time. Especially when some of them wouldn't have survived without taxpayers' money. It's a scandal if they can set lending criteria ridiculously high, and can look at records beyond 6 years to do this - people may have made mistakes in the past or had problems, and turned their life around so deserve a bit more than a lifetime of renting, including as a pensioner, because for 50 years they have been blemished because of a decision made between eating or paying a credit card bill. In fact it is partly the fact that lenders were lending willy nilly at the time that I got into debt. I emphasise the word "partly". Lenders are using anything they can as an excuse to charge higher rates. I am still determined, with a big enough deposit I will still get a mortgage but just not there yet. I prefer to be in a stronger position anyway, as I never want to have the debt problems I had in the past, it was really awful.

AliceBanned

I meant to say "I think didaiva is aware of this"

Thrugelmir

AliceBanned wrote: »

I think Thrugelmir is aware of this, as I am but they are playing God and they shouldn't be able to do what suits them all the time. Especially when some of them wouldn't have survived without taxpayers' money.

Banks are run by people. The top management of all the bailed banks has changed. So the new management has had to adopt the necessary measures to (a) correct historic lending issues (b) set appropriate standards for the future.

There's nothing radical in what banks are currently doing. Lending policy has merely returned to an era of around 15 years ago.

So you can shout as much as you wish but these are the new rules. Best to accept them and move forward from here.