Angry with bank. Wrong advice received. £4k cost to me.

Wh05apk

I think this highlights the danger of dealing with Banks etc, who allow un-qualified "advisers" to "provide information without putting anything in writing, understandably you assumed the info provided was correct, they will off course deny any information/advice was given, and claim you should not have proceeded without taking advice (which effectively you thought you had.

Sadly without questioning everybodies qualifications and authority to discuss every financial transaction this will only ever be a very confusing situation.

george_d

Wh05apk wrote: »

I think this highlights the danger of dealing with Banks etc, who allow un-qualified "advisers" to "provide information without putting anything in writing, understandably you assumed the info provided was correct, they will off course deny any information/advice was given, and claim you should not have proceeded without taking advice (which effectively you thought you had.

Sadly without questioning everybodies qualifications and authority to discuss every financial transaction this will only ever be a very confusing situation.

I wholly agree. Unfortunately this will be one of those lessons learnt. Hopefully I can get some form of recompense from them.

The banks (and equivalent institutions) should be helping everybody, not aiding confusion of the system to exist.

GMS

An expensive lesson learnt. Unfortunately this government and its so called regulators seem hell bent on letting the banks call the shots.

There was a proposal from the FSA to make all sales advised. The vast majority of the industry approved as did the majority of the public, many of whom thought banks gave advice anyway.

The FSA then go and approve Tesco for mortgages to be sold on a non advised basis. Totally against whaty they proposed for the market.

When people sit down with a bank 'adviser' they assume they are being advised. Why wouldn't they?

Until the rules are changed for the better there will be many more people finding themselves in situations like yours.

TrickyDicky101

GMS wrote: »

An expensive lesson learnt. Unfortunately this government and its so called regulators seem hell bent on letting the banks call the shots.

There was a proposal from the FSA to make all sales advised. The vast majority of the industry approved as did the majority of the public, many of whom thought banks gave advice anyway.

The FSA then go and approve Tesco for mortgages to be sold on a non advised basis. Totally against whaty they proposed for the market.

When people sit down with a bank 'adviser' they assume they are being advised. Why wouldn't they?

Until the rules are changed for the better there will be many more people finding themselves in situations like yours.

What utter tosh! I can see why you would like every mortgage to be on an advised basis - it would guarantee an income stream for mortgage advisers such as yourself!

I, like many, have no need for assistance or paid for advice which would simply increase the cost to me of buying a property.

Wh05apk

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

What utter tosh! I can see why you would like every mortgage to be on an advised basis - it would guarantee an income stream for mortgage advisers such as yourself!

I, like many, have no need for assistance or paid for advice which would simply increase the cost to me of buying a property.

Clearly there is a need for advice, or if not advice a clearer route to purchase, this forum is littered with many posts from peoplewho thought they were getting advice, but in fact were simply purchasing on a non-advised basis from bank sales people.

Ultimately for most people purchasing a property is the largest financial transaction they will make, so advice to be able to get the best deal/package for them is essential, not everybody is able to or has the time to fully research the market.

With regards cost, the cost of the brokers element is minimal, for a lender brokers can often be cheaper for them per application than using their own staff even after paying us a fee.

betmunch

As the mistake has been uncovered before you are committed to proceeding I cant see you having any success with reclaiming the ERC.

If you decide against proceeding with the house purchase you may have a chance of recouping any costs, but its very slim in my opinion as you had not, at that point, taken advice. Also, if you were actually porting the original mortgage rather than taking a new product then the information given was correct.

Good Luck with it

Jimbo1976

GMS

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with you that advised sales should be the default option for the vast majority of borrowers apart from those financially sophisticated enough to opt out, I don't understand your beef with the FSA over Tesco.

The consultation period for the Mortgage Market Review closed in the spring and we eagerly await the final rules. The latest consultation paper proposed banning non advised sales. Unless the FSA has a radical change of mind it will publish rules banning non advised sales. However a) it hasn't published the new rules and b) the rules won't go into force for 12 months anyway. So Tesco applied for authorisation to carry out non advised sales under the current rules. If and when the rules change, it will need to change its distribution method.

vectistim

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

What utter tosh! I can see why you would like every mortgage to be on an advised basis - it would guarantee an income stream for mortgage advisers such as yourself!

I, like many, have no need for assistance or paid for advice which would simply increase the cost to me of buying a property.

Shirley, it wouldn't be too taxing to regulate such that the default position is advice and a clear and explicit system for opting out of that advice is required for a non-advised mortgage.

TrickyDicky101

Wh05apk wrote: »

Clearly there is a need for advice, or if not advice a clearer route to purchase, this forum is littered with many posts from peoplewho thought they were getting advice, but in fact were simply purchasing on a non-advised basis from bank sales people.

Ultimately for most people purchasing a property is the largest financial transaction they will make, so advice to be able to get the best deal/package for them is essential, not everybody is able to or has the time to fully research the market.

With regards cost, the cost of the brokers element is minimal, for a lender brokers can often be cheaper for them per application than using their own staff even after paying us a fee.

I don't disagree with you - advice for many is an extremely sensible option and perhaps if more people took it, they might save many thousands of pounds over the life of their mortgage (and be less stressed during the purchase process).

But the point is it should be their choice - they should be free to take (or purchase) advice should they so wish, and in a similar vein they should be free to not take the advice.

grey_gym_sock

the most obvious rule change would be to ban calling somebody an "advisor" when they are not. "salesperson" is the correct term.