mortgage application disclosure

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

please see post i understand what you are saying and your not wrong, however the documented facts show that the process was manipulated outside of fsa rules. I did not realise this and never intended to point the finger at any individual. I guess I will have to wait for the ICO investigation on the data breach, yes lender can do what they like in their own systems as long as they adhere to fsa mcob rules which this advisor and underwriter failed to do. A full search cannot be done with euifax as is recorded on my file 5th feb unless disclosure application is signed and dated that is the law under the data protection act.

My income is an issue that cannot be ignored I've never disputed this with my mortgage provider i was looking to port 138k but why not allow or even consider the further 82k of equity i still had to offer which i was prepared to do. unfortunately it was a clear case of all or nothing as if they said we will accept x amount then this would be a breach of my contract so they manipulated the application to try and force me off product. why would a lender leave a decision months after initial contact and allow customer to proceed to point of exchange and pull rug from under feet. that s not fair or reasonable practice is it.

Would you have complained about breach of DP if the application was successful?

Also why proceed to exchange with no offer in place?

Presumably you are still on the original product and loan? Could you not reduce the loan by the amount of your deposit? You could then re-apply and use the released equity as a deposit.

Not really sure what you want to achieve here.

Dave_Ham

I am utterly confused.

Fraud is a strong word and from my experience of banks and their internal systems, there is no motivation for a frontline advisor or underwriter to commit fraud to only advantage the bank by not allowing you to port the desirable rate.

Either you can borrow the funds (and can port the mortgage) or you cannot.

Your posts read like you are ranting and looking to cause trouble, in opposition to resolving the ongoing issue.

Many years ago when I worked for a bank, complaint school taught us the first rule is to ask the client what they want - so what do you want?

You are exploring all of the correct avenues in terms of complaining, although you have to be more concise.

I also fear we may not be availed of all of facts given the dates just keep appearing.

Were you downsizing due to unsecured debt, or were you on interest only or are you aged 55+

Is your income derived from a source the bank are unhappy with, ie only 1 year self employed, non-guaranteed pension income, probation period employment, self employed with decreasing net profit??

I too will be interested in the end result of this...

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

Would you have complained about breach of DP if the application was successful?

Also why proceed to exchange with no offer in place?

Presumably you are still on the original product and loan? Could you not reduce the loan by the amount of your deposit? You could then re-apply and use the released equity as a deposit.

Not really sure what you want to achieve here.

Oh I had offer it was for 300k although I had dropped my asking price, as far as dates are concerned this was all happening in 2009 i have been fighting this since then. yes I'm still on same product 0.84pc tracker which i had a rate switched to on 22nd sept 2008 four months before all this erupted. i came off lender svr onto the tracker at 0.84pc I'm certainly not complaining of that.

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

Oh I had offer it was for 300k although I had dropped my asking price, as far as dates are concerned this was all happening in 2009 i have been fighting this since then. yes I'm still on same product 0.84pc tracker which i had a rate switched to on 22nd sept 2008 four months before all this erupted. i came off lender svr onto the tracker at 0.84pc I'm certainly not complaining of that.

You got an offer for 300k having declared an income of 15k?

potatoefeet66

Dave_Ham wrote: »

I am utterly confused.

Fraud is a strong word and from my experience of banks and their internal systems, there is no motivation for a frontline advisor or underwriter to commit fraud to only advantage the bank by not allowing you to port the desirable rate.

Either you can borrow the funds (and can port the mortgage) or you cannot.

Your posts read like you are ranting and looking to cause trouble, in opposition to resolving the ongoing issue.

Many years ago when I worked for a bank, complaint school taught us the first rule is to ask the client what they want - so what do you want?

You are exploring all of the correct avenues in terms of complaining, although you have to be more concise.

I also fear we may not be availed of all of facts given the dates just keep appearing.

Were you downsizing due to unsecured debt, or were you on interest only or are you aged 55+

Is your income derived from a source the bank are unhappy with, ie only 1 year self employed, non-guaranteed pension income, probation period employment, self employed with decreasing net profit??

I too will be interested in the end result of this...

Im sorry i don't want to confuse any one and i don't want to come across as a nut case. I agree fraud is a very strong word FOS took 29 months to finally tell me they don't deal with fraud after initially in march 10th 2010 telling me they did and would investigate it. I can't begin to explain what a mess this is.

I was down sizing so to speak as id had my offer accepted on a detached property offered by a friend of my then girl friend it was a doer upper like the property i had just completed and had agreed sale on only this one i intended to port to was detached market value average post code price 575k my offer accepted 230k.the lender would not even survey it

No I'm a professional photographer which is all I've ever done since i was 17. my work is published in new york times and if you look at all virgin active club web sites interiors all 122 clubs. I am self employed yes.

yes If i could not get lending the last 50k secured on porting to a 575 detached house then fine this lender just did not want me to reduce my term by over ten years in one hit continue to over pay by 50pc and be mortgage free in less than 7 years.

and to make sure of that they manipulated the application process to get underwriter involved simple its all documented.

Dave_Ham

So the issue is that you believe they manufactured their processes to ensure you could not port the attractive rate.

So you need to establish exactly why they declined the case. They cite income and therefore if you have decreasing net profit/net income it may fall foul of their criteria.

Indeed lower income than keyed declared also fits into this category.

The fast track etc. is not relevant, as if I suspect the advisor keyed previous details (to make sure the case fitted) on a fast track basis then an underwriter has a look and wants proof then unfortunately they are within their rights.

I have a better handle, happy to be amended but not sure I fancy your chances if I have this correct..

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

You got an offer for 300k having declared an income of 15k?

no no look i already have a mortgage its a lifetime tracker 0,84pc my home . I had agreed a sale of it at 300k to purchase a detached property at 230k.

I had 40pc deposit satisfying kfi ltv that was 92k with a further 82k to add if reguired.

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

Oh I had offer it was for 300k

You put this in a reply to not having a mortgage offer.

I give in. This is far too confusing.

Did you have a mortgage offer? If not why did you attempt to exchange contracts?

Satisfying KFI is complete nonsense. A KFI could be issued for any loan and not have any meaning.

potatoefeet66

Dave_Ham wrote: »

So the issue is that you believe they manufactured their processes to ensure you could not port the attractive rate.

So you need to establish exactly why they declined the case. They cite income and therefore if you have decreasing net profit/net income it may fall foul of their criteria.

Indeed lower income than keyed declared also fits into this category.

The fast track etc. is not relevant, as if I suspect the advisor keyed previous details (to make sure the case fitted) on a fast track basis then an underwriter has a look and wants proof then unfortunately they are within their rights.

I have a better handle, happy to be amended but not sure I fancy your chances if I have this correct..

yes you are spot on however they never declared i was un lendable to just my income now failed to support the loan amount originally asked for to port which was 138k this i have never disputed but feel is harsh given all evidence and therefore i was dismissed without even consideration of me reducing the 138k to meet income multiple. the fact is all evidence points to process manipulation and is beyond doubt. Yes Fast track in irrelevant how ever I'm sure you would not leave over a month from initial contact and search and ring your customer two hours before application and tell them you were not fast tracking application but advise they proceed anyway.

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

You put this in a reply to not having a mortgage offer.

I give in. This is far too confusing.

Did you have a mortgage offer? If not why did you attempt to exchange contracts?

Satisfying KFI is complete nonsense. A KFI could be issued for any loan and not have any meaning.

the existing mortgage i hold has a ltv criteria that states to keep the product i.e. the 0.84pc i have to have a min 40pc deposit as i cannot borrow more than 60 pc of value. but i could have put down 85pc