mortgage application disclosure

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

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

As has already been said, any porting of a mortgage is subject to meeting all lending criteria at the time.

No wonder this has dragged on for years, you are dodging the issues and going round in circles.

Dave_Ham

Did you not ask them at the time if they would lend you anything on existing rate?

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.

sorry offer of 300k to purchase my home

potatoefeet66

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Did you not ask them at the time if they would lend you anything on existing rate?

yes, I was told you either stay put or go else where for mortgage also i was told they did not want to officially decline mortgage as they did not want to jeopodize
any future application. basically they did not want to prevent another lender from taking me on

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

As has already been said, any porting of a mortgage is subject to meeting all lending criteria at the time.

No wonder this has dragged on for years, you are dodging the issues and going round in circles.

well i guess i could be accused of that, however you tell me the application i had was conducted and declined on the 3rd of feb 2009 and data now disclosed is that the application was submitted and credit searched on the 5th and bank can not produce copy of disclosure document.

Simon_gloster

Which is correct.

Should you not meet basic affordability rules NOW, then you do not have the right to port your mortgage rate. It's a concession only.

Let me ask you a question....would you go to this much trouble if you were a a variable rate of 6.29%?

It seems from the post they do not want to know, nor does any other body in the country who has influence.

Should a house move go ahead you need to find alternative money lenders on their terms.

Outrageous.

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

As has already been said, any porting of a mortgage is subject to meeting all lending criteria at the time.

No wonder this has dragged on for years, you are dodging the issues and going round in circles.

yes its dragged on as i went through all the correct complaint hoops only to be offered by FOS compensation over its failure and poor service of my complaint and after 29 months finally admitting that FOS cannot deal with fraud. you would not believe what I've unearthed.

If it not fraud and I'm simply dodging the issues why won't the bank give me or FOS any response on the allegations

potatoefeet66

Simon_gloster wrote: »

Which is correct.

Should you not meet basic affordability rules NOW, then you do not have the right to port your mortgage rate. It's a concession only.

Let me ask you a question....would you go to this much trouble if you were a a variable rate of 6.29%?

It seems from the post they do not want to know, nor does any other body in the country who has influence.

Should a house move go ahead you need to find alternative money lenders on their terms.

Outrageous.

But I'm not on 6.29 % am I .Im on 0.84% and i can prove mortgage fraud by the lender. even more outrageous.

Ill let you know what the ICO say then .

potatoefeet66

one last word thanks for every ones help and i hope I've not given you all nightmares, but let me say this thats it is well documented that this lender has a history of manipulating markets so why stop their and not do customers also.

Simon_gloster

And you think the ICO can force a lender to offer porting rules if you do not meet their current affordability rules.

You seem an intelligent person, but after all this time :

1) Are you buyers/vendors getting annoyed?
2) Is fraud the issue? I thought it was because you had insufficient provable income to support the mortgage. Different ball game.

You are self employed as stated. What income did you declare to HMRC for 2010-2011 and 2011-2012? If this isn't enough to get your £92K or whatever it is, they will give you whatever they feel suitable based on your taxable income. Would that amount not help you?

You will get 0 sympathy from a lender on utilising your tax breaks trust me.