mortgage application disclosure

potatoefeet66

Simon_gloster wrote: »

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.

Yes i agree with you, keep in mind this is in 2009, and all i needed was a multiple of the figure they assessed as income, but they only came forward with that figure two years later to FOS and not to me, bit late in day to say we would have only offered at time xyz don't you think, far fairer to have told me at the correct stage of the application process.

As to what 2010-11 11-12 income is, thats irrelevant i was only wanting to move from my house in 2009 to detached. when I bought this house i live in, I had built a self contained studio to one side, which now has a tenant and as resident landlord all cost are covered. don't get me wrong I'm one of the lucky ones I'm just don't like being lied to and having my future security for me and my three kids ruined by one individual with a personal axe to grind get my drift. and if i can get any kind of justice for lenders action I will for my kids sake. you would, so would any other hard working decent father parent.

potatoefeet66

Simon_gloster wrote: »

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.

no I do not think the ICO can force lender to offer lending if affordability is not met. But I hope they will resolve the data breach. lets presume there was not breach of data or fraud ill have to move on finally but thats why i went to FOS in first place but they have failed.
secondly lets say lender is asked to correct information as there was not actually any application recored as taking place on the 5th feb 2009 then I was never given in any way irrespective of my status as an existing customer a fair process they will be liable for damages, and any refusal to either correct or apologise will be met with a fine by ICO

Simon_gloster

I see where you are coming from...in a way.

Try to keep the tin on your tin of baked beans as letting a self contained studio on someones security/land can open a can of vindaloo strength curried beans!!!, especially without their consent.

To put your mind at rest I'll give you a scenario which probably happens 000's of times a day across the UK.

£150,000 property.
£130,000 mortgage 5 years ago.
single man no kids on £30,000 per annum. A doable and nice application.

5 years later.

Property worth £150,000
Mortgage £115,000
single man no kids on £14,000 per annum due to redundancy etc.

Wants to downsize to a £100,000 property and borrow £84,000.

Their existing lender and no-one else will entertain them on those figures as, even though they may be able to afford the mortgage now, it was agreed on terms 5 years ago.

Should that mortgage be agreed and that person falls into arrears as they are good existing payers, the lender would be hung, drawn and 1/4ed for a mortgage that was deemed unaffordable.

If you have been ill-informed at some stage then redress is a possibility, but the mortgage, should you fit remotely the above scenanrio is never going to happen.

GMS

KFI issued 2 days before the application submitted is not unusual. KFI can be done there and then with the application sent to underwriters. 48 hours seems a reasonable timescale.

potatoefeet66

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

no I do not think the ICO can force lender to offer lending if affordability is not met. But I hope they will resolve the data breach. lets presume there was not breach of data or fraud ill have to move on finally but thats why i went to FOS in first place but they have failed.
secondly lets say lender is asked to correct information as there was not actually any application recored as taking place on the 5th feb 2009 then I was never given in any way irrespective of my status as an existing customer a fair process they will be liable for damages, and any refusal to either correct or apologise will be met with a fine by ICO

ps I do not think making customers mortgage prisoners is fair practice either but thats what they did because the product is no longer commercially viable.

cwcw

Simon_gloster wrote: »

To put your mind at rest I'll give you a scenario which probably happens 000's of times a day across the UK.

£150,000 property.
£130,000 mortgage 5 years ago.
single man no kids on £30,000 per annum. A doable and nice application.

5 years later.

Property worth £150,000
Mortgage £115,000
single man no kids on £14,000 per annum due to redundancy etc.

Wants to downsize to a £100,000 property and borrow £84,000.

Their existing lender and no-one else will entertain them on those figures as, even though they may be able to afford the mortgage now, it was agreed on terms 5 years ago.

Whilst this is a true reflection of reality, it does highlight the stupidity of a situation where a lender prefers someone to be trapped into an existing, higher mortgage, rather than give them a new, smaller mortgage which they would be at lower risk of defaulting on. Even if their criteria fell short for the new mortgage, it would fall even further short for their existing one.

cwcw

OP - I've read through this thread but I have to admit I'm struggling to understand some of the basics. Please could you complete the following, as at the time of the application in 2009:

Proposed house sale price:
Proposed new purchase price:
Remaining mortgage balance to port:
Additional lending required, if any:

Please copy/ paste and complete, rather than writing out in sentences.

Simon_gloster

cwcw wrote: »

Whilst this is a true reflection of reality, it does highlight the stupidity of a situation where a lender prefers someone to be trapped into an existing, higher mortgage, rather than give them a new, smaller mortgage which they would be at lower risk of defaulting on. Even if their criteria fell short for the new mortgage, it would fall even further short for their existing one.

I also agree with you, however the line has to be drawn somewhere and there are those that will feel hard done by and those that accept the situation.

All it takes is 200 of those caught prisoner to fall foul of rate rises in 7 years time to compo the hell out of the lender for irresponsible lending. This country brought this situation on itself by claiming for everything when it doesn't go its way.

cwcw

Simon_gloster wrote: »

I also agree with you, however the line has to be drawn somewhere and there are those that will feel hard done by and those that accept the situation.

All it takes is 200 of those caught prisoner to fall foul of rate rises in 7 years time to compo the hell out of the lender for irresponsible lending. This country brought this situation on itself by claiming for everything when it doesn't go its way.

That depends. I'm sure legislation could be put in place. Effectively a reduced mortgage on a new place could be treated as the same mortgage rather than a new application.

cwcw

cwcw wrote: »

OP - I've read through this thread but I have to admit I'm struggling to understand some of the basics. Please could you complete the following, as at the time of the application in 2009:

Proposed house sale price:
Proposed new purchase price:
Remaining mortgage balance to port:
Additional lending required, if any:

Please copy/ paste and complete, rather than writing out in sentences.

PS. OP - as well as the basics I have requested above, I also don't understand why you think fraud has been committed. It is quite a serious allegation to make and you should be careful not to name the institution as it could constitute libel.

To me, from what I understand, and I'm not saying I do understand it all, but it sounds like a failed application due to not meeting lending criteria, combined with some incompetence of the advisors involved (par for the course) and a bit of data mishandling thrown in for good measure (which is where you may have a case against them, but mishandling data is not the same thing as fraud).