mortgage Lump sum repayments chicken egg.

potatoefeet66

A customer has an existing mortgage a life time tracker with no erc or associated tie ins. He/she has ±70pc equity in the mortgaged home.no ccj no credit issues and has perfectly run mortgage for the past 9 year or more.

The lender confirms,...."we can confirm that your current Mortgage product may be ported to a new property up to the balance outstanding of each account and the new mortgage must be completed simultaneously or with in six months following the redemption of the existing Mortgage."

The terms are set out that " you can keep all parts of this mortgage if you move to another property provided that you still meet our lending criteria at that time".

However the customer does not want to keep all parts in as much he no longer wishes to have any where near as much borrowing, and want to use equity of between 60-80K to reduce the existing balance upon porting. original advance 3years earlier 150K outanding balance 138K lump sum repayment upon simultaneous porting 60-80K. product rate to port 0.84pc.

Even though he/she is putting down min 40pc deposit of 92K but has at disposal a further 60-80K to use making up a deposit of over 80pc.

The lender declines application as income of customer is not the same as when the original advance of 150k was made.

They then refuse to allow customer to even offer use of all equity reducing balance.

who is at fault the customer for not foreseeing ten years later his income temporarily would not be same for that year as it was three years earlier, customer fault for not forecasting a recession, or the lender for having ambiguous terms about lump sum payments and not explained clearly enough that simultaneous lump sum repayments while porting a reduced balance are actually not allowed.
which are irresponsibly enforced as product is clearly no longer financially viable to lender.

_Andy_

Didn't you already have a lengthy thread about this?

potatoefeet66

_Andy_ wrote: »

Didn't you already have a lengthy thread about this?

No that was about data protection breach. this is about simultaneous lump sum repayments. you don't have to read or comment on everything by me. If theres a limit and I've exceeded it my appolgise I'm relatively new to this stuff.

GMS

I did suggest in the last thread that you may wish to look at reducing the balance with the funds you currently have prior to making a new application to port the mortgage as this may help affordability.

However you will still need to prove income as was covered many times in the last thread.

I have no idea what you want to achieve, other than for somebody to tell you the lender are negligent and you are right and can port what you want when you want and however you want.

Criteria needs to be met as you have stated above.

What are the terms on your current mortgage relating to overpaymets? If you are out of your initail period can you pay as much as you wish?

If not then pay what you are allowed to. Otherwise overpay and incur the penalty if it will help you achieve your aim of porting.

Seriously you are not doing yourself any favours with these threads. Why not go to the bank and sit down with somebody. Suggest reducing prior to porting to see if it helps. Making complaints left right and centre will not help.

Accusing the lender of fraud will not help either.

The fact is you did not meet the criteria so they won't lend. No ombudsman will force a lender to lend.

Sit down and try to work out a way.

potatoefeet66

Thank you should I start a thread about ombudsman's admission of its failures and poor service and offer of compensation.
I have no penalties tie ins or erc what ever i pay I can over pay on a daily basis as little as a pound, or as much as i can afford. is an income status change reason to refuse any lending in line with the assessed income.

Im sure that I've just not managed to get point issue across.
surely mortgage advisors would be interested at an issue which if common practice would result in loss of their income.

Fraud as the ombudsman stated to me is a very serious criminal offence.
They told me they would investigate the issue, they failed to ask lender to issue response to allegation and then after 29 months declared they cannot deal with fraud.

Whether we like it or not all mortgages are pointless and worth less its only a matter of time before bank (s) collapse the housing market.

FOS the Bank are still dealing with the issues and their action three and half years later, they just picked on the wrong customer to commit a fraudulent process with. Sorry if Ive wasted or rattled any cages was not my intention.

GMS

Change of income status is enough of a reason to refuse a loan. If you went self employed and they wanted 3 years accounts then you would need to wait until then. Similarly if you went from full time to contract you would need to meet the criteria for that.

If you can overpay which you say you can sit down and see if you can work a solution.

I said in last thread be careful of shouting fraud as the application was yours. You knew the income being declared.

You didn't answer what your proveable income was at the time of application and what the proof was yet you continue to accuse the bank of wrong doing.

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

I did suggest in the last thread that you may wish to look at reducing the balance with the funds you currently have prior to making a new application to port the mortgage as this may help affordability.

However you will still need to prove income as was covered many times in the last thread.

I have no idea what you want to achieve, other than for somebody to tell you the lender are negligent and you are right and can port what you want when you want and however you want.

Criteria needs to be met as you have stated above.

What are the terms on your current mortgage relating to overpaymets? If you are out of your initail period can you pay as much as you wish?

If not then pay what you are allowed to. Otherwise overpay and incur the penalty if it will help you achieve your aim of porting.

Seriously you are not doing yourself any favours with these threads. Why not go to the bank and sit down with somebody. Suggest reducing prior to porting to see if it helps. Making complaints left right and centre will not help.

Accusing the lender of fraud will not help either.

The fact is you did not meet the criteria so they won't lend. No ombudsman will force a lender to lend.

Sit down and try to work out a way.

ps. I totally agree that criteria has to be met, but that does not give any individual or lender the green light to alter FSA rules in conducting its processes. Rules are rules.

GMS

Alter what rules?

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

Change of income status is enough of a reason to refuse a loan. If you went self employed and they wanted 3 years accounts then you would need to wait until then. Similarly if you went from full time to contract you would need to meet the criteria for that.

If you can overpay which you say you can sit down and see if you can work a solution.

I said in last thread be careful of shouting fraud as the application was yours. You knew the income being declared.

You didn't answer what your proveable income was at the time of application and what the proof was yet you continue to accuse the bank of wrong doing.

the fact is the lener altered process and breached contract and what ever figures i was told by advisor to submit i would just deny that the application took place as they cannot provide the disclosure document for the application dated the 5th Feb, Simple they have committed fraud no contest. Id be very happy if they issued proceedings against me on the matter would save me a fortune ...... does anyone want to know what lender committed this fraud ....?

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

the fact is the lener altered process and breached contract and what ever figures i was told by advisor to submit i would just deny that the application took place as they cannot provide the disclosure document for the application dated the 5th Feb, Simple they have committed fraud no contest. Id be very happy if they issued proceedings against me on the matter would save me a fortune ...... does anyone want to know what lender committed this fraud ....?

So you don't deny committing fraud? More to do with the lender not being able to prove it ocurred?

potatoefeet66

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

the fact is the lener altered process and breached contract and what ever figures i was told by advisor to submit i would just deny that the application took place as they cannot provide the disclosure document for the application dated the 5th Feb, Simple they have committed fraud no contest. Id be very happy if they issued proceedings against me on the matter would save me a fortune ...... does anyone want to know what lender committed this fraud ....? I'm more than happy to name the underwriter and the Branch advisor, I doubt they would argue over a settlement then