mortgage Lump sum repayments chicken egg.

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

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

Of course i deny committing fraud. But the bank has not they just don't want to answer any allegation on the subject and cannot give me or FOS a signed disclosure document the entire application process was rigged. If this lender wants to prosecute me over fraud then it will save me trying to get court action to prove that they have
by claiming I made a false application. Look You know as well as i do with out the disclosure document they cannot prove or insist I gave information either willingly or that they haven't just made the whole thing up am I wrong .

Thrugelmir

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

Of course i deny committing fraud. But the bank has not they just don't want to answer any allegation on the subject and cannot give me or FOS a signed disclosure document the entire application process was rigged. If this lender wants to prosecute me over fraud then it will save me trying to get court action to prove that they have
by claiming I made a false application. Look You know as well as i do with out the disclosure document they cannot prove or insist I gave information either willingly or that they haven't just made the whole thing up am I wrong .

The situation you may have arrived at is that your current lender has no further interest in conducting business with you. There's no FSA requirement to offer you a new mortgage. The decision is entirely down to the lender.

potatoefeet66

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The situation you may have arrived at is that your current lender has no further interest in conducting business with you. There's no FSA requirement to offer you a new mortgage. The decision is entirely down to the lender.

If that was the case why even bother to provide any illustration and then decline the application then offer an appeal at that stage all card s are on the table. Fraud intent to remove product as FOS declared was no longer financially viable to the company.

GMS

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

If that was the case why even bother to provide any illustration and then decline the application then offer an appeal at that stage all card s are on the table. Fraud intent to remove product as FOS declared was no longer financially viable to the company.

If they wanted to remove you from the product you would have been offered a higher rate surely? Was it not the case that you were declined and left on the same rate and terms?

Genuis from the bank that. Committ fraud in order to leave you on the same loss making product.

I am now convinced this thread is a wind up.

potatoefeet66

GMS wrote: »

If they wanted to remove you from the product you would have been offered a higher rate surely? Was it not the case that you were declined and left on the same rate and terms?

Genuis from the bank that. Committ fraud in order to leave you on the same loss making product.

I am now convinced this thread is a wind up.

GMS I'm totally serious it no wind up. Like I said why conduct application to port 138K search credit, decline application on the 5th Feb,at this stage lender has all info with out any doubt, then offer an appeal carried out on 16th Feb only to refuse any reduction if the did not want my business any longer. I know it does not make sense.

The advisor i think had at the time a personal axe to grind not directly with me but with the system as at the interview she made personal comments to me regarding how its unfair that some do well by making a lot of equity and others do not , and went on to relate how her daughter and son inlaw are in negative equity in their flat in S.............

_Andy_

Either way, things are getting quite, quite tedious. Really unsure what the OP is actually looking to gain but posting about it constantly.

potatoefeet66

I will say what it is though apart from internal fraud, a cover up of rate claw back.

potatoefeet66

_Andy_ wrote: »

Either way, things are getting quite, quite tedious. Really unsure what the OP is actually looking to gain but posting about it constantly.

Nothing really its my problem. what will be will be.

potatoefeet66

I think its better for you all if I stop posting you have my word I will if you all like. The next time I post will be after I get ICO and FOS responses. Thank You all. X

Thrugelmir

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

If that was the case why even bother to provide any illustration and then decline the application then offer an appeal at that stage all card s are on the table. Fraud intent to remove product as FOS declared was no longer financially viable to the company.

Banks are large organisations. You can talk to monkeys all day but it is the organ grinder that makes the real decisions.

The FOS will not interfere or rule on grounds of commerciality.

Common sense dictates that lenders will honour existing contractual arrangements but decline new applications. Particularly if the outcome is a straight loss.