Halifax Computer "says no"

spurs_nut

Mr_helpful wrote: »

This is the trouble with going direct. The person who operates this computer often doesnt have any qualifications and doesnt understand mortgages. I once had a guy turned down by halifax, Abbey, and Woolwich for a 30K loan on a 270K house, No adverse it was just he had sold his company and signed a cotract not to work in same business for 6 mths. Computer said no coz he was unemployed. One phone call to the manger of our local building society (one of the smallest and most cautious) was all it took.
Computers are black and white. If you want to be with the halifax phone head office and have a tantrum. Or use a broker.

Exactly, why don't you make an appeal with proof of your financial information and have someone human look over it.

Computers make a decision over black and white data which doesn't always tell the full story.

Try a bit harder and you may get what you want.

regularsaver1

Mr_helpful wrote: »

This is the trouble with going direct. The person who operates this computer often doesnt have any qualifications and doesnt understand mortgages.

all those that do mortgages in halifax have the appropriate qualifications , cemap and fsa authorised - as you know they have to otherwise they can not deal with the mortgage application in the first place

why do i read these things saying that those that key mortgage applications are not qualified - they have to be. They give advice. They are observed monthly by their supervisor

I agree that some lending decisions at halifax are cautious - and maybe too cautious at times, but they have their criteria and stick by it. Some times the advisers don't agree with some decisions, but the underwriters do

It also frustrates branch advisers because somehow, sometimes brokers manage to get the same mortgage through that they branch adviser was told was not feesable by underwriter - different rules. Ie I know a branch adviser who required income proof from her client - but a broker did not have to provide it - why? same mortgage, beats me but different rules

regularsaver1

In this case, the adviser may have been able to submit a business case with proof from customer

or was there more to the decline than this?

Emmzi

terese wrote: »

Can someone tell me how they did it in the 50's & 60's.

I can tell you how we did it in the early 90's.

Bankers were trained to assess.. and I may have the acronym slightly wrong, it's a while since my exams!...

Person - respectable? trustworthy? track record? any CCJs? employment history.
Age - over 18?
Reason- is the loan for a legal purpose eg not funding drug deals
Security - is suitable security available eg a sound house for a mortgage
Expediency - eg if its the son of your best customer you might bend the rules a bit
Repayment - can they afford the monthly payments, with a bit spare in case interest rates rise?
Remuneration - will we make a profit off the deal?

Basically the computers take these criteria, assess them slightly more scientifically based on profiles of who has defaulted before, and give an answer. (Except the expediency, that's still a local decision.)

regularsaver1

and didn't they have a pot of money and once that money was gone in that quarter, that was it until the next quarter?