Unfair Booking fee from Coventry

Thrugelmir

holly_hobby wrote: »

The data below is lifted from Coventry's own intermediary site ...

Which does rather put the ball pretty squarely back in your brokers court (given he stated before he submitted they were tight on affordability) and confirms what I and the rest of the guys have already stated .... (TBH to have submitted without even a DIP given the circs, does appear that hes a little inexperienced, or may just have been lax instead)

"Check lending policy

Make sure your case meets our lending policy before you submit your application, as we will not refund fees where we subsequently decline or cancel a case.

Please be aware that we may request additional information to finalise our lending decision "

Do building societies publish detailed criteria or policy changes?

ACG

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Do building societies publish detailed criteria or policy changes?

I tend to avoid Coventry, but i do use Skipton and Principality building societies a lot. I call my BDM, tell them what the income is made up of - they say yay or nay whether they will accept it or not.

GMS

I like Coventry. They do what they say. Pretty transparent in what they do and don't do and always very helpful on the phone with any queries.

Agree with ACG on Principality. Superb to deal with and apply a lot of common sense.

If this case has fallen down on affordability then the broker has not checked properly or not had full information. Simple as that.

holly_hobby

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Do building societies publish detailed criteria or policy changes?

No, thats where experience comes in, and the whole reason why you always refer any non-standard issues to your BDM or lender rep, for guidance and if necessary a pre-submission agreement with the UW.

Holly

GMS

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Do building societies publish detailed criteria or policy changes?

A snapshot of criteria is available on the intermediaries website. Policy changes are communicated by email.

A snapshot is just that. Many things are not included which are only learnt from experience.

Thrugelmir

holly_hobby wrote: »

No, thats where experience comes in, and the whole reason why you always refer any non-standard issues to your BDM or lender rep, for guidance and if necessary a pre-submission agreement with the UW.

Holly

I was merely thinking that its not possible to be on top of all changes in the market currently. As risk is under constant review. As lenders react to each others moves.

holly_hobby

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I was merely thinking that its not possible to be on top of all changes in the market currently. As risk is under constant review. As lenders react to each others moves.

I understand not being an adviser that you would think that, but its exactly this type of background work that is what essentially a brokers role entails (a proficient one at least).

To know the market, and any changes to criteria (which are communicated by the lenders to regisgtered brokers) - to which if you're not sure a case fits, its an unusual case or you have little or no experience with the lender in question, you ring them or your BDM for guidance and initial placement.

To submit a case tight on income and with salary sacrifiice (which you have included in the multiple), with him simply hoping for the best esp where there is a booking fee (which are rarely refundable unles the product was pulled between app completion and submission), is completely unacceptable (well from my point of view as an ex adviser it is).

Hope this helps

Holly

ACG

Im with holly on this, i see my role as to check anything and everything im not 100% on. Whether thats because im still relatively new and have maybe 12 months experience or whether i have OCD is to be seen.

But i treat everyones money as though its my own, if i wasnt prepared to gamble my own money there is no way i would be gambling someone elses.

Conrad

Personally I have found the Building Societies bring out all sorts of off the wall reasons to decline cases and even with my 20 yrs experience I get caught out.

Even treble checking every detail and running things by a rep, you still get declines and to be frank the list of reasons to decline are infinite as one factor affects another and so on.

As long as broker made it clear the fee was non refundable and subject to underwriting I'm not sure you have a case.

As an example a client with one of his B2L's with Halifax was at the last moment declined as the underwriter wanted that mortgage coverted to a full blown buy to let by a lender even though Halifax had granted permission to let.

kingstreet

In my experience, a lender may decline to include childcare vouchers in income where salary sacrifice is taking place, but would likewise not factor childcare costs into the affordability calculation.

The end result would be the same as your income being increased to take into account the vouchers, but then the costs being deducted.

ie £500 per month salary sacrifice has the same impact as a £500 per month childcare bill on your bank statement.

Is that the case with Coventry?