Old ppi on mortgages

dunstonh

Very interesting responses ... and very defensive.

Not defensive. Accurate.

Time you stopped trying to avoid the consequences of your actions boys.

Time you stopped being so ignorant.

oporus

Thanks boys

societys_child

oporus wrote: »

Thanks boys

That's naughty unless you mean it,
and . . . at least 2 responses have been from girls . . .:)

Goldiegirl

I was going to explain the differences between a PPI and MIG.

But I think I'll save my breath.

Suffice to say it's like comparing an elephant and an apple. There are no similarities at all because they are completly different.

From a girl

_Andy_

Let's stop feeding the troll.

roonaldo

oporus wrote: »

Very interesting responses ... and very defensive.

Time you stopped trying to avoid the consequences of your actions boys.

wake up and read the posts, its not PPI.

oporus

Like I said - thanks boys.

Let's see ...

It's not PPI because it will open a whole new can of crap, and cost IFAs buddies loadsamoney.

Like I said - thanks boys - btw that's to the girls also.

Insider101

oporus wrote: »

It was PPI by another name. In fact I was probably one of the very first victims of this whole mis-selling scandal.

It wasn't and you weren't. As others have said, the product in question is not PPI, not even remotely similar. It is basically a higher rate lending charge used to purchase insurance to cover the bank in case of your default in the mortgage. This is because the loan to value on your mortgage was higher than they would usually be prepared to lend. Hence, they can either decline your mortgage application or otherwise they can offer the mortgage with the MIG policy as a condition of acceptance. They chose the latter. You were under no obligation to accept it.

The insurance was a condition of the offer and hence was not Mis-sold.

magpiecottage

oporus wrote: »

Like I said - thanks boys.

Let's see ...

It's not PPI because it will open a whole new can of crap, and cost IFAs buddies loadsamoney.

Like I said - thanks boys - btw that's to the girls also.

Let me spell this out to you.

1) IFAs are NOT "buddies" of mortgage lenders.

2) PPI did not exist in the early 1980s so you cannot have been sold it then.

3) In those days lenders would not lend more than 75% of the cost of a house (or its valuation, as determined by a Chartered Surveyor, if that was lower) because they risked not getting it all back if you defaulted on the loan and they had to get you evicted and sell it.

4) If you wanted to borrow more than that the lenders would only do so if somebody else would agree to take on the additional risk.

5) A number of insurance companies were willing to take that risk but, as with any form of insurance, a premium must be paid.

6) You wanted that additional risk to be taken so it was entirely reasonable that you paid the premium.

You can believe this or you can choose to believe it is PPI but that does not change the fact that it is true any more than the world will continue to be round if you insist it is flat.

oporus

You lot are too easy ... far too easy ... very suspicious.