MSE News: Buy-to-let borrowers hit by West Brom mortgage hike

Thrugelmir

Many moons ago Skipton BS borrowers threatened a similar course of action. When it come to the crunch though. They weren't so keen to put their money on the table to fund the action.

Richard_Watters

I know, that's the risk, everyone wants someone else to pay. This is gathering a lot of momentum though, from the response so far I'd be surprised if there wasn't enough support.

Thrugelmir

Richard_Watters wrote: »

I know, that's the risk, everyone wants someone else to pay. This is gathering a lot of momentum though, from the response so far I'd be surprised if there wasn't enough support.

Hot air rather than momentum one suspects. As BOI class action seems to have faded away. Yet far more borrowers were impacted than this latest event.

Norwich & Peterborough BS effected a change as well. That received no coverage at all.

So the precedent's are mounting up.

motch

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Hot air rather than momentum one suspects. As BOI class action seems to have faded away. Yet far more borrowers were impacted than this latest event.

Norwich & Peterborough BS effected a change as well. That received no coverage at all.

So the precedent's are mounting up.

how did the BOI increase (or not) turn out in the end?

fewcloudy

brit1234 wrote: »

Yes. There are far more savers than people with mortgages. For 4-5 years buy to let landlords have been given the stupidly low mortgage rates at the expense of taking it from prudent savers. In return they have increased rents.

If a small 2% rise at these extra low rates is unaffordable then your business is unsustainable. Perhaps you should sell in January with help to buy 2 to maximize your returns and then maybe add it to your pension as an annuity.

The simple fact is that banks can't operate sustainably while interest rates are so low and they all need to improve their balance sheets.

I am not a BTL mortgage holder, but I am still surprised anyone would think the way you do about the banks behaviour.

Me or you might not be able to operate "sustainably" if the interest rates were to go as high again as they did in 89/90... I had a mortgage then and I do not remember hidden clauses allowing customers to just adjust their interest rate downwards by a few percent, do you? Do you know what the banks did then if you found it difficult to manage on 15%? Sweet Fanny Adams, that's what.

So now it turns out the last 4 years have been good for a minority of customers shrewd or lucky enough to find themselves on lifetime trackers at barely above the BOE BR. So what? You're telling me that the best financial brains in these institutions have their sums so f****d up they cant cope with that, despite having many more customers on rates far above the BOE BR, and even further above the rates that the banks actually borrow money at? Utter tosh!

Whether or not a business, or anyone else for that matter, can sustain a "small 2% rise in interest rates" is missing the point. So this so-called "hidden clause" allows some of the banks to do that to some of their customers, and you think that's OK? How about if they move it up by 4%? Or 8%? Just because they can? Still OK? Because it sounds like they can if they want to now... Great, just what we need, less trust in banks, that'll help us all won't it?

Lets substitute Buy To Let customers for the communists...

"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

fc

motch

fewcloudy wrote: »

I am not a BTL mortgage holder, but I am still surprised anyone would think the way you do about the banks behaviour.

Me or you might not be able to operate "sustainably" if the interest rates were to go as high again as they did in 89/90... I had a mortgage then and I do not remember hidden clauses allowing customers to just adjust their interest rate downwards by a few percent, do you? Do you know what the banks did then if you found it difficult to manage on 15%? Sweet Fanny Adams, that's what.

So now it turns out the last 4 years have been good for a minority of customers shrewd or lucky enough to find themselves on lifetime trackers at barely above the BOE BR. So what? You're telling me that the best financial brains in these institutions have their sums so f****d up they cant cope with that, despite having many more customers on rates far above the BOE BR, and even further above the rates that the banks actually borrow money at? Utter tosh!

Whether or not a business, or anyone else for that matter, can sustain a "small 2% rise in interest rates" is missing the point. So this so-called "hidden clause" allows some of the banks to do that to some of their customers, and you think that's OK? How about if they move it up by 4%? Or 8%? Just because they can? Still OK? Because it sounds like they can if they want to now... Great, just what we need, less trust in banks, that'll help us all won't it?

Lets substitute Buy To Let customers for the communists...

"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

fc

I think Brit and co just want more reasonably priced houses not house prices inflated out of proportion by the cheap/lax lending circa 2000-2007, and the artifically low mortgage borrowing prices of the last 4 years or so (for some), can't blame them really, would be better for most having lower priced housing. Don't see everyone cheering when the gas/electric prices go up.

Thrugelmir

motch wrote: »

how did the BOI increase (or not) turn out in the end?

At the moment following a similar path to the events following Skipton's breaking their collar condition. Threat of class action. Yet nothing materialises. As the cost of High Court action to contest the issue would be considerable. Certainly not a black and white issue.

Thrugelmir

fewcloudy wrote: »

You're telling me that the best financial brains in these institutions have their sums so f****d up they cant cope with that,

The consequences of an extended period of base rates are causing problems for some lenders. Sometimes tough decisions have to be made. The alternative to is to sell the mortgages on to another lender ( BOI to NW). Then the new lender can up the rate anyway.

Richard_Watters

fewcloudy wrote: »

I am not a BTL mortgage holder, but I am still surprised anyone would think the way you do about the banks behaviour.

Me or you might not be able to operate "sustainably" if the interest rates were to go as high again as they did in 89/90... I had a mortgage then and I do not remember hidden clauses allowing customers to just adjust their interest rate downwards by a few percent, do you? Do you know what the banks did then if you found it difficult to manage on 15%? Sweet Fanny Adams, that's what.

So now it turns out the last 4 years have been good for a minority of customers shrewd or lucky enough to find themselves on lifetime trackers at barely above the BOE BR. So what? You're telling me that the best financial brains in these institutions have their sums so f****d up they cant cope with that, despite having many more customers on rates far above the BOE BR, and even further above the rates that the banks actually borrow money at? Utter tosh!

Whether or not a business, or anyone else for that matter, can sustain a "small 2% rise in interest rates" is missing the point. So this so-called "hidden clause" allows some of the banks to do that to some of their customers, and you think that's OK? How about if they move it up by 4%? Or 8%? Just because they can? Still OK? Because it sounds like they can if they want to now... Great, just what we need, less trust in banks, that'll help us all won't it?

Lets substitute Buy To Let customers for the communists...

"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

fc

A real case of schadenfreude here I'm afraid. Because its those nasty Buy to Let Investors who deserve no sympathy.

So if the Banks decide to target residential owners next does that still make it ok?

caroldaisy

trying to get your e mail i am, also in process of trying to fight this and will be running or willing to pass on other people in same boat. i have contacted landlord mortgage ltdl who sold these deals to me who are a big institution willing to help