Trapped and Exploited by Nationwide

Thrugelmir

Trapped1 wrote: »

They want us trapped on the 6.75% because it benefits their Members. /QUOTE]

If that's the contractual rate then it's a business decision. The Nationwide is a mutually owned lender. So there'll be winners and losers. That's life. Simply because the market isn't currently in your favour. Is no reason for you to receive different or preferential treatment to any else. That wouldn't be fair. I doubt those on low base rate trackers are voluntarily going to give them up to subsidise you.

Trapped1

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

I would speculate that the cash raised was given away, to make it potentially exempt from IHT. Complaining about NW because your tax avoidance scheme has gone horrible wrong seems a bit rich really.

Your speculations and judgement casting is all very wrong.

alchemist.1

Essentially, greed got you in this mess but now you want Nationwide to act differently to you.

Trapped1

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Trapped1 wrote: »

They want us trapped on the 6.75% because it benefits their Members. /QUOTE]

If that's the contractual rate then it's a business decision. The Nationwide is a mutually owned lender. So there'll be winners and losers. That's life. Simply because the market isn't currently in your favour. Is no reason for you to receive different or preferential treatment to any else. That wouldn't be fair. I doubt those on low base rate trackers are voluntarily going to give them up to subsidise you.

I understand your thinking. Had we been put back to where we were originally, we would have been on something like 3%. It is a shame we are doddering old people as we would never have gotten into this mess in the first place. Sadly the world has plenty of people wanting to make an extra buck and they don't care about the people or the consequences because it doesn't affect them.


If only this had all happened a little bit later on when the product was regulated (after 2004) as we would have had the proper backing of the Ombudsman.


Thanks for comments. Signing off now.

fed_up_and_stressed

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

I would speculate that the cash raised was given away, to make it potentially exempt from IHT. Complaining about NW because your tax avoidance scheme has gone horrible wrong seems a bit rich really.

Trapped1 wrote: »

Your speculations and judgement casting is all very wrong.

Trapped1 wrote: »

We did not want any cash and but was advised to take out this money to avoid inheritance tax. We do have the original lump sum.

But keep pedalling was correct in that this was done as a way to avoid your tax liabilities.

Thrugelmir

Trapped1 wrote: »

Sadly the world has plenty of people wanting to make an extra buck and they don't care about the people or the consequences because it doesn't affect them.

Your aim was to save yourself a buck. Your comments sound rather hypocritical as a consequence. Now blaming a third party provider for your problems does little to aid your cause.

I'm signing off too. As although you've received redress for the misselling. You accept no responsibility for your own choice and decisions which sounds little more than greed. Which is a matter not relevant to this forum.

ViolaLass

NW may not require you to repay part of the mortgage but the question is, will they allow you to?

TBeckett100

Never sure equity release stacked up for IHT planning.

You withdraw £100k to create a debt on the estate. Gift the 100k and live 7 years so £100k is outside the estate saving £40k

In the meantime £100k attracts interest at £6750pa rolled up. So after 7 years the interest due is more than £40k.

I believe the government changed rules to say that equity release taken out for IHT planning is a disregarded debt anyway.

Keep_pedalling

TBeckett100 wrote: »

Never sure equity release stacked up for IHT planning.

You withdraw £100k to create a debt on the estate. Gift the 100k and live 7 years so £100k is outside the estate saving £40k

In the meantime £100k attracts interest at £6750pa rolled up. So after 7 years the interest due is more than £40k.

I believe the government changed rules to say that equity release taken out for IHT planning is a disregarded debt anyway.

Even worse, with the family home allowence coming in, it's doubtful that the OPs estate would be paying any IHT at all.

If the equity release was used to help the daughter buy a house, it seems a bit harsh that she now has to sell her home now to correct the big mistake her parents made. We are all capable of making mistakes but once made we have to accept the consequences and if I was in the OPs position however much I loved my house I would take the downsizing option as the lesser of two evils.

ViolaLass

But the OP hasn't used the money - they said they've still got it in the bank. If they keep it in the bank, what was the point of the equity release?