MSE News: 'I was a mortgage prisoner but escaped thanks to MSE and saved £3,600' 14 June 2016 at 6:41PM in Mortgages & Endowments 16 replies 2.3K views

Legacy_user

There's fresh hope for so-called 'mortgage prisoners' after one MoneySaver agreed a £3,600 saving thanks to our campaign...

Read the full story:
''I was a mortgage prisoner but escaped thanks to MSE and saved £3,600''

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

Thrugelmir

Having read the article what actually did MSE do? Lot of trumpet blowing over nought.

MortgageMamma

Notice it was the woman who sorted it all out for her husband....tut....sigh......

Senior_Paper_Monitor

The Chancellor's "recent" quoted (and provided as a link) letter is undated !!

So about as much relevance as a Vulcan Mind Meld I would suggest if the basic construction of a letter as I was taught in Primary School (and in many legal discussions since referring to any signed document) is still valid - or are we supposed to look up "today" with regard to the 'Responsible Lending Review' ?

(16th May by the way)



Pretty much the equivalent of the Sun's "It's the Sun Wot Won It" headline I would suggest (this article rather than the letter).

Pincher

MMR itself was the result of some kind of crusading purge in the first place, wasn't?

If people didn't go crazy denouncing irresponsible lending, would they have dreamt up MMR to pretend they were doing something in the first place?

We should identify all the repossessed mortgages, find the introducers who lied on the mortgage applications, and put them on trial. Tissue match them, and put them on an organ donor list. When a match happens, string them up and gut them. Useful to society at last.

jamesd

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Having read the article what actually did MSE do? Lot of trumpet blowing over nought.

What Martin Lewis did was raise the matter during a TV show with the Chancellor and do so again in a followup discussion at the invitation of the Chancellor. MSE then proceeded to mention that in the email. That's more than ample work for some credit to be taken, not least because Martin Lewis is still editor of this place.

Thrugelmir

jamesd wrote: »

What Martin Lewis did was raise the matter during a TV show with the Chancellor and do so again in a followup discussion at the invitation of the Chancellor. MSE then proceeded to mention that in the email. That's more than ample work for some credit to be taken, not least because Martin Lewis is still editor of this place.

I'm fully aware of this. Doesn't explain the blowing of trumpets though. Lenders will deal with cases singularly not on a group basis. On a personal level I find ML's approach an over simplification of the wider issues. All about PR rather than substance.

MortgageMamma

Pincher wrote: »

We should identify all the repossessed mortgages, find the introducers who lied on the mortgage applications, and put them on trial. Tissue match them, and put them on an organ donor list. When a match happens, string them up and gut them. Useful to society at last.

What if the clients themselves were the liars not the introducers? could they expect the same treatment? it wasn't just the clients that suffered during the financial crisis you know! It was more to do with lax regulation, the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing than with self cert mortgages.

Pincher

MortgageMamma wrote: »

What if the clients themselves were the liars not the introducers? could they expect the same treatment? it wasn't just the clients that suffered during the financial crisis you know! It was more to do with lax regulation, the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing than with self cert mortgages.

My model of how the world works is that poor people are asking for loans all the time, but heartless bank managers say no to them. They want six times income mortgages, but lying doesn't help. It takes an introducer with no morals and a big appetite for commission to short circuit the system to enable a poor person to get a big mortgage.

I did get a Self-certificated Buy To Let mortgage, but the broker was part of the accountancy firm that did my taxes, and he knew my situation very well. It all worked out brilliantly, but I could never have got the mortgage myself.

Thrugelmir

Pincher wrote: »

MMR itself was the result of some kind of crusading purge in the first place, wasn't?

No MMR. Merely wound the clock back to when lenders acted responsibly (within their own lending models) without requiring regulatory supervision.

MortgageMamma

Pincher wrote: »

My model of how the world works is that poor people are asking for loans all the time, but heartless bank managers say no to them. They want six times income mortgages, but lying doesn't help. It takes an introducer with no morals and a big appetite for commission to short circuit the system to enable a poor person to get a big mortgage.

I did get a Self-certificated Buy To Let mortgage, but the broker was part of the accountancy firm that did my taxes, and he knew my situation very well. It all worked out brilliantly, but I could never have got the mortgage myself.[/QUOTE


So because brokers facilitated self cert mortgages they are all liars with no morals? Why does it have to be so black or white? is life black and white? you benefitted from a form of self certification yourself but self cert was wrong? brokers that are part of accountancy firms are excused from your barrage of assumptions I take it? You are a hypocrite in the truest meaning of the word. I would go on but its kind of not the point of this thread but you need to give your head a wobble mate!