Nationwide - advice sought, help please!

Toon_Army

Hi,

So we have been with Nationwide for quite a few years with a flawless record.

We are wanting to remortgage as part of a house sale/purchase process and both increase and extend the current loan.

However, Nationwide are telling us that if my wife applies in only her name, I am classed as a dependant despite being in full-time work (albeit currently a fixed-term contract as opposed to permanent as I was at the time of original application).

If we include me back on the mortgage (as I currently am), the amount they will lend us decreases significantly!

As we are tied in with a fairly sizeable redemption fee (and doubt any other lenders would be happy to pay this on our behalf to get the business) we feel utterly stuck.

Am I wrong in thinking that lenders are supposed to be clear and fair in their behaviour these days? I don't understand how I get classed as a dependant when I am working full-time? I have demonstrable earnings so on what basis can they declare me as such?

Is there any value in approaching other lenders to see if they would help both on the mortgage and also the redemption?

aNom

What happens if/when your fixed-term contract happens, you'll become a dependent in the eyes of Nationwide.

Why they will decrease the mortgage amount if you're named could be due to a number of reasons, I'm sure a mortgage broker can advise further on that.

Toon_Army

If/when my ftc finishes), if I haven't been made permanent (although the most likely outcome is the position being made permanent during the contract), I will go and get another job, as is quite common amongst contractors.

Surely it is incumbent upon them to offer evidence to support a claim of me being a dependant rather than a contributing finance source?

bigisi

Toon_Army wrote: »

Surely it is incumbent upon them to offer evidence to support a claim of me being a dependant rather than a contributing finance source?

Nope - their money, their rules. If you don't like them you're free to leave.

Toon_Army

bigisi wrote: »

Nope - their money, their rules. If you don't like them you're free to leave.

Read the OP. No we're not.


All I want is an explanation as to the basis for declaring me as a dependant when working, which is pretty much the antonym of dependant.

Thrugelmir

Toon_Army wrote: »

If/when my ftc finishes), if I haven't been made permanent (although the most likely outcome is the position being made permanent during the contract), I will go and get another job, as is quite common amongst contractors.

Lenders can only base their decisions on the facts at the point of application. Not the if's, maybe's in the future. Doing so would be to act irresponsibly. Particularly if you were to default and the property be repossessed.

Lenders underwrite business at a macro rather than micro level. Internal policies will be set at board level. Nothing personal in their decision.

Stanway29

All lenders have different criteria and as the reply above suggests, to Nationwide you will possibly be seen as a dependent if you are not on the mortgage. I would consider looking at Principality Building Society as their rates would be competitive and as long as you are working they will not class you as a dependent.

Toon_Army

I am currently on the mortgage and have been from the start. That's why I can't understand the status they are trying to now confer on me.

Stanway29

To them, you have become a riskier individual to lend to because you are no longer employed on a permanent basis.

Toon_Army

I get their perceived risk. What I don't get is how that makes me a dependant though? Given the long history of payments they've had from us, the risk as such is minimal.


By all means, reduce the amount because of the perceived risk if they want, but by classing me as a dependant, it completely changes the amount they'll provide.


If anyone can shed any light on how someone working full-time is a dependant, I'd very much appreciate it!

kingstreet

You are really an applicant, not a dependent.

You would only be a dependent if you were not party to the mortgage and ownership. In practical terms though, it means the same thing.

As an applicant, you have an income. In this case, you are not able to have your income taken into account because of the nature of your contract which isn't acceptable to the lender in question.

As a result, a single income is having to cover the costs of the household, resulting in a lower mortgage amount being available as greater costs are involved in a two person household than a one person household.

If you had become self-employed a short time ago, the same outcome would have resulted. An income, but no way of evidencing it to the lender's satisfaction, so effectively no income.

Unfortunately, however long you might have paid in the past has no relevance to your future ability to pay which the lender now sees as a potential problem.

If you are looking to move and the amount you owe will drop and the loan to value is going to be lower, you could attempt a complaint on the basis the lender is making you a mortgage prisoner and it should apply the October 2012 FSA Transitional Rules which were absorbed into the MMR in April 2014. An increase in both means the lender can/must apply its full affordability and criteria regardless of your changed circumstances.

When did your fixed term contract start and when did you last take a new Nationwide product?

BTW a remortgage is a new mortgage with a new lender on the same house. You simply want a new mortgage on a new property, although you may wish to port the rate from the old mortgage to a new one.