Product Transfer Offer - legally binding

romeroe

Hi there,

I was sent a product transfer offer that on subsequent inspection contains multiple errors:

• No early exit penalties
• No product fee stated

If the lender accepted my paperwork without corrections does this form a legally binding contract between lender and myself?

Rom

dimbo61

Well have you looked on the lenders website ?
Many product tranfers do offer " No Product fee"
What are you looking at ? Tracker deals by any chance ?

romeroe

It was a 2 year fix, so I would have imagined there would be a lock in fee for those 2 years, however that is not what my MO states.

Similarly there is nothing in the fee section, even though I have paid a fee.

Whilst I would not expect a MO to be in and of itself a legally binding document - if the mortgage company accepts it and opens the mortgage on that document does that make it legally binding?

Of course I can start a complaint and get the Ombudsman to make a ruling, but if it is a frivolous matter...

Rom

kingstreet

What does the lender say?

davidmcn

If it's obviously an error then it's not necessarily binding.

romeroe

kingstreet wrote: »

What does the lender say?

I've not asked them yet. Clearly they will say it is an error. I don't doubt that it is an "error" on their part. The question is, is it a legally binding matter once they have accepted my signed paperwork without any corrections on their part. Akin to an online order, simply placing the order does not create contract, but accepting that order and shipping it constitutes a contract...

I would fully imagine their response to be "its an error on our part, sorry" - its whether or not it is worth querying that to the ombudsman...

For full disclosure the bank in question has become very petty over the terms and conditions of an unrelated matter... what goes around comes around.

[Deleted User]

Have you checked the Product Code to make sure its actually the one you applied for?

davidmcn

romeroe wrote: »

I don't doubt that it is an "error" on their part.

Because...it contradicts information you were given at an earlier stage? As I said, if it ought to be obvious that it's an error then I think they'll have a pretty good argument that it's not binding. Though it will probably depend at what stage anybody realises that, as it's not going to be easy to unravel a mortgage after completion of the transaction.

Brock_and_Roll

One of the most famous cases in English company law - Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co

The product transfer "offer" that was received would not be an offer that can be formally accepted and legally binding, it is merely an "invitation to treat". I suspect the "offer" did not come with documentation that when signed and returned by the customer binds the lender.

Many cases over the years on this.

romeroe

Brock_and_Roll wrote: »

One of the most famous cases in English company law - Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co

The product transfer "offer" that was received would not be an offer that can be formally accepted and legally binding, it is merely an "invitation to treat". I suspect the "offer" did not come with documentation that when signed and returned by the customer binds the lender.

Many cases over the years on this.

Interesting. I understand what you mean by invitation to treat. If they implement the contract following receipt of my paperwork has that not then become binding (the mortgage started 12 months ago).

Rom