Mortgage Payment Holiday Ended
Comments
-
Banks are under no obligation to renegotiate terms. That's why you're hitting a brick wall.HUMBUG said:
The facts are that they have ignored my brothers proposal (ie. not replied with one phone call or letter or email to discuss his specific proposal) for every month of the year.Thrugelmir said:
Best to stick to facts not assume. The world is full of people who tell other how to do their jobs and run their businessess from their armchairs.HUMBUG said:Thrugelmir said:
As they are contractually in default, ball is in the lenders court.HUMBUG said:
Both him and his wife do not want to sell their houseThrugelmir said:
So your brother has options available to him. Downsizing for example. Mortgage lending is highly regulated. Affordability may well be considered an issue if interest rates were to rise.HUMBUG said:My brothers house is worth over £1m in equity
Little point in writing to the CEO. Not in their remit to personally handle a single customers problems.
Sounds as if Nat West have some internal process problems or lack trained staff to deal with these situations (and I suspect they have literally hundreds , maybe thousands of similar cases to deal with).
The personal financial circumstances seem far more complex than just the mortgage in isolation. Blaming the mortgage lender isn't going to assist the cause. Nor gain any empathy.
Who want's to gain empathy ? Just plain communication please in response to his proposal without going around the threatening letter process circle for 12 months.
All they do is ask him to complete the incomings and outgoings every month , then just say you cannot pay off the arrears . The fact that they have ignored his request to extend the mortgage term by 17 months (ie. no official letters, emails, phone calls) where he can pay off the arrears seems to fall on deaf ears or they don't have an internal process to deal with it properly. That's not me telling them how to run their business just pointing out what seems to be an obvious gap in their internal procedures.
Why would they renegotiate when they're no better off? It makes sense to you but it makes little sense to the bank, they have their security so why would they renegotiate?
Once you realise they hold all the cards you'll realise why the bank is taking the action that it is.4 -
Most banks will not consider extending mortgages beyond retirement age .
It might be possible to find another lender willing to do so , but likely they would require any outstanding debt to be cleared first.0 -
Even 30 years ago, banks/building societies did not want to extend mortgages beyond the agreed repayment term.If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0
-
HeinzVarieties said:
Banks are under no obligation to renegotiate terms. That's why you're hitting a brick wall.HUMBUG said:
The facts are that they have ignored my brothers proposal (ie. not replied with one phone call or letter or email to discuss his specific proposal) for every month of the year.Thrugelmir said:
Best to stick to facts not assume. The world is full of people who tell other how to do their jobs and run their businessess from their armchairs.HUMBUG said:Thrugelmir said:
As they are contractually in default, ball is in the lenders court.HUMBUG said:
Both him and his wife do not want to sell their houseThrugelmir said:
So your brother has options available to him. Downsizing for example. Mortgage lending is highly regulated. Affordability may well be considered an issue if interest rates were to rise.HUMBUG said:My brothers house is worth over £1m in equity
Little point in writing to the CEO. Not in their remit to personally handle a single customers problems.
Sounds as if Nat West have some internal process problems or lack trained staff to deal with these situations (and I suspect they have literally hundreds , maybe thousands of similar cases to deal with).
The personal financial circumstances seem far more complex than just the mortgage in isolation. Blaming the mortgage lender isn't going to assist the cause. Nor gain any empathy.
Who want's to gain empathy ? Just plain communication please in response to his proposal without going around the threatening letter process circle for 12 months.
All they do is ask him to complete the incomings and outgoings every month , then just say you cannot pay off the arrears . The fact that they have ignored his request to extend the mortgage term by 17 months (ie. no official letters, emails, phone calls) where he can pay off the arrears seems to fall on deaf ears or they don't have an internal process to deal with it properly. That's not me telling them how to run their business just pointing out what seems to be an obvious gap in their internal procedures.
Why would they renegotiate when they're no better off? It makes sense to you but it makes little sense to the bank, they have their security so why would they renegotiate?
Once you realise they hold all the cards you'll realise why the bank is taking the action that it is.
But aren't they better off by extending the mortgage for 17 months by getting more interest in the longer term? Yes they hold all the cards but they must act only as a last resort in repossessing homes.
Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages
"The Bureau has found hundreds of mortgage possession cases in courts in England and Wales since the ban on enforcing home repossessions was lifted. Some were being pursued for as little as £1,000. This was despite explicit guidance from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the regulator for financial services, that, due to the impact of the pandemic, lenders should only start court action as a last resort. The government has also said that no one should lose their home because of the pandemic.In just under a third of the cases the Bureau witnessed, the impact of Covid-19 was raised in the courtroom. In many cases, the lender was granted a possession order anyway. Two people told the Bureau they were left feeling suicidal after the court session.
It appears some lenders are taking more action than others. In the four months immediately after the ban on bailiff repossessions was lifted at the end of May, the Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Bank – which are both part of the Lloyds Banking Group – appear to have brought a disproportionate number of claims. The two banks made up nearly 40% of all the mortgage lender claimants in 10 of the busiest courts, despite making up just 20% of the mortgage market.
The Bureau sent reporters to sit in possession hearings in 30 courts across England and Wales over two months, but found many lenders wanted the proceedings to remain secret. Lawyers acting on behalf of mortgage lenders repeatedly asked for our reporters to be excluded from hearings. And a trade association for the finance industry wrote to top justice officials raising questions about our reporting, citing “nervousness” about the “reputational risks” to banks.
Despite the setbacks, we logged the details of 115 mortgage possession hearings. We found:
Covid-19 was mentioned in 30% of the hearings we attended.
Nearly half of hearings ended in an outright possession order, leaving the lender open to evicting the homeowners. A further 30% resulted in what is called a suspended order – meaning the homeowner was vulnerable to eviction if they fell behind on payments.
It took an average of nine minutes (8.6) for a possession order to be granted.
The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670.
In 81% of hearings the homeowner did not have any legal representation. In 78% of all hearings the defendant did not show up.
Lucy Powell, Labour’s shadow housing secretary, said: “The government promised nobody would lose their home because of coronavirus, but the safety net for homeowners was withdrawn while Covid-19 and its economic effects were still raging, and we’re starting to see the result.
“Combined with the thousands of renters already facing eviction, Conservative incompetence is creating a homelessness crisis this winter.”
0 -
No, because the FCA has a gun to their head, and they can just sell your property, get their capital back and lend to someone else.HUMBUG said:HeinzVarieties said:
Banks are under no obligation to renegotiate terms. That's why you're hitting a brick wall.HUMBUG said:
The facts are that they have ignored my brothers proposal (ie. not replied with one phone call or letter or email to discuss his specific proposal) for every month of the year.Thrugelmir said:
Best to stick to facts not assume. The world is full of people who tell other how to do their jobs and run their businessess from their armchairs.HUMBUG said:Thrugelmir said:
As they are contractually in default, ball is in the lenders court.HUMBUG said:
Both him and his wife do not want to sell their houseThrugelmir said:
So your brother has options available to him. Downsizing for example. Mortgage lending is highly regulated. Affordability may well be considered an issue if interest rates were to rise.HUMBUG said:My brothers house is worth over £1m in equity
Little point in writing to the CEO. Not in their remit to personally handle a single customers problems.
Sounds as if Nat West have some internal process problems or lack trained staff to deal with these situations (and I suspect they have literally hundreds , maybe thousands of similar cases to deal with).
The personal financial circumstances seem far more complex than just the mortgage in isolation. Blaming the mortgage lender isn't going to assist the cause. Nor gain any empathy.
Who want's to gain empathy ? Just plain communication please in response to his proposal without going around the threatening letter process circle for 12 months.
All they do is ask him to complete the incomings and outgoings every month , then just say you cannot pay off the arrears . The fact that they have ignored his request to extend the mortgage term by 17 months (ie. no official letters, emails, phone calls) where he can pay off the arrears seems to fall on deaf ears or they don't have an internal process to deal with it properly. That's not me telling them how to run their business just pointing out what seems to be an obvious gap in their internal procedures.
Why would they renegotiate when they're no better off? It makes sense to you but it makes little sense to the bank, they have their security so why would they renegotiate?
Once you realise they hold all the cards you'll realise why the bank is taking the action that it is.
But aren't they better off by extending the mortgage for 17 months by getting more interest in the longer term? Yes they hold all the cards but they must act only as a last resort in repossessing homes.
Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages
"The Bureau has found hundreds of mortgage possession cases in courts in England and Wales since the ban on enforcing home repossessions was lifted. Some were being pursued for as little as £1,000. This was despite explicit guidance from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the regulator for financial services, that, due to the impact of the pandemic, lenders should only start court action as a last resort. The government has also said that no one should lose their home because of the pandemic.In just under a third of the cases the Bureau witnessed, the impact of Covid-19 was raised in the courtroom. In many cases, the lender was granted a possession order anyway. Two people told the Bureau they were left feeling suicidal after the court session.
It appears some lenders are taking more action than others. In the four months immediately after the ban on bailiff repossessions was lifted at the end of May, the Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Bank – which are both part of the Lloyds Banking Group – appear to have brought a disproportionate number of claims. The two banks made up nearly 40% of all the mortgage lender claimants in 10 of the busiest courts, despite making up just 20% of the mortgage market.
The Bureau sent reporters to sit in possession hearings in 30 courts across England and Wales over two months, but found many lenders wanted the proceedings to remain secret. Lawyers acting on behalf of mortgage lenders repeatedly asked for our reporters to be excluded from hearings. And a trade association for the finance industry wrote to top justice officials raising questions about our reporting, citing “nervousness” about the “reputational risks” to banks.
Despite the setbacks, we logged the details of 115 mortgage possession hearings. We found:
Covid-19 was mentioned in 30% of the hearings we attended.
Nearly half of hearings ended in an outright possession order, leaving the lender open to evicting the homeowners. A further 30% resulted in what is called a suspended order – meaning the homeowner was vulnerable to eviction if they fell behind on payments.
It took an average of nine minutes (8.6) for a possession order to be granted.
The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670.
In 81% of hearings the homeowner did not have any legal representation. In 78% of all hearings the defendant did not show up.
Lucy Powell, Labour’s shadow housing secretary, said: “The government promised nobody would lose their home because of coronavirus, but the safety net for homeowners was withdrawn while Covid-19 and its economic effects were still raging, and we’re starting to see the result.
“Combined with the thousands of renters already facing eviction, Conservative incompetence is creating a homelessness crisis this winter.”
I don't know what that waffle from "The Bureau" has to do with anything, nor a Labour shadow minister who wants to throw more borrowed money into the economy.
It's not your fault that the economy has gone tits up, but it's not your lender's fault either.5 -
HUMBUG said:HeinzVarieties said:
Banks are under no obligation to renegotiate terms. That's why you're hitting a brick wall.HUMBUG said:
The facts are that they have ignored my brothers proposal (ie. not replied with one phone call or letter or email to discuss his specific proposal) for every month of the year.Thrugelmir said:
Best to stick to facts not assume. The world is full of people who tell other how to do their jobs and run their businessess from their armchairs.HUMBUG said:Thrugelmir said:
As they are contractually in default, ball is in the lenders court.HUMBUG said:
Both him and his wife do not want to sell their houseThrugelmir said:
So your brother has options available to him. Downsizing for example. Mortgage lending is highly regulated. Affordability may well be considered an issue if interest rates were to rise.HUMBUG said:My brothers house is worth over £1m in equity
Little point in writing to the CEO. Not in their remit to personally handle a single customers problems.
Sounds as if Nat West have some internal process problems or lack trained staff to deal with these situations (and I suspect they have literally hundreds , maybe thousands of similar cases to deal with).
The personal financial circumstances seem far more complex than just the mortgage in isolation. Blaming the mortgage lender isn't going to assist the cause. Nor gain any empathy.
Who want's to gain empathy ? Just plain communication please in response to his proposal without going around the threatening letter process circle for 12 months.
All they do is ask him to complete the incomings and outgoings every month , then just say you cannot pay off the arrears . The fact that they have ignored his request to extend the mortgage term by 17 months (ie. no official letters, emails, phone calls) where he can pay off the arrears seems to fall on deaf ears or they don't have an internal process to deal with it properly. That's not me telling them how to run their business just pointing out what seems to be an obvious gap in their internal procedures.
Why would they renegotiate when they're no better off? It makes sense to you but it makes little sense to the bank, they have their security so why would they renegotiate?
Once you realise they hold all the cards you'll realise why the bank is taking the action that it is.
But aren't they better off by extending the mortgage for 17 months by getting more interest in the longer term? Yes they hold all the cards but they must act only as a last resort in repossessing homes.
Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages
"The Bureau has found hundreds of mortgage possession cases in courts in England and Wales since the ban on enforcing home repossessions was lifted. Some were being pursued for as little as £1,000. This was despite explicit guidance from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the regulator for financial services, that, due to the impact of the pandemic, lenders should only start court action as a last resort. The government has also said that no one should lose their home because of the pandemic.In just under a third of the cases the Bureau witnessed, the impact of Covid-19 was raised in the courtroom. In many cases, the lender was granted a possession order anyway. Two people told the Bureau they were left feeling suicidal after the court session.
It appears some lenders are taking more action than others. In the four months immediately after the ban on bailiff repossessions was lifted at the end of May, the Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Bank – which are both part of the Lloyds Banking Group – appear to have brought a disproportionate number of claims. The two banks made up nearly 40% of all the mortgage lender claimants in 10 of the busiest courts, despite making up just 20% of the mortgage market.
The Bureau sent reporters to sit in possession hearings in 30 courts across England and Wales over two months, but found many lenders wanted the proceedings to remain secret. Lawyers acting on behalf of mortgage lenders repeatedly asked for our reporters to be excluded from hearings. And a trade association for the finance industry wrote to top justice officials raising questions about our reporting, citing “nervousness” about the “reputational risks” to banks.
Despite the setbacks, we logged the details of 115 mortgage possession hearings. We found:
Covid-19 was mentioned in 30% of the hearings we attended.
Nearly half of hearings ended in an outright possession order, leaving the lender open to evicting the homeowners. A further 30% resulted in what is called a suspended order – meaning the homeowner was vulnerable to eviction if they fell behind on payments.
It took an average of nine minutes (8.6) for a possession order to be granted.
The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670.
In 81% of hearings the homeowner did not have any legal representation. In 78% of all hearings the defendant did not show up.
Lucy Powell, Labour’s shadow housing secretary, said: “The government promised nobody would lose their home because of coronavirus, but the safety net for homeowners was withdrawn while Covid-19 and its economic effects were still raging, and we’re starting to see the result.
“Combined with the thousands of renters already facing eviction, Conservative incompetence is creating a homelessness crisis this winter.”
Instead of copying and pasting massive walls of text your better off just quoting the parts you want to highlight in your post, you have already posted the link so no need to copy and paste so much irrelavant information.So in your post above you could have simply said:
It will make your posts much easier to read and more people will reply when only include the parts that are relavent.HUMBUG could have said instead:Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
"The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670."
ref: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages1 -
So you decided to quote it again in its entirety just to say the above? Anyhow point taken and I did take it into consideration before I copied/pasted (some people do not like clicking on strange urls for obvious security reasons).RogerBareford said:Instead of copying and pasting massive walls of text your better off just quoting the parts you want to highlight in your post, you have already posted the link so no need to copy and paste so much irrelavant information.So in your post above you could have simply said:
It will make your posts much easier to read and more people will reply when only include the parts that are relavent.HUMBUG could have said instead:Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
"The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670."
ref: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages0 -
Why do you think it was waffle ? I thought it was an interesting article to show how the banks are responding after the COV19 lockdown. All they did was provide facts plus some stories showing how some banks (not all) are pushing for repossession orders and added some personal stories/situations that had no effect on the Courts decision.
No, because the FCA has a gun to their head, and they can just sell your property, get their capital back and lend to someone else.
I don't know what that waffle from "The Bureau" has to do with anything, nor a Labour shadow minister who wants to throw more borrowed money into the economy.
It's not your fault that the economy has gone tits up, but it's not your lender's fault either.
Weren't the bank bailed out at the last crisis? So why aren't we helping to bail out households because of the COV19 effects on people's livelihoods?0 -
HUMBUG said:
So you decided to quote it again in its entirety just to say the above? Anyhow point taken and I did take it into consideration before I copied/pasted (some people do not like clicking on strange urls for obvious security reasons).RogerBareford said:Instead of copying and pasting massive walls of text your better off just quoting the parts you want to highlight in your post, you have already posted the link so no need to copy and paste so much irrelavant information.So in your post above you could have simply said:
It will make your posts much easier to read and more people will reply when only include the parts that are relavent.HUMBUG could have said instead:Although I have seen this article below which seems to suggest that some banks are pushing through repossessions for very small arrear amounts.
"The average homeowner was £7,900 in arrears, although one person got a suspended possession order for owing just £670."
ref: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-11-03/banks-repossessions-pandemic-mortgages
It's always good forum etiquette to quote the post you're replying too, just in case it gets modified or deleted.
1 -
So the situation at the end of this year (end of mortgage period), my brother will be owing 40k . If Nat West insist on the arrears being paid and go ahead with their threat of repossession via the courts can my brother find a broker to borrow 40k to pay off Nat West and then repay them over 2 years (using his £1m house as security)? My brother is able to pay 2k a month at the moment so its not as if he can't pay off the mortgage or a loan from another lender , just needs a few more years.
I've heard of something called a bridging loan that can be extended to 2 years if necessary.
Would the FCA have a list of regulated brokers that might help my brother out ?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 346.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 251.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 451.1K Spending & Discounts
- 238.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 613.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 174.5K Life & Family
- 251.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards