Mortgage Fees - Are they unlawful?

homer_j_3

It is possible to have name on deeds and not on mortgage.

If Applicant 1 was earning sufficiently enough for Applicant 2 to be able to stay at home and look after the home and the family then its not uncommon for solicitors to recommend that Applicant 2 is still named on the deeds to protect their interest.

BubbleFrogette

Try contributing to the forum rather than criticising those that do. When you have done that for a while, then I will take notice of what you say.[/QUOTE]

Is this place some kind of 'old club' where only those who have notched-up a certain number of posts are paid any attention to??

Sorry for deviating back to this people, but it really does get my goat when one joins up to something new and existing members treat you like an outsider until you have earned enough status to be 'accepted' into the clique. We are adults in here, not schoolchildren...are we not?

From what I understand of MSE, this attitude is totally the opposite of what it aims to achieve - even if people do ask stupid questions from time to time.

Therein ends my baptism of fire into MSE forums.

homer_j_3

Is this place some kind of 'old club' where only those who have notched-up a certain number of posts are paid any attention to??

No, not at all. This is a forum where many people have helped others regardless of number of posts.

Sorry for deviating back to this people, but it really does get my goat when one joins up to something new and existing members treat you like an outsider until you have earned enough status to be 'accepted' into the clique. We are adults in here, not schoolchildren...are we not?

Why do you let it get to you. The OP has asked a question, they have been told that it has been answered before and to go and search.

Dunston has basically related the same question into another scenario to try and get the OP to understand that products are priced differently because they do offer different benefits - its not illegal to do this.

From what I understand of MSE, this attitude is totally the opposite of what it aims to achieve - even if people do ask stupid questions from time to time.

Therein ends my baptism of fire into MSE forums.

I am sure over time you will come to realise that this is a great forum and there is a lot of help and support across the whole forum.

Addiscomber

I read this forum but rarely post. I would just like to say that in my experience dunstonh and homer_j are among a handful of mortgage brokers who give clear, helpful answers to nearly all of the questions raised here. Give them a break! They do this for no reward and frankly it must be disheartening to be expected to answer the same question over and over. New posters are, of course, always welcome, but surely it would only be courteous to explore the forum and make use of the available features before posting a question?

baby_boomer

Are mortgage [arrangement] fees illegal?

Is almost as daft a statement as

Addiscomber wrote: »

dunstonh [does] this for no reward

However mortgage exit fees are a different matter and significant progress has been made on this issue, not least as a result of Richard Dyson's campaign in the Mail on Sunday.

jill2002

If Applicant 1 was earning sufficiently enough for Applicant 2 to be able to stay at home and look after the home and the family then its not uncommon for solicitors to recommend that Applicant 2 is still named on the deeds to protect their interest.

Sorry, but I beg to differ. The mortgage company would want App 2 on the mortgage. - What if App 1 defaulted? The mortgage company would be need to repossess the property but it would be partially owned by App 2. There could be a Deed of Consent signed, but this would not be enforceable if App 2 'Owned' the property.

I think the solicitor would be at fault and in breach of the mortgage company's terms & conditions - who of course they also act on behalf of.

homer_j_3

if you say so Jill.

The mortgage company would get the applicant not named on the mortgage as a persons over 17 so they can evict.

The name on the deeds is there to ensure that the person who has not financially contributed to the home has protection.

jill2002

The protection is needed by the mortgage company - so they will get their money back. They have the upper hand here and make the decisions - no mortgage, no purchase.

The mortgage company would get the applicant not named on the mortgage as a persons over 17 so they can evict

This is the deed of consent - which would be powerless if they actually owned the property - yes they would be able to evict them, but they still own it as their name is on the deeds.

homer_j_3

thanks for the mortgages 101.

I still say that you can. I do not really need an explanation in deeds of consents or the upper hands that a lender needs lol.

Just to add as I have re-read through and I want to be more clear on what I mean.

It is possible to afford protection of equity and rights of the home even if both parties are not named on the mortgage.

Gorgeous_George

This is how it works.

The lender offers a 5% rate with a £2,000 fee. For a loan of £100K this is the same as offering a loan of £98K with a rate of 5.2% but no fee.

For a £50,000 loan the real rate is 5.41% (but for £48K with no fee).

Try this to compare different deals and let me know if you find anything wrong. Just use it as a guide!

I reckon they could offer 0% deal with a £43K fee on a mortgage of £100K.

GG