Redemption Penalities

Dick_here

So it's people that are the problem, not portable mortgages.

MarkyMarkD

No. The problem is that portability is sold as a benefit when it doesn't actually work in all circumstances.

And lenders could offer true portability.

It is completely illogical that, if you have a £100,000 mortgage obtained when you earned £50,000, but you then lose that job and become self-employed, what happens next depends if you want to move house or not:

- if you stay in the same property, the lender is quite happy that you have that mortgage; but
- if you ask to move house, and port the mortgage (without any additional borrowing), the lender re-underwrites the mortgage and may say no.

Portability is meaningless unless it is offered without underwriting.

And lenders could, but won't, do that.

So they should not claim that mortgages are portable, without very clearly setting out the provisos.

Dick_here

You seem to have a personal grievance about this, but I doubt many people would agree with you on the general principle.

dunstonh

Portability is a nice to have option but there is no guarantee that the lender will offer portability when the time comes. So, it isnt something you should rely on. You have to meet the criteria in place at the time and criteria changes. Especially with lenders that withdraw from new business as many have in recent times.

MarkyMarkD

No, !!!!!! here, I don't have a personal grievance in the slightest. I've never needed to port, and I've never ported.

I'm honestly expressing indignation on the part of those others on MSE who have been persuaded by lenders, or advisers, to take mortgages with tie-ins, on the dubious grounds that the tie-in doesn't matter because "the mortgage is portable".

I don't believe that in 99% of those sales pitches, the problems with portability are explained.

And accordingly, I would always advise people to be very careful with portability as it doesn't always work.

Don't get me wrong - it's obviously always better to have a mortgage product which is portable, compared to one which is not. But it's also even better to have a mortgage product without penalties beyond any realistic minimum redemption period, than one which is "portable". People should weigh up the additional cost of a penalty-free mortgage against the risk of taking a "portable" one with penalties, rather than always choosing the cheaper one on cost grounds and then being surprised and financially penalised when portability goes wrong for them.

willdo

UBS Home Mortgages

willdo

Just to be clear - not in a flaky relationship, quite the opposite in fact (13 years and still going strong), and have both been promoted in last year with reputable employers - somehow don't think the Met's going to go bust just yet!

But I take your point/s and appreciate the feedback - short of requesting a reduction in the redemption penalty I'm beginning to think it wise to just ride this one out!