Short Term Fixed Rate Mortgages - Were they Mis-Sold?

owitemisermusa

I see it's broker-clobbering time again!

Truly, you guys should be on the endangered species list - bullet proof vests anyone?

Not to worry, people will soon find the next target and leave brokers alone.

Dan_Collins_2

poppy10 wrote: »

Have you read the Northern Rock thread?

Poppy read my post, NR is an extreme case.

This post is a bit of a joke. I nearly through my screen out of my window when I read it!

How can you expect anybody to predict what SVR's will do and what will happen in 2 or 3 years. You could say the same about 2 year trackers!

I am guessing that the not so nice Englishman has a two year fixed coming to an end!??

Guy_Montag

I think you guys are taking this too personally - I don't think that ANE'man was saying that you deserve to be reproached for misselling; simply that in our "where there's blame there's a claim" culture, & with the FSA being so far off the ball they're not even in the stadium, brokers & lenders may end up taking it up the proverbial, since there's likely to be fewer broker votes that idiot punter votes out there.


That's how I read it, not an accusation that you have, just that you may get blamed.

Conrad

I've always had the client complete thier maximum affordable mortgage budget and only taken the case of where the figure comfortably exceeds the payments on SVR.

Remember we have a duty of care to recommend THE most suitable course given the clients needs. As long as your written signed documentation supports the advice you have nothing to worry about.

Each file should contain plenty of different lender illustrations, but alas I still come accross plenty of cases where brokers onlt have the 'sale' illustratiuon on file - yikes!

MarkyMarkD

But there's nothing new here. Anyone buying a short-term fix or discount has always been subject to a repricing risk - that's the nature of the beast.

Anyone could have avoided that risk by buying a lifetime tracker, or a 25 year fix. But in the latter case they would then feel they were vulnerable to their rate being "bad value" if rates fell, and in the former they'd feel they'd got "bad value" if they would in fact have saved money by opting for a fix.

Borrowers can't have their cake and eat it. Either they accept repricing risk, or they accept the risk that their long-term fixed rate may (with the benefit of hindsight) be a poor choice.

It's stupid to even think of alleging mis-selling. People shouldn't buy mortgages if they don't have sufficient intelligence to understand the nature of the financial commitment they are making.

As others have (often) said, people seem to spend less time dealing with buying a mortgage (which is most people's biggest financial cost) than they do choosing a three-piece suite.