The TMB, Challenor Investments and a Mis-sold Mortgage

silvercar · 11 March 2009 at 9:00PM

I would be very careful about these fraud squad investigations.

Who signed a mortgage application for an 85% mortgage based on a higher valuation? You did.

Who paid stamp duty at the higher price? You did.

You could find that you are one of the perpetrators rather than the victim. The victim is the lender.

Dan_1976 · 11 March 2009 at 9:04PM

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Cashpig74 · 11 March 2009 at 9:07PM

silvercar wrote: »

In one line: OP wanted to make an investment without investing any money, now he realises it hasn't work and wants to blame [strike]someone[/strike] everyone else.

Slightly longer version:
OP bought a BTL investment. He wanted to buy on 100% mortgage with no deposit, so the seller inflated the value of the property and gave OP the difference as a vendor gifted deposit.

Now the property has fallen in value, so OP feels the bank should not have accepted a vendor gifted deposit, that the surveyor shouldn't have valued the property so high, that the solicitor should have stopped him buying the property, but OP himself did nothing wrong.

Even though OP must have signed a mortgage application valuing the property high, even though OP would have signed a transfer document at the higher price, even though OP paid stamp duty on the full price, even though OP didn't commission an independent valuation, he didn't know that the price was inflated.

great story. incorrect though.

Cashpig74 · 11 March 2009 at 9:08PM

Dan_1976 wrote: »

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

great addition to the discussion. you have nothing more to add. clearly.

like I say - if it was all a neat and tidy as these expert high flying city lawyers on here are suggesting, there would have been no arrests (6 so far), no fraud crime to investigate, no FOS continued investigation.

But, these ppl on here ARE top lawyers....

Dan_1976 · 11 March 2009 at 9:17PM

I find your situation very funny, sorry if it offends you!

I find it hard to take what you say so seriously, your so defensive and you seem to be justifying yourself to people that write on a forum, giving opinions and help if they can to complete strangers! This is not real life it is the internet.

Police have arrested people, they may well you! Fingers crossed hey!!

You really are class!

Today, 10:23 AM #2 Cashpig74 vbmenu_register("postmenu_19613469", true);

MoneySaving Stalwart

Join Date: Nov 2008

Post Count: 210

Thanked 49 Times in 43 Posts

Natiowide are c*unts.

Cashpig74 · 11 March 2009 at 9:36PM

Dan_1976 wrote: »

I find your situation very funny, sorry if it offends you!

I find it hard to take what you say so seriously, your so defensive and you seem to be justifying yourself to people that write on a forum, giving opinions and help if they can to complete strangers! This is not real life it is the internet.

Police have arrested people, they may well you! Fingers crossed hey!!

You really are class!

Today, 10:23 AM #2 Cashpig74 vbmenu_register("postmenu_19613469", true);

MoneySaving Stalwart

Join Date: Nov 2008

Post Count: 210

Thanked 49 Times in 43 Posts

Natiowide are c*unts.

Who are Natiowide? I've not heard of that organsation b4. Are they Spanish?

Yes I am tetchy - I am mixed up in all this and no I will not be arrested for fraud - I have that on good authority too as I have been selected as a case witness against the investment firm.

I signed everything I was given, my earlier posts do say that I was not privy to all the paperwork at the time. Things were filled in on my forms after they were signed - a fact I now know. But you all seem to be avoiding some of the questions I have posted in here about the valuer(s) - oh and it was valied again 6 months later in a rising market and guess what - 165,000 the SAME as the first one - the one that was skipped over by the bank to start with.

The bank are victims also. I have not conned them for a mortgage.

I admit, had I been turned down at the time I would have been well fed up - but they would have acted correctly as it is now clear to see that the sale of these flats should not have happened the way they did. it's not a glaring error - but a clever tweaking of events that has led to a con. I will not be conned and accept it without fighting the case.

If I am wrong or it all goes against me - then fair enough. I am complaining NOW given my knowledge of these events, anyone else would do and it has nothing to do with their current state. No estate agent can explain why a "180,000" has dropped to £100,000 - whilst the other flats of the same type size spec on the same plot built within 6 months by a different builder - are the same value now too. Oh, and those other flats were marketed on the open market direct without incentives for 139,000 - 150,000.

But they are ALL worth the same now - so mine has dropped 80,000 apparently and every other flat only 40,000-50,000 - so again more valuation evidence if we are going by that, that it was over priced and over valued. A banking responsilbilty. infact it dropped 30,0000 the second I completed on it.

The mortgages, IMO and the police's opinion, should never have been granted - and there are hundreds of them.

silvercar · 11 March 2009 at 10:05PM

Yes I am tetchy - I am mixed up in all this and no I will not be arrested for fraud - I have that on good authority too

Have you got that in writing? And verified by an independant solicitor?

From where I am standing this could be a second time you leap before you look.

If this was an episode of "The Bill", it would be 'tell us everything and when we prosecute XX for fraud we will get the judge to go easy on you.

There is the risk that the lender could call in the loan, once they realise that it was obtained under false valuations, that is deception. Your only saving grace is that with negative equity, now would not be a good time for the lender to be calling in loans. You say the DI said it was illegal to accept a vendor gifted deposit, well Halifax still do it, so clearly all the DI says is not correct.

Seriously, you are involved in some fraudulent activity, like it or not. I would only be talking to the fraud squad with the help of your own solicitor.

silvercar · 11 March 2009 at 10:12PM

One more question.

If this really is going to court, why hasn't your solicitor advised you against naming the parties involved on an open forum?

Cashpig74 · 11 March 2009 at 10:23PM

silvercar wrote: »

Have you got that in writing? And verified by an independant solicitor?

From where I am standing this could be a second time you leap before you look.

If this was an episode of "The Bill", it would be 'tell us everything and when we prosecute XX for fraud we will get the judge to go easy on you.

There is the risk that the lender could call in the loan, once they realise that it was obtained under false valuations, that is deception. Your only saving grace is that with negative equity, now would not be a good time for the lender to be calling in loans. You say the DI said it was illegal to accept a vendor gifted deposit, well Halifax still do it, so clearly all the DI says is not correct.

Seriously, you are involved in some fraudulent activity, like it or not. I would only be talking to the fraud squad with the help of your own solicitor.

maybe ive not been clear - the bank is not being investigated by the f.sqaud. the investment co is.

i cannot say more than I have about the situation. yeh it is the price drop that has exposed the value issue - i do not care what it is now, it just has been exposed as to what happened from the start... I did not start the f.s investigation either tho!! it was already in the pipeline and I came across it at the same time as the price drops hit...

the fos are dealing with my complaint against the bank - like i say i think it is neglagence of some sort but i am no expert.

the gifted deposit bit is one thing - but this was not gifted as such - it was just a "paper" discount. Rack the price up by 30,000, give the discount and it comes back down to the true market value - so I buy at market value with a 100% mortgage( 150,000 true value, 150,000 mortgage).

the solicitors should have seen this for me - but they were acting for their own interests and getting a bung for it too so I was never gonna be given paperwork that would alert me to it..... hence why I got a letter from them 6months later asking my to sign and have witnessed a 150,000 bridgin loan appl I never made and send the signed paperwork back to them undated !!

!!!!!!!??

Do you see why I say that there is dodgy business here - it is not a case of me saying that its dropped in price and i want to blame someone..

I wanna keep it anyway and I have no problem with the tenant.

However, if I get a chance to reverse the situation back to where I was before I bought the flat, then I will most likely take it after some consideration.

opinions4u · 11 March 2009 at 10:33PM

Cashpig74 wrote: »

the fos are dealing with my complaint against the bank - like i say i think it is neglagence of some sort but i am no expert.

I am fairly sure that the Ombudsman would put any investigation on hold until the outcome of any police investigation and potential court case is clear.

I stand to be corrected, but they would look silly ordering a lender to pay compensation to you and then the plod deciding to charge you with an offence linked to the purchase.

The TMB, Challenor Investments and a Mis-sold Mortgage

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free