West Bromwich Building Society's Increases Interest Rates For Btlers -- Merged Threads

[little fish]

Will £100k be enough for the lawyers?

Doubt that will get them far - but shows clearly the delusion and financial skills held

[andygivenup]

Another non story, affects so few people it won't make any difference, my two peneth, a good size chunk of BTL are owned outright by a certain group of individuals who were fortunate enough to have worked for huge multi national companies that pulled out of the uk over the last 15/25 years and paid out very generous redundancy payments and then paid very generous ocupational pension lump sums, and then generous monthly pension payments often starting much earlier than the usual 65. Ditto for a good number of state workers. These people suddenly found themselves in the fortunate position of suddenly having a rather large amount of cash without.. if you will excuse the pun, a home to put it. Most of these were average Joe's and had lead most of their lives without gambling, and saw stocks/bond investments as risky, however for all of their working lives they had seem house prices rise, and rise, and rise, so it's no great surprise to anyone that they parked their cash into residential property mortgage free, so lets talk £500 per calendar month rent 6k per year, these people and there are plenty of them are not really interested in yeilds, it's all about protecting their capital to them, remember a huge amount of the population do not understand inflation full stop. So people banging

on about what if it needs a new boiler or a roof it's not a problem to them they are on 2k a month pension FFS.

Until these people pass away and leave these assets to their siblings that money is going to stay parked there, and this particular group of people as an average seem to be living very full and active lives into their 80's and beyond, their can be no correction until that generation has passed which will be many years away, and the siblings sell up and split the cash, however problem there is by the time that happens the siblings are getting close to retirement themselves and think "hang on a min that would be a nice pension for us honey, lets keep it and split the rent with our Jane". So still no sale.

Unless and until we have a massive and I mean massive change of government policy in this country younger people will rent, I've said it before the under 25's have been conditioned to rent phones, cars etc. There is no massive crash round the corner, slow decline over many years in the real cost of houses by the drip drip of over

levered BTL's selling one from the portfolio to keep going, and older outright owners dying off. Yes some will have to go into care and their assets used to fund it, but again not a big enough percentage to have a quick, sharp effect on prices. Long haul is my opinion and I do feel huge sympathy for people who saw prices going mental 10 years ago and decided to rent and save until a big correction came, they were dealt a very bad hand and it is very unfair that the government keeps putting props in place

to maintain high property prices and protect banks, but I can not see any change in government for a long time.

Ask yourself this question, what would your grandad of said if you had told him in 1950 that a loaf of bread would be £1.50 60 years later? he would of laughed, They can and will print for many, many years, and wars and banking collapses will not stop them, only the will of the people will stop them, and there is no will in large enough numbers to stop them, at the moment!! but 2015 wont be the time and 2020 wont be either, 2025? lets talk again nearer the time.

In summary the government are bent, the bankers are bent, TPTB are bent, and care little for the populace they have their own agenda and can not see the woods for the trees.

Rant over sorry about that, its just this yeild thing gets on me t1ts abit. :angry:

Edited September 24, 2013 by andygivenup

[Sancho Panza]

Don't lawyers just love cases like this.

I'm guessing that other untrustworthy bankers have looked at the response from BOI borrowers and have decided to follow suit. How long before all the bankers decide that contract terms don't apply to their industry and that they can act with complete impunity to the law and change any of their terms and conditions at will. Just wait until they decide to impose exorbitant fees to your current accounts.

At least Santander backed down from their attempt to charge for business bank accounts that they sold on the basis of no charges ever for the life of the account. But that was small beer to the millions extra that BOI and West Brom can charge over the remaining life of affected mortgages.

These are two separate issues.

Without having access to the documents concerned,it's impossible to give a complete answer.

What we can surmise as likely,given that courts will take a view on specific contract terms,is that those who failed in their action against certain banks probably failed because there weren't grounds to overturn.It's that simple.

It's the same with the margin call clauses that seem to have been a real problem for YB and Clydesdale customers.If there was a basis in law for overturning them,then they would be overturned upon examination.

The simple reality is that a lot of people didn't read their T+C's in the heady days of 125% mortgages and have been caught out when certain clauses,heretofore,never used,are invoked.

Banks will try it on,lawyers will try it on.The courts are there as the final arbiter if it's needed.

[cybernoid]

How long before all the bankers decide that contract terms don't apply to their industry and that they can act with complete impunity to the law and change any of their terms and conditions at will.

There was some discussion about this on here at the time and someone posted the actual clause, it was along the lines of 'if circumstances become so a55 about face due to a bunch of self serving fktards and it turns out we the bank aren't making any money anymore out of this arrangement we reserve the right to increase the rate until we are'. Like any contract its largely balls until tested, however a bank is obviously going to have had a rigorous check made of the contract by very competent solicitors so I doubt they have much to worry about if challenged by some chancer buy to let monkey.

Its not them acting with impunity they are just activating a clause the borrower agreed to. If the debtor didn't want the contract in that form they don't sign it or they negotiate it. Of course buy to let monkeys can barely read so plainly didn't even consider reading the contract fully, too late to whine about it now. I have no sympathy for them at all. This is not the 'evil' banks running amok making up the rules as they go along, this is buy to let idiots being idiots and some of them getting some of what they deserve.

[Sancho Panza]

Still it is bad press for BTL? Along with the voids, the bad tenants, the repairs, the noise complaints from neighbours you are also expected to keep money aside to pay lawyers when your bank doesn`t play ball Could think of less stressful things to do than BTL.

You are treated differently when you're levered at less than 50%.

Increasingly,more and more BTLer's will fall into the risk categories briefly outlined earlier in the thread which will only serve to increase risk aversion more generally.

[Sancho Panza]

Its not them acting with impunity they are just activating a clause the borrower agreed to. If the debtor didn't want the contract in that form they don't sign it or they negotiate it.

I wish I could have been that succinct.

[Si1]

<br />Don't lawyers just love cases like this. <br /><br />I'm guessing that other untrustworthy bankers have looked at the response from BOI borrowers and have decided to follow suit. How long before all the bankers decide that contract terms don't apply to their industry and that they can act with complete impunity to the law and change any of their terms and conditions at will. Just wait until they decide to impose exorbitant fees to your current accounts. <br /><br />At least Santander backed down from their attempt to charge for business bank accounts that they sold on the basis of no charges ever for the life of the account. But that was small beer to the millions extra that BOI and West Brom can charge over the remaining life of affected mortgages.<br />

<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />lmao<br /><br />boo boo etc Edited September 24, 2013 by Si1

[Si1]

<br />I wish I could have been that succinct.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

outrageous

BTLRS demand free money

so there

[koala_bear]

I wish I could have been that succinct.

+1

[@contradevian]

Will £100k be enough for the lawyers?

Hire the same lawyers for class action law suit by savers?

[zugzwang]

In summary the government are bent, the bankers are bent, TPTB are bent, and care little for the populace they have their own agenda and can not see the woods for the trees.

Rant over sorry about that, its just this yeild thing gets on me t1ts abit. :angry:

Excellent post. No need to apologise. Most of us share your incredulity and frustration, but houses don't pay for themselves whatever the sheeple have been conditioned to expect. Unless you believe the UK govt can continue to borrow the best part of a trillion quid every five years to support the economy then house prices must inevitably correct.

[little fish]

Seems WB are targeting only what they class as professional LL's. How does this stand legally? Are WB in a position to determine who is a professional LL or how many house you have to own to become a prof LL.. Comments are calling it discrimination

A nasty payment shock however you analyse it. The rate hikes are being applied to 'professional' landlords only – those that West Brom has identified as owning three or more properties.

http://www.thisismon...elp-savers.html

[Si1]

<br />Seems WB are targeting only what they class as professional LL's. How does this stand legally? Are WB in a position to determine who is a professional LL or how many house you have to own to become a prof  LL.. Comments are calling it discrimination <img src='http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><a href='http://www.thisismon...elp-savers.html</a><br />

<br /><br /><br />

possibly they are concerned that so called professional landlords, will have loans from more than one provider, so would rather get ahead of those other institutions on the queue of creditors

[little fish]

<br /><br /><br />

possibly they are concerned that so called professional landlords, will have loans from more than one provider, so would rather get ahead of those other institutions on the queue of creditors

Good point - how times have changed. It's gone from the 'we want you' and all your properties poster to a two fingered salute instead

I was thinking of the OFT's guidance on professional cleaning stated on rental contracts where they said that it was not up to a LA or LL to decide what was professional or not. But then BTL remains unregulated, something which has benefited LL's for years.

Ironic that now they want redress via regulatory bodies. HPC needs a violin playing emoticon...

.

[Eddie_George]

Ironic that now they want redress via regulatory bodies. HPC needs a violin playing emoticon...

[little fish]

love it....

[koala_bear]

possibly they are concerned that so called professional landlords, will have loans from more than one provider, so would rather get ahead of those other institutions on the queue of creditors

They are definitely addressing what they perceive as the highest risk BTL (first?). Multiple loans raise the risk flag immediately.

They may not know which of their borrowers has loans with other BTL lenders - some of the borrowers with 1 WB loan might have 5 with another lender.

This might encourage some of their other borrowers to move if they can, thus leaving behind what looks like the really high risk cases.

Looks like a good management team with their heads screwed on at WB at the moment.

BOI, NAB (Yorkshire and Clydesdale) all trying to ditch the loss making (on IR margin alone) high risk BTL at the moment, how long before some slightly bigger players do the same? (with lower risk of legal action each time it is done successfully).

Might Sant. be the first of the really big guys?

[Sancho Panza]

Looks like a good management team with their heads screwed on at WB at the moment.

BOI, NAB (Yorkshire and Clydesdale) all trying to ditch the loss making (on IR margin alone) high risk BTL at the moment, how long before some slightly bigger players do the same? (with lower risk of legal action each time it is done successfully).

Might Sant. be the first of the really big guys?

There's an old adage from GD1

'He who panics first,gets his money back.'

[koala_bear]

There's an old adage from GD1

'He who panics first,gets his money back.'

Worked for those who "invested" with in Bernie Madoff too.

[sleepwello'nights]

<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />lmao<br /><br />boo boo etc

That makes more sense than most of your posts.

[TheCountOfNowhere]

Worked for those who "invested" with in Bernie Madoff too.

that's the case in all ponzi schemes.

[houses-do-my-head-in]

Are there these kind of clauses in-

a) residential fixed rate mortgages?

all residential mortgages? or is it just some lenders?

[Si1]

That makes more sense than most of your posts.

You really are a shining whit

[Sancho Panza]

Are there these kind of clauses in-

a) residential fixed rate mortgages?

all residential mortgages? or is it just some lenders?

There are all sorts of clauses in all sorts of contracts.

Experience tells us that there's likely to be some potentially nasty clauses in most mortgage contracts,which most advisers will tell you ignore on the grounds that 'they'll never use it'.Well,if they'll never use it,why is it there?

NAB/YB/Clydesdale has been mainly been capital calls based on LTV breaches.BoI/WB are about rate changes.Plus ca change.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Sancho Panza

[little fish]

Are there these kind of clauses in-

a) residential fixed rate mortgages?

all residential mortgages? or is it just some lenders?

Clauses exist in all mortgage contracts, I would think (I haven't seen all of them). Residential would be harder for the banks to apply as consumers have more rights than commercial. The Bank of Ireland rates rise earlier this year included some residential consumers.

The majority of the affected are BTL as they are unregulated and the FCA don't want to know - with BTL & LL's gaining adverse publicity, the timing of this is interesting.

Barclays & Natwest BTL trackers are based on their SVR rather than the BOE base rate, so they can, in effect, raise their SVR at any time. BM Solutions BOE base rate lifetime tracker mortgage offer outlines a host of reasons, including changed "competitive conditions" and "funding environments" where the lender can change the rate charged. All monies clause seem to be popular again, margin calls are happening - the banks are starting to use their small print.

I'm sure clauses exist in all mortgage T&C's - the lenders just need to be more careful using them in residential.

Ray Boulger, the most respected mortgage expert in the UK, tells me that many, if not all, lenders have buried deep in the small print "exceptional circumstances" clauses which, among other things, allow them to demand you repay your mortgage, in its entirety, at a month's notice

When I rang the UK's Council of Mortgage Lenders for comment, it said that there has been a "very exceptional change to market conditions since the loans were taken out". The CML insisted it was not endorsing Bank of Ireland's move, but pointing out the situation some lenders may be in

http://www.theguardi...te-rise-reverse