Endowments get the heave-ho
Just a couple of weeks after the Council of Mortgage Lenders
claimed there is nothing wrong with endowment mortgages,
the Midland Bank and Abbey National said they will,
respectively, scrap and reduce them. Both said they were
acting because endowments are unsuitable ways to repay loans.
For the full story see the Sunday Times at:
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/99/09/12/stimonnws01019.html?999.
Mortgage lenders are unhappy
Mortgage lenders are unhappy with recent press reports
about poor mortgage deals.
Calling press coverage of underpaying endowments, mis-selling and early redemption fees, a "feeding frenzy", the Council of Mortgage Lenders has warned us that all the coverage will not help "well-considered debate".
Presumably the CML fears that reporters are dreaming up the customer abuse they are writing about. If they are not dreaming it up, the CML's warning is - presumably - a sign that it feels that the regulation debate should not take any notice of customer abuse. Presumably, it feels that the regulation debate should only take notice of what lenders think.
Lord knows, with the amount of lobbying the CML is currently doing, you'd think it would be the other way around. You'd think that sensible, mature people in a service industry would want to hear more about customer abuse. You'd think they would want to go away and try to come up with solutions.
Unfortunately, the lenders' lobbying does appear to be doing some good - for lenders. The Treasury is rumoured to be leaning towards voluntary regulation for lenders. Your MP has until 22 October 1999 to take your views about voluntary regulation to the Treasury. So, if you want him to know what you think, you ought to contact him a little earlier.
CIFAS gets upset. Again.
Speaking of the media upsetting people, we've really gone and
upset CIFAS.
How do we know? Primarily from the number of people using the "Reader Comments" section of the CIFAS page.
We encourage you to read the latest batch. We'd love to know whether or not you think they are genuine. Read them, get a feel for the mindset of the people who wrote them. Have a look at their email addresses (where they have left an address). Ask yourself if any of them were written by the same person? We're surprised at how many of them seem to be written late at night. We're surprised at the colourless tone of them. We're... well, make up your mind. You read them for yourself at: http://greenspun.com/com/repossession/blacklis/cifas.htm.
At the time of writing - 5:30am on 7 September - the CIFAS site was inaccessible as its web builders prepared to add a Private Members' Log-in area. An "under construction" sign has even appeared on the front page now that the site has reopened - a tease perhaps of the facts yet to come.
I mention this because we've put up more information about CIFAS, how The Times reported one reputation-destroying error it had made, plus one of CIFAS's emails to us and our response. Having read it, we suggest you visit CIFAS's website and read what it has got to say for itself - we don't want you to go away with just our views. You can see its explanations of itself at: http://www.cifas.org.uk/faq.htm.
We commend to you paragraph 9, which is headed:
What proof do members of CIFAS need to file details on CIFAS?
and paragraph 10:
What happens if members of CIFAS file people
on CIFAS in error? Am I entitled to compensation?
We would point out to anybody that has been hurt by this mob that despite what they say about compensation, you do also have the right to sue them for libel if they make a mistake.
........................................................................
Those of you who read the last newsletter will
remember that CIFAS's director had sent us an email
claiming that telephone harrassers had tracked him down
because we had included his name on the web-site. This
despite the fact that there are currently 64 people in the
British telephone directory who share his name and that
his name and address are on public record in Companies
House.
Well, he replied to our request for more information about the harrassment and the steps he took to ensure the perpetrators were caught. We reproduce it below:
CIFAS email>
From: "CIFAS OFFICE - LONDON" cifas @ cifas.org.uk
To: "Lee" repossession @ bigfoot dot comI have not involved the Police as I have no proof for them. The caller(s) left no number for the 1471 service to retrieve. The Police can do nothing other than offer sympathy. If the calls start again I will report the problem.
I changed my number without using the BT service as I used to work for BT in that line of work and know how seldom they can do anything. I believe using my name from the website and my position here at CIFAS, whoever it is, located me, either by contacting the office and pretending to be a friend who needed to get me at home urgently (I work from home at least 2 days a week) or by using the Companies House records to get my address and then searching directory enquiries. I am now an unlisted number and the problem has ceased. Staff in the office will now never give out my home telephone number.
I'd be grateful for removal of my name from the website to avoid any recurrence. The office address and telephone number can of course be published.
Thanks
>ends CIFAS email
NatWest compensates early redemption penalty victim
NatWest has paid [sterling]3,000 to a borrower who began
to sue it over an early redemption penalty clause. It had
refused to refund the money to the Woking-based borrower
when he said its early redemption penalties were unfair
contract term. It backed down very fast once he issued a
writ, according to a report in the Sunday Times.
Legal experts reckon banks and building societies are now preparing for a flood of similar claims from borrowers. The Sunday Times quotes its sources as saying that banks do not want any such claims to actually go to court because a win by a borrower could spark a flood of claims.
We think what they mean is that the publicity surrounding a borrower winning in court could trigger many more claims. So banks and building societies prefer to deny the borrower claims privately and only cave in if the borrower issues a writ.
And that could well happen. The Sunday Times confirms that the Consumers' Association plans to go ahead with a case against lenders who charge customers early redemption penalties. It will start in the next few weeks unless lenders back down.
Web-site for insurance rip-offs
Pearse Kelly runs a web-site that tries to help people who
suspect they have been ripped off or maltreated by insurance
companies. It looks worth visiting, if only for the common
insurance industry quotes pages. It's at http://freespace.virgin.net/spice.help.
Changes to The Home Repossession Page
We've added two pages of fun-filled facts on CIFAS, all
visible from the links in the Blacklisted? index. And following
a complaint from a CIFAS fan, we've repaired the link
to our information about GAIN. It's in the Blacklisted? section.
We added a link for SPICE on the page listing sources of free help. In fact at the time of writing SPICE operates on a no-win, no fee basis, which is as good as free in my book.
Spouses facing shortfall claims after they signed a mortgage deed with their partner will find small additions to the information relavant to them in the Legal Rights page. It's ni the Repossession section and visible at: http://www.home-repo.org.
[ends]
| Home Page | Receive free news and updates |
| Tell a friend about this site | |
| © The Home Repossession Page 1997-2000 | |