Services: Mis-sold Mortgage Claims

You are here: Services >> Claims Management Services >> Mis-sold Mortgage Claims



Mis-sold Mortgage Claims

There are numerous reasons why you may have a claim relating to your mortgage. It is not just the mortgage product itself but the process that was followed during the purchase of your property or properties. Where possible, we will investigate information from your lender, broker, solicitor and surveyor to ensure that your purchase was conducted correctly. We will also investigate the mortgage account including any fees and charges. If we find discrepancies, you could be eligible to make a claim.


If any of the following applies to you, it’s worth picking up the phone to speak to us: 



Repossession Claims

Each repossession claim is different, but fundamentally we check that the correct process has been followed and investigate the charges that were added.  If possible, we will also investigate the mortgage.


What do we look for?

In addition to the information that you provide us, we also look for the following:

What types of mortgage can be evaluated?

What do we claim for?

This depends on the nature of your claim, and who you have a valid claim against, but generally the claims involve:

How long do Mis-sold Mortgage claims take?

Information has to be requested from various parties which should take 40 days or less.  Once the required information is received, your case will be evaluated to establish the grounds of your claim, if any.  The next stage is to initiate your claim with the relevant party/parties. We expect most claims to be resolved between 6-12 months.  If your claim goes to litigation, or needs to be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, the time taken to conclude your claim may be longer.


How much does a Mis-sold Mortgage or Repossession claim cost?

Our standard fee is £395. If we cannot proceed with a claim, we will refund the fee minus £150. Claims that proceed are subject to a final fee of 19% plus VAT (or a minimum fee of £200 plus VAT) of the compensation awarded upon conclusion of a successful claim.

 

Recent Cases

The solicitor bought the wrong flat for a buy-to-let client


Mrs D looked at and agreed to buy a ground floor flat, valued at £325,000. The solicitor actually bought for her a first floor flat in the same development worth £165,000, and Mrs D paid £325,000 for this flat. The building society, who had provided a mortgage based on a valuation of the ground floor flat advanced to Mrs D a mortgage of 80% of £260,000.


Mrs D to claimed £160,000 (being £325,000 - £165,000) from the solicitor.


A Surveyor fails to identify a defect in a property


Mr E engaged a surveyor to conduct a full structural survey on a house he wanted to buy. The survey revealed no problems. Mr E bought the house. Later Mr E realised there was a problem with a wall. A builder recommended further investigation. Another surveyor advised that there were severe problems with the wall that were present at the time of purchase. Mr E paid for remedial work. He advanced a case saying that if he had received notice of this defect he could have bought the house at a cheaper price.


Mr E claimed for the loss of a chance, and loss of income.


Surveyors negligence in the buy to let market by overvaluing properties and solicitors negligence in failing to advise a client about a secret profit for the agent and unsuitability of a mortgage product


Mr F wanted to join the property boom in 2006. He contacted an agent Mr V who said he could locate suitable properties. Mr V said he had located a property (the property) at a price of £250,000 and that he had found a tenant at a rate of £1000 per month AND that he would guarantee that rate for 1 year so that Mr F could afford his mortgage.


Mr V was paid £6000 for locating the property.


Mr V said to Mr F he could get a discount on the property of £50,000 so that the £200,000 mortgage he got would be all he would have to pay apart from V's £6000.


Mr V recommended a surveyor - Mr W

Mr V recommended a financial adviser - Mr X (he organised a self certification mortgage)

Mr X recommended a Financial institution for the Mortgage - The Y Bank

Mr V recommended a solicitor - Mr Z


Unbeknown to Mr F (but known to Mr V) the property was available at a price of £120,000. Mr W surveyed the property and valued it at £250,000 (evidence has been obtained that in 2006 the property was worth £120,000).


Mr X advised Mr V to take out what the Financial trade called a HONEY TRAP mortgage (a great rate for 2 years but with penalties for early repayment and then escalating to a rate that Mr F would find difficulty paying).


The Y Bank were happy to provide the Honey Trap mortgage and with Mr V's assistance sold Mr F a PPI policy (personal protection insurance) so they could get a commission and advanced Mr F 80%. The solicitor, Mr Z failed to tell Mr F that there was a sale and sub sale on the property and failed to tell Y Bank about the discount.


In a world of escalating prices everyone was happy.


Then came the credit crunch. The property is now untenanted, the value is £100,000 and Mr F cannot afford the mortgage.


Mr F has actions against the solicitor (Mr Z), the agent (Mr V), the surveyor (Mr W), the financial adviser (Mr X) and the Y Bank.