West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

Reply to the comment left by "Richard Adams" at "17/11/2013 - 17:36":

I can see the intention to "not settle" in the summary. But this may depend on what you understand by the words "to settle"

Just another thought on my bafflement about why more do not join the class action, I suppose many people are happy to "go with the flow" and respect the decisions of those they may look up to - including financial institutions.

As my partner just remarked to me.. "Ah but you are different. You have worked in financial services organisations, so you are well aware of how they play the long game and the methods used to increase income, however pernicious those methods may be."

Naturally enough, she also worked in financial services too! Those who have not joined this action and are sitting on their hands do not have the benefit of my own or her personal work experience.

Good luck with the campaign

David Lawrenson
http://www.LettingFocus.com/Blogs

Reply to the comment left by "ROSEMARY BOSWORTH" at "17/11/2013 - 17:39":

Thanks Rosemary for saving me the bother of asking WBBS. Were it possible for my heart to harden yet further against them you have facilitated it with your revelation.

Reply to the comment left by "David Lawrenson" at "17/11/2013 - 17:57":

When the issue arose and was debated in posts settle meant accept an offer WBBS might make to let those in the class action off the hook leaving remainder of their BTL borrowers firmly on it.

While this would be tempting to me to ease my personal financial situation (and to teach freeloaders a lesson), the consensus was that cutting a deal for a few would not suffice to deter other lenders trying on what is a frankly revolting, dishonest, underhand and nasty trick. So taking them all the way to court while taking longer and causing the likes of me temporary pain, would in the long run lance this particular boil once and for all.

Should WBBS meanwhile offer me zillions of pounds and restore me to paying them at existing interest rate in exchange for keeping my mouth shut, then I guess that would be the time I have to examine my conscience most deeply??!!

As for why WBBS BTL borrowers are only joining steadily - yet still encouragingly day by day mind - rather than in a torrent remains a mystery. Despite massive publicity there is doubtless still much ignorance of the Property 118 campaign. There is also the apathy and "I don't like to make a fuss" attitude you refer to. Sadly there are for certain still quite a few sitting on their hands hoping to ride shotgun on our success without paying or contributing anything. They are in for a rude shock when we win. While they may benefit from the case law we shall have established they will still have to fight their own corner to have the increased interest rate turned over for themselves. Time, legal fees and individual effort will be required.

Thanks for your good wishes in the campaign.

Sent on line payment and docs in post tomorrow.

Just playing catch up, I needed to take a break from the PC this weekend as I was feeling a bit burned out.

To all - Regarding my complaint to the ASA – has anybody else made one or are there any questions about that?

Also to all – a tracker rate is a variable rate, as it a capped rate, whether the rate tracks LIBOR or BoE base rate as per the West Brom tracker. There is nothing wrong with referring to the rate as a variable rate, what it is NOT is a Standard Variable Rate, hence the description tracker.

@ Helen Landlord – I can but speculate why West Brom have reduced the tracker rate hike from 2% to 1.9%. It changes nothing so far as I’m concerned. They can change it to 0.1% if they wish and I will still fight it because it’s sets a precedent for them and other lenders.

@ Mark Landlord – I agree that sending a response to their letter changing the rate hike from 2% to 1.9% rejecting that rate is a good idea. I have yet to receive my letter but I will respond when I get it.

@ Rosemary Bosworth – sorry, I don’t know the answer to your question regarding number of properties vs number of mortgages.

@ Stuart Marshall – I do not believe funding for lending is not relevant here. My understanding is that funding for lending only applies to new commercial loans. Buy to Let mortgages do qualify as commercial loans apparently, however, West Brom are no longer offering them due to being over exposed in to the sector under building society rules. I have to say that I am not 100% certain about this though so I am prepared to be corrected if others can prove me wrong.

@ Appalled Landlord – my West Brom mortgage is 2.49% over bank base rate now and will be 4.39% over bank base rate as of 1st December – OUCH!!! I took the deal as I was running out of lenders at the time, several had closed their doors to new lending and I was up to or exceeding the thresholds on others. If only I knew then what I know now!

@ Dave penney – consumer protection means that landlords with only one property “theoretically” have the benefit of Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations on your side – see http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/protection#.UokTltK-2M4 However, given that so few of us are likely to qualify I think this could well be a “red herring”. There is a slim chance that West Brom might reverse their decision for people who can prove they were consumers at the time of taking out the mortgage. As David Lawrenson said in a later post, there is no legal definition of a Consumer landlord and the Foxtons case is all we have to go on. The case of the OFT vs Foxtons was all about clauses being buried in small print, hence there are many similarities between that and the case we have against West Brom. The Foxtons case is different though as it involves finance which the Foxtons case didn’t. A high profile case regarding the definition of a consumer with a business is the FCA ruling on interest rate hedging products. Our QC is also looking into further case law which I am not at liberty to disclose via the forum. It is unlikely that it will be economically viable for the Class Action to press for a definition of a Consumer Landlord, unless of course a few thousand more landlords join in.

@ Stuart vMarshall & Peter Cole – agreed, excellent article in the Mail on Sunday. As you may have spotted, I left a comment this morning to drive affected borrowers here, I would ask all reading this to do the same, the link again is >>> http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2508332/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-Quiet-men-taking-Goliaths.html 

@David Lawrenson - if West Brom offer me a deal and put it in writing, the first thing I will do is publish it, regardless of whether they say I can or not. If necessary I will blank out my details, create another member profile here and post it regardless. No doubt others will do the same thing too so I may not need to HAHA

@Richard Adams – I do understand your point about teaching the freeholders a lesson. The hardest lesson of all though will be if we don’t raise the required funds to take this fight all the way. The only winners in that case will be west Brom and the other lenders which may choose to follow suit. This fight runs well beyond our predicament todaty, we are fighting for every mortgage borrower with a tracker rate mortgage. I do hope they appreciate it. Sadly, I suspect the vast majority remain blissfully unaware of us though. That’s why it is still just as important for each and every one of us to do our bit to spread the word. This campaign started with one person, there are now hundreds of of who need to continue to do our bit and when we do all pull together we have the ability to reach out the thousands.

LET’S KEEP FIGHTING!
.

My mortgage is also 2.49% over bank base. I'm just pondering over what I'm going to spend my 1% saving on!

Mark
First of all sincere thanks for all the work and encouragement you offer on this site. Like many others when we first received our letter from West Bromwich we felt helpless that this was a 'fait accompli'.
Far from It !
This site has been an inspiration and we have done everything suggested, joined the class action several weeks ago and sent details and cheque to Justin, wrote and received a reply from our MP who has written to Vince Cable, wrote to the FOS, and as you suggested today, the Advertising Standards and also commented on the This is Money website.
It is a pleasure to be proactive in fighting this.
Peoples' comments are encouraging and bring a wealth of experience and expertise to inform everyone of the wrongdong of West Bromwich.
The website is excellent but I have one suggestion:- At the top of the page you have the 'TO DO LIST', could you add all the extras you have been suggesting so that new people will be up to date on all they can do to work towards a successful outcome.
Well done, keep up the good work and do have a break from time to time as it must be very intense at times keeping up with the flow of comments.
To a successful outcome.

Hi I am sending 3 x cheques to Justin can someone confirm the postcode?

Is it

NW10 5LJ

Reply to the comment left by "Tony the hairdresser " at "18/11/2013 - 10:49":

The Law Department, 7A Wellington Rd, London NW10 5LJ

Reply to the comment left by "Tony the hairdresser " at "18/11/2013 - 10:49":

Yes that is correct.