West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

Some more thoughts, straight from WB 'booklet':

Condition 14. When the Loan has to be paid back to us

14.1 You may be obliged by us to repay the Loan in full....if any of the following events occur:

* we give you one month's notice requiring such repayment;

Now,

27.1 ...we believe the terms and conditions of the Mortgage and the Mortgage Conditions to be FAIR, if any of them becomes invalid or unenforceable for any reason, provided the law permits...

I think here's the crux of the matter: WB believes the terms and conditions are FAIR and we believe condition 14.1 (point 1) is UNFAIR, therefore Justine could get an injuction from the court against WB to halt the recall till the court decides if 14.1 (point 1) is Fair or not... QED

My mortgage offer clearly shows a term of 25 years, no mention of a 28 day settlement. The terms and conditions state that if there is a conflict between the terms and conditions and the mortgage offer the mortgage offer prevails!

Reply to the comment left by "Scott Davison" at "21/11/2013 - 10:28":

I can't stand it when people say the following to me 'about speaking to a solicitor friend', but I have to share this to provide some sense of perspective about calling in the mortgage.

I have just spoken to a friend who has been a Property Solicitor for 25 years and he has NEVER heard of any Lender (BTL or Commercial) who have tried to call a mortgage in early that was a) Not in Arrears an b) was still performing during the duration of the term, i.e. my mortgage still have 15 years left to run.

Secondly, what are on earth of WBBS going to do with 1,000 + REPO properties. This is liking signing their own death warrant and is the very last thing they would ever want to do and would spell the end of their lending business.

Finally, although the FREE Legals package offered by the WBBS for remortgages states the solicitor is acting for WBBS and not necessarily the borrower, even with a disclaimer saying we should get independent legal advice, he states that there were not actually Free Legals, but the package was NO legals, i.e. the SRA would have an extremely DIM view of this being packaged as Free Legals when no advice was provided.

Just received WB 1.9% letter. Of course I will be writing to them to reject.

It is interesting that they are now referring to 1.9% as 'additional interest charge' - I feel this change of tact is materially important in our case. There is definitely no provision in their T&C for any additional interest charge...

Another point to notice is that there is no mention of recalling the mortgage - another change of tact?!

Not entirely sure if these guys are fools or deviously clever?!

As far as 14.1 of these mysterious terms and conditions goes, and putting conspiracy theories aside for a moment, this just looks like poor drafting to me. It seems fairly obvious that the first bullet point was intended to have an "and" after the semi-colon, such that 28 days notice was required under the ensuing circumstances. Otherwise, why have a stated mortgage term at all?

Reply to the comment left by "stuart marshall" at "21/11/2013 - 11:27":

You have to remember who you are dealing with WB.

Has your solicitor friend ever come across a situation where a lender completely changed the terms of a tracker mid term ?

I hope he is right and I don't think they will do it. Many properties will be in negative equity anyway. I know most of mine will be for the next 3-5 years. By then interest rates will have gone up anyway.

There will be a lot of organising to do this anyway and a lot of costs.

You never know you might be able to go to the Auction re purchase your old property , tenant still in place at a much lower price and a higher rate mortgage that has a lower balance so interest about the same, but when the rates go up your new mortgage balance will be less and you might have got a better overall deal !?

I like the idea of being able to sue Enact though

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "21/11/2013 - 08:36":

Mark,
Yes I do remember reading something on those lines before; but I didn't recall who, nor precisely what was said - though it obviously struck a cord with me as I contributed and wrote in a like-minded fashion. I feel EXACTLY the same and for the same reasons, obviously.

What I have now subsequently read in your post, beginning: SERIOUS LEGAL ISSUE (I do read 80-80% of what's posted on the forum, BUT due to me having duplicate e-mail notifications, which has been a problem with some other contributors also, which I tired of very quickly, I unsubscribed to the 'Notification' element, so miss some content - though I do log in to the forum regularly and TRY to read as much as I can).....only serves to compound my belief that the T&Cs were indeed 'general' ones, not specific to Buy-to-Let mortgages.
Therefore, these terms ARE highly irregular; and therefore surely highly UNlikely to be taken seriously in a court of law, from the (sloppy) lender's point of view? They clearly couldn't be bothered to write up T&Cs specific to BTL, but were nevertheless happy to offer Buy-to-Let mortgages in order to boost profits at the same time!
They know I'm of this opinion, as I have told them so, in no uncertain terms. Like 'The Man From Nowhere', I too go under a pseudonym, not because I've anything dubious to hide, but because I don't feel that those at the WBBS reading this, ought to know exactly what I'm thinking and airing here, as IF there is any further, personal 'targeting', for whatever reason, and in line with what we're talking about here, but in a slightly different guise, then I don't wish to become a victim. In other words I just don't want to provide them too much ammunition. I don't want to make their life easier, and I don't want to be 'followed' in future either:
Many, many years ago I made some comments, both favourable and unfavourable, towards certain people and organisations, and STILL to this day, if you search under my real name, they are there, on the web, for ALL to see; and this was about 12-15yrs ago!!!! Google your own name and see what I mean.
So like FaceBook and other social media, and the general 'public' concern for privacy, I too wish to retain my own privacy as far as I reasonably can. You never know how people will use this against one in future, even though no crime or anything dubious or inflammatory has necessarily been said - even tenants, on landlords!
Things have a habit of sometimes coming back at one, years down the line.
That said, we're ALL, I think, on firm ground with regards to our position with the likes of WBBS, as far as the law goes and our Class Action.....but as you have said, IF they were to target anyone, then once again, if they're reading this forum and were minded to take out a few who they took exception to, then giving one's real name is a red rag to a bull!
You may not fear it, and neither do I, BUT it's the unforeseen that more concerns me, so I play it as safe as I reasonably can. I hope you understand?

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Eastabrook" at "21/11/2013 - 11:51":

...good point Paul...

Moreover, we keep seeing the following on every letter from the banks:

"your property may be repossessed if you do not keep up repayments on your mortgage'

Surely, such an important clause as 14.1 (point 1) should also be prominently shown on all documents and not buried in small letters in a booklet...

I think their recalling bluff is just that, a bluff - they'd have no leg to stand on if that is going to be their defence and WB know it...

Reply to the comment left by "Concerned Landlord" at "21/11/2013 - 12:05":

All of the bullets in 14.1 represent "reasons" apart from the first which is just a mechanism or timeframe towards enforcing the ultimate action of terminating the agreement. If WB wants to use it instead as a "blank cheque", then it would appear to be in contradiction of the stated mortgage term.

West Brom has some serious history already re equity release schemes mis-selling.
Lots on the web about this, but here is a link
http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/equity-release-plans-cost-west-brom-pound27m/70596.article