West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

Hi The Man from Nowhere
Thank you for you enlightening information about the law and how it works. I agree whole heartedly with your comments about winning in court. It is comforting to realise that a legal bod thinks the case is very winnable and really is only about money so if the magic figure is 100K should we just not put in a bit more? I for one would if asked.
Now something totally useless I have complied a file (or 2) of the forum to date that you can open in an ordinary word processor to search for details. It is not absolutely brilliant because there is the odd duplicate and some are out of order but if enough people want it I will investigate putting on a global url so people can simply download it. I am loathe to e-mail it to every one individually because it we would have to release our e-mails addresses to all and sundry (or at least to me! And none of you actually know who I am so it would be a big leap of faith on your part) .
Infighting does no one any good so don't rise to the bait if possible. Everyone is entitled to their opinions no matter how extreme, its how we handle ourselves that matters.
Ps I have just received my reply from the treasury guess what it says exactly what all the others have said it says. I wonder if they just send out the same letter with a different name. However my MP asks if he can help to write to him. So I will be writing as per my previous prelimary letter (some time in the past as a post)

Reply to the comment left by "Andy Bell" at "27/11/2013 - 14:26":

OMG. Horrible realisation having read your post here. My mortgage was a discounted tracker, discounted for two years followed by a 0.99% set tracker rate for the rest of the term. Is that what they're going to claim next? That I was actually on a Discounted Variable Rate after all?

Well done for extracting that information. The more we find out about this BS the more weasly they appear.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "27/11/2013 - 15:21":

I believe my West Brom BTL tracker mortgage that has an account number beginning with 9 was taken out in 2004. I'm going to have a root around at home for all the documentation relating to it and will forward it on to you and Justin. Failing that, I will forward everything from my S.R.A request to Justin and forward that particular 2004 mortgage documentation to you.

I have a sinking feeling that West Brom are going to raise the rate on their currently non-affected BTL trackers that begin with a 9. Therefore do I need to send in an additional £240 to cover the 2004 BTL tracker that is (as yet) not affected by the rate hike?

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "27/11/2013 - 15:21":

Hi Mark,
We've all been good while you were away. Hope you feel able to take a few more breaks.

Amends to the to main article look OK, seems to answer the recent question.

- typo Pwlease and " 25% of the way towards our £100,000" could do with updating -

Reply to the comment left by "Mervyn Wharton" at "26/11/2013 - 20:43":

Hi Mervyn

I can think of a very good reason to include the properties you are in the process of selling or considering selling into the Class Action.

You are of course only selling them as a result of West Brom's action's are you? 😉 Read into that what you will.

On this basis you will no doubt want to claim compensation from West Brom for all sale costs and consequential loss of rental profits and capital gains if/when we win they case won't you?

You are free to pick and choose whichever mortgage accounts you wish to include in the Class Action, personally I would pay to register them all but you are free to make your own decisions for your own reasons of course.
.

Reply to the comment left by "Ian Burton" at "27/11/2013 - 15:25":

Hi Ian,

The magic figure could be well in excess of £100k. It all depends on how much the ATE insurance premium is, the cost of which will largely be governed by what they view to be our prospects of success and the maximum amount they are willing to underwrite regarding adverse legal costs, disbursements etc... They will then input these variables into their risk model and arrive at a figure which is the insurance premium (and which since 1st April 2013 is no longer recoverable from the opponent even if you win. This little change in the law caused a mad scramble for claims to be put in before the 1st April 2013 deadline. However, such is life and we have to work with what we have).

Please remember, just because you win doesn't necessarily mean that you can't be hit with adverse costs, e.g. for failing to beat an opponent's Part 36 offer. That is why it is absolutely crucial to have ATE insurance in place to cover you for this kind of eventuality as having the ATE in place means you can don't have to feel pressured into accepting a Part 36 offer and can continue with the litigation. Just be aware that the ATE insurer will be reviewing the prospects of success at every stage of the litigation as prospects of success can change during the course of litigation so they may also need to be happy that you're not rejecting a Part 36 offer unreasonably.

A Part 36 offer is an offer to settle made by either party in an attempt to conclude a claim early. They are most often made by defendants and can be in relation to liability or quantum or indeed both.

The rules state that, if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer and the claimant decides not to accept it, if they go to trial and less is awarded by a judge or if later the claimant is forced to accept less than was offered, the claimant has to pay the defendant’s legal costs (and disbursements) incurred from the date the offer was made until the end of the case. What is more, the claimant also has to pay his/her own legal costs (so basically any disbursements if acting under a CFA) from the offer date as well, as these cannot be recovered from the defendant.

So this is where After the Event (ATE) insurance comes in. You see the problem lawyers have is that they are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. If they tell a client to accept an offer, they get hassle from the client who thinks their lawyer isn’t getting them the right settlement and just wants to get their costs. If they tell the client to carry on and then fail to beat the offer, the client says they should have advised them to accept. ATE insurance is as much to protect the lawyer here as the client. With After the Event insurance in place, if a lawyer advises the client to continue, but then the offer isn’t beaten, the insurance will kick in to cover the adverse costs. Without it, the client has to pay these out of their damages.

Therefore securing the ATE insurance and having enough money to litigate is crucial to winning the fight against the West Brom. Without, we don't have a snowball's chance in hell as I certainly wouldn't risk going to court without having the security of an ATE policy in place.

HI Mark,

I have just received confirmation from Ana Simpson at the Law Dept that my cheque and paperwork has arrived.

I was just wondering how we are doing in terms of numbers joined, amount received. I don't know if you'd rather not highlight these figures but it would be nice to know and may well encourage some of the fence -sitters to join the fight..

Reply to the comment left by "Alison Buckland" at "27/11/2013 - 11:14":

On the second day of Chrismas West Brom staff said to me ....

Your stuffed! - you pro landlord turkey

On the third day of Christmas West Brom said to me ....

Complain to F.O.S. HE-HE-HE-HE !!!

.....

Your turn, loving your thought process 🙂
.

I spent a few worthwhile hours today at the Landlord & Letting Show near Coventry. I bent the ear of plenty of landlords sadly none of whom have WB mortgages but they NOW get the point about what their lenders will do if we allow WB to get away with it.

Also spoke with many property insurance mobs, letting agents and other organisations with plenty of landlord clients on their books. They also NOW know why it is important to spread the word. Also some mortgage advisors who also NOW realise the significance of it all.

A lot of flyers handed out so much mud overall has been thrown at the wall, Hopefully some will stick? I used the flyer that was so excellently designed etc short time back. It was very good for purpose today. Excellent in fact.

Someone posted awhile back that these shows occur fairly regularly around the country. If there is one near you in the future I recommend you attend. Well worth the time.

Footnote to Mark Alexander. Those that knew about Property118 and the campaign already were very flattering about you, Deservedly so. Mary Latham whom you know
mentioned the fight and Property118 in a seminar address. I spoke with her briefly and thanked her.

Reply to the comment left by "Addicted to fighting the WBBS" at "27/11/2013 - 12:02":

Nicole is probably sick of me by now, however, she may well be pleased to hear from another affected borrower. Her contact details are:-

Nicole Blackmore
Personal Finance Reporter
Telegraph Media Group
Ph. 020 7931 3531
Twitter: @Nicole_B_K

Please don't all call and e-mail her, she's the best journalist contact we have at the moment so we don't want to lose her. These contact details are for Stuart's use only.
.