West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

18:38 PM, 30th September 2013, About 11 years ago 3869

Text Size

West Bromwich Tracker Rate Mortgages Legal Action Group

West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

Are you affected by the West Brom Tracker Rate Hike?

If your mortgage account number begins with the number 8 you are highly likely to be one of the unlucky 41% of the mortgage customers of the West Bromwich building Society with a West Bromwich Mortgage Company account affected by the 1.9% increase in your tracker margin rate. However, if you arranged your mortgage directly with West Bromwich Building Society (i.e. not via a broker) or before 2006 the chances are that your account number will begin with the number 9 and you are not affected – YET!!! West Brom will give no assurances that mortgages with account numbers beginning with the number 9 will not be affected at some point in the future.

OUR INTENDED CLASS ACTION LITIGATION OVERVIEW

Tracker Rate Class Actions Updates

The reasons we started this campaign are very simple:-

1) We believe the actions of West Brom are immoral

2) We believe the actions of West Brom are unlawful, i.e. they have no legal grounds to increase their tracker rate margins

3) We have no wish to subsidise other areas of the West Bromwich Building Society business model

4) We are fearful of other lenders following suit if West Brom are allowed to get away with this

Mark Smith (Barrister-At-Law) said …

“Representative actions, where one person starts a case representing many others, who all want the answer to a legal question from a court such as ‘is this contract enforceable against me?’ but are not seeking damages. All those who sign up to the action will get the benefit of the win, but they do not have to start their own cases, as they are ‘represented’ by the lead claimant.

The only people who will definitely benefit from success in the case are those who have signed up. There will be no free rides. Any others will have to fight their own corners individually, either alone or with legal help (which will inevitably cost significantly more than the group case).”

We will NOT settle on any basis.

Landlords take legal action against West Brom Mortgage Company

We have a moral duty to do what is right for those who support the values upon which this campaign was started. Our promise to all who support these values is that we will not sell out on you at any price. We will continue to fight this injustice and we will fight any other lender who tries to follow suit.

Are you with us?

This discussion thread is now closed – we’re off to Court!

To link to the new discussion please CLICK HERE

West Bromwich Mortgage Company Tracker Margins Legal Action


Share This Article


Comments

The Man From Nowhere

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

2:26 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Seething Landlord" at "28/11/2013 - 01:42":

As regards section 8 of the Administration of Justice Act 1973 Act, it applies only if two conditions are satisfied, namely:

(i) if the mortgagor is entitled or permitted ( whether by the mortgage itself or by some agreement between the parties) either (a) to pay the principal amount by instalments or (b) to defer payment of principal in whole or part, and

(ii)there is provision made for earlier payment on the happening of certain events

According to the Court of Appeal in Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc, it is not necessary for a lender who wishes to take possession of the mortgaged property to seek a court order. A lender will in fact rarely seek possession in the absence of any default on the borrower's part. Possession is almost invariably sought these days as an adjunct to the lender’s power of sale, exercisable under the Law of Property Act 1925, normally only on default. Most lenders would not want possession for themselves, since the appointment of a receiver is preferable and does not attract the same burden of accountability to the borrower (Law of Property Act 1925, s. 109(2)). Nor does it seem necessary in most situations that the lender should need possession before default has occurred.

Where the lender does seek possession it is nearly always through a court order. The court then has various options available to it. These include implying a term that the lender will not seek possession until there is default, utilizing the principle in Quennell v Maltby, discussed earlier, and using the statutory discretion afforded by the Administration of Justice Act 1970. However, apart from the lender's strict duty to account to the borrower for rents and profits both actually received and which ought reasonably to have been received, there is little legal deterrence to a lender taking possession without a court order. What deterrence there is lies in the criminal law in the form of the Criminal Law Act 1977, s. 6, under which it is in general an offence for a person to use or threaten to use violence in order to gain entry to premises in which it is known that there is someone present who is opposed to entry. Assuming that the borrower is prepared to go quietly, it is unlikely that this provision will cause any problem to any secured lender wishing to gain vacant possession without seeking a court order. In circumstances where the borrower is unwilling to go quietly, the borrower becomes a trespasser. A lender entitled to possession may peacefully evict a trespasser without a court order, but it is likely to be rare that the lender would wish to test the limits of peaceable entry. So, in practice it is probable that only in those cases where the borrower delivers the keys to the lender or otherwise makes no protest that the lender will be prepared to take possession without the safeguard of a court order.

The long and short of it folks is basically that yes, following Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc, the West Brom can technically take possession without a court order, but it is unlikely that it would seek to do so. I am sincerely of the opinion that it is little more than scaremongering by the West Brom to weed out the weak and feeble. It is a bluff to deter those who are not aware of the law or their rights under the law from taking any legal action to ensure that the interest rates on the BTL trackers they took are are not unjustly raised.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

8:04 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Financial Advisers "at risk" if Class Action Against West Brom Fails

I have sent an email today to the Editors of FT Adviser and CherryFind - see below

"This afternoon we will have a professional negligence barrister posting on the Property118 West Brom forum.

He will say that in the unlikely event of the borrowers Class Action litigation against West Brom failing and the Courts upholding the terms being relied upon by West Brom to increase tracker rate margins that professional advisers should have been aware of this risk and pointed it out to their clients. This would give rise to a claim against mortgage advisers and solicitors for professional negligence which the barrister would take on a “no win no fee” basis. This is our Plan B.

We have made it very clear that our argument is with West Brom and that we need the support of mortgage advisers and solicitors to make affected borrowers aware of the Class Action group. It is in their interests to do so because the more people who join the Class Action the greater our chances of influencing the powers at Westminster and the FCA to get involved based on the principles of Treating Customers Fairly. Only a win against West Brom can truly protect professional advisers.

We hope you will do all in your power to ensure that professional advisers understand the importance of this issue to their own businesses."
.

Norfolk n'Chance

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

8:18 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Richard Adams" at "27/11/2013 - 23:26":

Don't under estimate the cost factor.

Its less than 4 weeks to Xmas. There's an economic downturn. Many people are experiencing hard times, landlords included. In a few days we will all be paying the increased rates. Many will not want to add to their financial burden at this time of the year.

If you are one of those that is not feeling the pinch, can spare the money, is doing nicely in the current crisis then its easy think that everyone is in the same boat. Clearly thats not the case and irrespective of any positive spin or well worded argument made here its quite unlikely they will choose to pay.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

8:23 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mervyn Wharton" at "28/11/2013 - 08:18":

Hi Mervyn

You didn't comment of my responses to your dilemma over whether to join the Class Action on the basis of part or all of your portfolio or the opportunities associated with including the properties you are looking to sell.

Your feedback on the points I raised would be very much appreciated.

Are you in and if so on what basis?
.

Addicted to fighting the WBBS

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

8:59 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "27/11/2013 - 16:44":

Thanks Mark.

Nicole has just responded to confirm she is going to look into further the TCF issue with regards to confirmation only 41% of customers have been affected AND also seek comment from Mortgage Force as to whether their customers have or have not been affected.

I also send the FCA letter (20th Nov) and in your words, gave it on a plate as to the clear breach of TCF rules by the West Brom in this regard.

Thanks

Addicted to fighting the WBBS

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

9:18 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Addicted to fighting the WBBS" at "28/11/2013 - 08:59":

Hello - someone mentioned a week ago they were compiling one list of media contacts to update our news and findings.

Whoever said they were going to do this (cannot remember), are they able to PR the TCF breaches and FCA letter and Mortgage Force allegation to ?

I can email someone the email & attachments I sent to Nicole Blackmore @ The Telegraph.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

9:28 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Addicted to fighting the WBBS" at "28/11/2013 - 09:18":

Hi Stuart

That was Annette Stone. She has contacted me to let me know that her doctor has advised her to stay away from the Computer for a few weeks as she's been having acute migraines. I have, therefore, been asking individual members to follow up on the suggestions they have been emailing to me. Obviously I am helping out wherever possible in terms of providing contacts etc. but there are only so many hours in the day.
.

Norfolk n'Chance

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

9:45 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "28/11/2013 - 08:23":

I'll respond by email as I don't want to discuss personal details on an open forum.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:05 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

COMMENT NOTIFICATION LINKS NOW WORKING AGAIN

We think the problem occurred around lunchtime yesterday. Therefore, if you would like to catch up please follow this link to comments posted at 1:30pm yesterday onwards >>> http://www.property118.com/west-bromwich-building-society-mortgage-company-increase-tracker-margins-legal-action/43657/comment-page-197/#comments

Links in notification emails sent out from this point should now be fine. Sadly there is nothing we can do about those sent which did not work properly.
.

Ed Atkinson

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:20 AM, 28th November 2013, About 11 years ago

I took the NLA’s Nov/Dec “UK Landlord” to bed with me last night. Not a good idea. However, I did eventually find the mention of WB buried inside the article on page 55 titled “Sharp increase in BTL lending”. It reads

One dark cloud on the horizon
has come from the West Bromwich
Building Society which has told
6700 of its BTL tracker customers
that their rates will increase by 2%
on 1 December. The NLA advises
its members who are affected by
the West Bromwich developments
to check the small print in the
terms and conditions, contact the
lender to discuss their options, and
consider if it is possible to switch
to another product and/or lender.
The NLA’s Policy Team worked
closely with NLA members affected
by the Bank of Ireland's decision
earlier this year to increase the
differential used to calculate
interest repayments for its tracker
mortgages. Head of NLA Policy,
Chris Morris, explains that as buy-
to-let mortgages are not regulated
by the Financial Services Authority
it is unlikely that the Financial
Ombudsman Service can examine
any complaints. However, if you are
an NLA member who is affected
by the West Bromwich changes
and you are prepared to share the
details of your mortgage terms,
please email policy@landlords.org.
uk or fax details to 0871 247 7535.

This is disappointing, as expected. They seem to have achieved nothing for the BoI customers, otherwise they would be trumpeting the achievement.

I am not a WB customer, just a supporter. Does an NLA member and affected WB customer fancy sending in their details and report back to us?

Meanwhile I will email the NLA again.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now