West Bromwich Building Society Tracker Margins Legal Action

Reply to the comment left by "Colin Childs" at "26/10/2013 - 14:08":

> Reply to the comment left by “Badger ” at “26/10/2013 – 11:55“:
>
> Precisely what you would expect the WBBS to say. As that’s the way banks
> operate. Wholesale money market lending rates aren’t 0.5%. Far from it.

From your reaction, I wonder if I have made myself sufficiently clear.

The question of what the wholesale money market rates are now is supremely irrelevant.

The cost of servicing this business was almost certainly set at the time that the loans were made - based on fixed terms which matched those (plus a margin for profit) offered to the borrowers.

That is because the normal way that firms like WBBS financed the loans in the first place was to go to the money markets and purchase a tranche of cash on *fixed terms*. Fixed that is in the sense that they know from the outset precisely how much it will cost them to carry the loan through to maturity and these terms are then reflected through to the end borrower.

Sure, the base rate may vary and this is very explicit and up front for all to see, but I would be vey surprised indeed if WBBS had left themselves exposed to other rate movements within the market over the course of the loan.

To have set things up like that in the first place would have been bordering on incompetence.

No, this is profiteering / making things painful enough so that the borrowers will jump ship - pure and simple.

Not one jot of it is about "changing market conditions" in any real sense.

Reply to the comment left by "Badger " at "28/10/2013 - 10:07":

Spot on Badger! This what I've been thinking; and it's also something that didn't sit well with me when that woolly-worded 'toilet paper' response letter was sent to us, using weasel words to justify this rapacious move. So sure, it's NOTHING to do with 'costs' having risen for them (I think they were hoping that many people are actually unaware of how the lenders actually operate financially, so they can pull the wool over our eyes).

It's would gladden me much if this point could be made public rather more. Even the press hasn't singled it out as a red herring for part of their supposed justification for the increase. It has zilch to do with it. It's just plain and simply their incompetence. Well said!

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "09/10/2013 - 12:04":

Mark, I saw the transcript article too, but then did a bit of searching (and they didn't make it easy, did they!?) and finally found the audio/TV link. I was going to post it earlier, after I'd watched it, but I assumed I'd be contributing in a patronising way (possibly perceived as), so held off.

So, if even a guy as savvy as you hasn't found this, then maybe a few others haven't either. Well, here you are; there's nothing like watching the real thing, is there? It's just after 10mins into the 15min programme, if you want to skip to it, to save time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03gmfcs/Your_Money_26_10_2013/

BFN

Reply to the comment left by "Annette Stone" at "28/10/2013 - 09:57":

I totally agree with Annette, I too have seen comments that, I understand, are trying to protect those that have paid their £240. However those of us that have contributed even though we don't have mortgages with WBBS, also would very much like be kept in the loop.

If that means that some people benefit that didn't get involved...well that's life, but imho being overly protective of the 'inner clique' is short sighted. We have to stick together and make as big a stink as we all can.

Please, I think we've had enough naming and shaming. I understand both sides, and feel a little of each. We have to respect each individual's feelings, even if they are different from our own - free speech and all that.

As I think has been said, we don't wish to court in-fighting, but equally we don't want to alienate anyone either! These anti-feelings only fan the flames further, precisely what the contributor says he or she doesn't want.

So peeps, can we focus on WBBS? Let all this anger and resentment be directed effectively at them. We're all in this together. Enough criticism of your fellow supporters and other contributors!

@Incensed Landlord - thanks for posting the link 🙂

@Badger - I agree that it is highly likely that West Brom's mortgages are match funded, i.e. their profit margins on our loans have not changed since day one and will not do so. It is quite clear that a business decision has been made to the extent that WBBS are over exposed to BTL. I suspect that decision has been 'Hobsons Choice'. To restore the balance of their book, i.e to give better retail deposits and to grant more competitive residential mortgages they are now looking to do two things:-

1) Reduce their BTL book - what better way that to hike up the price. They may well have another go when they realise that it's difficult for borrowers to beat the deals with the 2% hike. Based on a 4% hike I suspect a lot more would move.

2) Increase their profitability - If the good loans refinance they will increase the margins on their "sticky business", i.e. people who can't refinance or where borrower apathy applies. This appears to be reflected in the credit rating on the securitisation bond attached to these mortgages. I linked details previously in this thread.
.

If this Web site attracts nearly 200,000 readers surly they could be kind enough to donate as little as a £1 each towards the campaign ??

Ian's right but I think you should ask for £10 (£1 is too difficult to process) This could raise £2m and a fighting fund of this size will generate its own publicity as it is pretty much unheard of in the UK. Even £1m would do it. Justin might need to think about how to look after this money and how the account would be administered and a bit of reassurance on this might give more people who are not directly involved a nudge.

Ian and co I completely agree those of us in the class action should go all the way to court rather than settling out of court.

Even though it may be personally financial less risky to settle, if we don't go to court and set a prescient to stop other lenders doing the same thing, then all lifetime trackers are at risk and the whole purpose this class action is wasted IMO.

We may have a stronger case against WBBS than others in the future would have against future rate rises, and we would not want to waste the opportunity to win the case in court. Lets see if counsel feels we have a strong enough case.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "28/10/2013 - 10:04":

I found the BBC webpage and tested it as if I was an affected W Brom customer not previously aware of any legal action. So I copy and pasted "Justin Selig West Bromwich" and saw that this page was top in google:

http://www.property118.com/justin-selig-legal-advice-to-affected-boi-tracker-borrowers/39404/

Unfortunately its the BoI case

This has me thinking. Are there any tricks or campaigns that we can do to ensure we hit top spot when the 6700 start research? For me searching " West Bromwich tracker" gives Nicole Blackmore's Telegraph article top spot, which prominently directs to Property118, excellent result. But is that search affected by my search history etc ?