Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Mis-selling in UK subprime loans exposed

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
26 September 2007
THE beleaguered subprime mortgage market in the UK has been dealt another blow, by an investigation claiming to have uncovered evidence of serious mis-selling.
Borrowers have been told to stretch their incomes to take out loans much bigger than they can realistically afford, according to a BBC File on 4 radio programme broadcast last night.

Half of all subprime mortgages in the UK are estimated to be se
lf-certification loans - where borrowers state their incomes, which the lenders will not always check. This is intended to help such groups as the self-employed and those who derive some income from state benefits.

A former mortgage broker told the BBC that inflating the client's income is seen as an easy way for some advisers to get a deal approved. And one borrower whose real income was £25,000 said he was advised to double that on his mortgage application to obtain a loan of more than eight times his salary.

A spokesman for the Financial Services Authority said: "We are determined to cut down on mortgage fraud. Based on our investigations and on information received from lenders and whistleblowers we have banned a number of brokers who have been involved in knowingly overstating the income of mortgage applicants and we will continue to crack down on this abuse."

Industry experts in Scotland say that while there may be the occasional case of this type of mis-selling it is unlikely to be widespread.

John Postlethwaite, consultant at Punter Southall Financial Management in Edinburgh, told The Scotsman: "I would be surprised if this isn't happening but I've not come across any clients who have wanted to lie about their income. Lenders should have systems in place to pick this up. They should spot if a postman is claiming to earn £100,000."

Postlethwaite added that the problem was likely to be less pronounced in Scotland because house price inflation had not stretched affordability to the same extent as in some areas in England, especially the south-east.

David Watson, consultant at Savills Private Finance in Edinburgh, said: "I'd be very surprised if it's happening on a big scale. As with any industry there is probably the odd 'bad apple' and it looks like some brokers have been encouraging borrowers to lie.

"Most of the big lenders in these fields say that arrears for their subprime mortgages are not that much greater than for their mainstream business so this would back up the fact that, in the main, people are borrowing within their means."

But the investigation will put further pressure on subprime lenders and borrowers. This month Victoria Mortgages became the first UK subprime lender to go into administration.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 25 September 2007 7:45 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Jacomo,

26/09/2007 09:55:39

John Postlethwaite is missing the point. A postman is unlikely to apply for a self-certification mortgage because they are on a payroll. These apply more to the self-employed, of which there are thousands.

These borrowers are vulnerable to a downturn in the economy, but are unlikely to panic in the marketplace otherwise. The short term risk comes from buy-to-let investors who have over-extended themselves and are now panicking. If they start selling up in larger numbers, the sudden oversupply of property could shock the housing market and trigger a dramatic fall.

This will affect the economy, and in turn affect those on self-certification mortgages who have borrowed beyond their means in order to get a stake in a very over-priced market.


2

Evan Owen,

Upper Gumtree 26/09/2007 12:18:03

Will we ever see those who bring trouble upon themselves ever stop blaming everyone else for their own misery?

And will we ever see the subject reported with true balance?

3

Scythia,

Glasgow 26/09/2007 13:03:07

Maybe they should be asking objective observers rather than those with vested interests, such a
the consumer advice bureaux, Which ?, or credit agencies where the response might be more accurate. After the endowment morgage scam, the overdraught charges scam and now this , It woudn't surprise if this was indeed widespread.

4

Redfive,

26/09/2007 15:18:21

When I wanted to buy a 3 bed terrace house (for £165k) in the south my mortgage broker told me I needed to be earning around 40k pa, is that how much you earn he asked yes i said. I knew it was a self certify and also knew if I said no I would not get the green light. Within 3 months I had moved in, so given the choice of telling a lie about your earning to get on the property ladder or continualy throw you hard earned wages away paying a landlord slightly less than my mortgage in rent what would you do ? I might strugle to pay my mortgage but I still manage just about, I work evening and weekends as well as my 9-5 but every month I pay off a little more and oneday I will own it out right, who in there right mind would not do the same given a chance. In todays society you only ever get anywhere by playing the system - ask all the immigrants !!!

5

Toots - Sheila,

Canada 26/09/2007 16:18:13

Don't you just love the FSA and this "mis-selling" line! Neither this or the "endowment debacle" were about mis-selling.

The issue is CRIME in the financial services industry and a regulatory body that appears to encourage and regulate exactly that - CRIME. By its own admission the FSA does NOT ENFORCE anything so why wouldn't the industry continually screw over customers. It is the good old customer that "loses" every time and the industry moguls stick a few more million every year into their hip pockets!!!!!

Hell the FSA is even perpetually in breach of the FSMA Act that it purportedly oversees. (Section 397 false and misleading statements....) And an industry "trade association" called the JMLSG is writing the money laundering regulations that clearly state NO financial institution shall have to undergo a "due diligence" test of "fit and proper" but consumers are automatically "suspected of financial criminal activity". That is the case if you are NOT at a UK address like myself but having to try and manage debt for 43 years as opposed to 25 due to the "endowment debacle".

By refusing me access to the legal profession I cannot even sue for adequate compensation. This itself is a breach of the FSMA section 102; like the FSA gives a dam!!


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.