View more on these topics

Let mortgage prisoners borrow more, says AMI

The Association of Mortgage Intermediaries says mortgage prisoners should be allowed additional borrowing of up to 10% as long as it is in their best interests.

The Mortgage Market Review states lenders can waive some of the regulator’s affordability rules for mortgage prisoners – for example, borrowers in negative equity or those who have self-certified – only if it means no additional borrowing or higher monthly payments.

But AMI director Robert Sinclair wants the FSA to allow these individuals to borrow up to an additional 10%.

He says: “If a consumer wants to move to a fixed rate mortgage to ensure greater certainty about their expenditure, even if it means an increase to their monthly repayments, it may be in their best interests to do so.

“There may be circumstances where a small amount of additional borrowing is needed to make a house move viable, such as to cover Stamp Duty and estate agent and removal costs.”

Sinclair adds: “Such flexibility should be left for the lender to determine as part of its lending policy but we would consider a 10% tolerance on both the additional borrowing and the monthly cost of borrowing to be a reasonable amount.”

He says the scale of the mortgage prisoners problem will only be fully exposed when the base rate rises and consumers try to switch mortgages.


Mortgage Brain’s ‘find a broker’ app is out this month

Mortgage Brain plans to launch a mobile app with a ’find a broker’ feature this month. The app is free of charge for consumers and will have a mortgage search facility which will direct users to their nearest broker. Mortgage Brain users can be featured on the app free of charge. Mark Lofthouse, chief executive […]


Employers fined £52,500 for auto-enrolment failings

By Jamie Clark, Business Development Manager The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has taken the step of naming and shaming employers that have been served County Court Judgments (CCJs) for non-payment of auto-enrolment fines. We take a look at what this means for employers, their employees and advisers Shamed into action? Sixty-four employers have been served CCJs […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up