View more on these topics

Landlords to start legal action against BoI and Skipton next month

Home-House-Monopoly-Money-Property-700x450.jpg

Angry customers of Skipton Building Society and Bank of Ireland will start legal action against the lenders next month as the fallout continues from a landmark court case on tracker rates.

Manchester Building Society will escape claims for now, despite having been named in discussions earlier in the year.

In June, the Court of Appeal found in favour of landlord group Property 118, which had argued that West Brom had wrongly raised interest rates on some tracker loans without a rise in the Bank of England base rate (see box below).

West Brom repaid £27.5m of overpaid interest to its customers and the outcome was claimed by some to set a precedent for how the wider mortgage market can treat interest rates.

In the aftermath of the West Brom case, Property 118 said it believed Skipton, BoI and Manchester Building Society had treated their customers in a similar way regarding tracker rates.

The landlord group then set up Property 118 Action Group, also in June, to galvanise borrowers into legal action.

Property 118 is using a crowdfunder website to build a warchest to sue lenders that acted in a similar way to West Brom. The group hit its initial £60,000 target last week and has set a second target of £100,000.

Property 118 founder Mark Alexander now says the group has suspended its plans to pursue Manchester due to insufficient data and complaints. But he adds: “We’re going to commence legal action against Skipton and the Bank of Ireland next month, in terms of issuing pre-action protocol letters.”

These letters are the first steps to bringing a civil claim. The exchange is designed to reveal information about the claim and enable parties to settle their differences if possible.

But the process looks set to be arduous as both Skipton and BoI refute the claim that the outcome of the West Brom case is applicable to them.

A Skipton spokesman says: “Skipton remains firmly of the opinion that, under the terms and conditions of its mortgage offer, it lawfully had the right to remove the standard variable rate ceiling that applied until 1 March 2010.

“The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in the Alexander v West Bromwich Mortgage Company Ltd case was very fact specific regarding an inconsistency in mortgage documentation. No such inconsistency can exist with Skipton’s documentation because the relevant key terms were very clearly and fairly laid out in only one document, being the mortgage offer.”

A BoI spokeswoman adds: “The West Bromwich case is not com­parable to Bank of Ireland UK.

“BoI’s offer document and mortgage terms and conditions expressly stipulated that the tracking margin or differential could be varied, and the offer and mortgage conditions documents are consistent, allowing for the differential to be lawfully changed.”

Skipton hiked its SVR on residential mortgages from 3.5 per cent to 4.95 per cent in 2010 and BoI raised rates for 13,500 base rate tracker mortgage customers in February 2013.

Property 118 members tried taking cases against BoI and Skipton to the Financial Ombudsman Service between 2010 and 2015 but these were rejected.

Alexander says: “By our assessment, there is £600m of overpayments to be refunded when we get to the same stage we are with the West Brom with those two.”

Alexander says the FOS rulings mean that, in order to gain redress via the ombudsman, customers would have to pursue claims against brokers.

He says he is persuading his members not to do this and instead wants brokers and insurers to rally to his cause and fund civil action against lenders.

He says: “We’re trying to hold them back. They only need one win and that will open the floodgates.”

Alexander says there are 150,000 potential claims against BoI and Skipton, implying a wave of potential claims against brokers. He says: “If one broker is found to have given bad advice and has to pay the full £15,000 compensation, all of a sudden you’ve got 150,000 claims that would pile into the FOS on the back of that.

“That could decimate the mortgage broking industry. It could certainly mess up the PI insurers.”

Background to case against West Brom

Property 118 questioned a West Brom decision in September 2013 to raise its tracker rate without a base rate rise.

At the time, the lender told 6,700 landlords it would increase rates from 1.49 per cent to 3.49 per cent from 1 December 2013. The borrowers all had loans with West Bromwich Mortgage Company, its now defunct specialist lending arm.

Property 118 started legal action against West Brom in the High Court in November 2013. Judge Nigel Teare sided with West Brom in January 2015, saying the lender was allowed to increase its rates to handle changing market conditions.

Teare threw out Property 118’s case, and the landlord group appealed.

In June this year, the Appeal Court found that West Brom had been wrong to raise rates in the way it had, and that it should not have claimed the right to call in its mortgages with one month’s notice.

Recommended

west brom

West Brom cuts five-year fixes by up to 0.55%

West Bromwich Building Society is cutting rates on its five-year fixed rate mortgages by up to 0.55 per cent. The newly-priced range, available from 15 July, starts from 2.09 per cent for new purchasers and remortgage customers at 65 per cent LTV. The biggest rate reduction in the range is at 85 per cent LTV, […]

west brom

West Brom launches ten-year fixed range

West Bromwich Building Society is launching a ten-year fixed rate mortgage of 2.79 per cent at up to 65 per cent LTV. The product launches tomorrow for house purchase and remortgage customers. The lender also has a ten-year fixed rate loan of 2.99 per cent at 80 per cent LTV. All ten year products have […]

7

Editor’s note: West Brom: a case in point

Last week saw a court judgment handed down that some claim will have severe knock-on effects on the way lenders are permitted to charge interest. The Court of Appeal found that West Bromwich Building Society should not have raised interest rates on buy-to-let tracker mortgages without a rise in Bank of England base rate. But […]

Identifying best-in-class UK stocks — Mark Martin, Neptune UK Opportunities Fund

FE Alpha Manager Mark Martin assumed management of the multi-cap UK Opportunities Fund at the beginning of February. As manager of the highly regarded UK Mid Cap Fund, Martin has begun restructuring the new portfolio to focus on our very best UK stock ideas from across the FTSE All-Share Index. In this video, update Martin addresses:

– Themes informing the UK Opportunities Fund
– The multi-cap structure of the fund
– UK equity valuations

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up
Comments
  • Post a comment
  • Peter Turner 18th July 2016 at 10:29 am

    “Alexander says the FOS rulings mean that, in order to gain redress via the ombudsman, customers would have to pursue claims against brokers.”

    Presumably Mr Alexander is also aware that buy to let mortgages are unregulated so FOS will not automatically have jurisdiction over brokers.

    My recommendation to any broker receiving such a claim would be to deny FOS jurisdiction on that ground.

    It is also worth noting that Skipton departed from the tracking differential more than six years ago so the six year/three year time bar would seem to apply.

    Bank of Ireland broke the link more than three years ago too, so any mortgage taken out over six years before a complaint is made could be timebarred too.

    • Anonymous 18th July 2016 at 11:03 am

      Hi Peter

      Please bear in mind that I’m a retired broker who sold loads of these mortgages. I’m on your side!

      However, the statute of limitations does not apply.

      I am disgusted with the FOS.

      When have they ever ruled against a lender in a case like this? The answer is NEVER! They also ruled in favour of West Brom, also putting brokers and lenders in the firing line on that case. Thankfully we raised enough funds for the Courts to overrule them.

      We need to get PI insurers to fund cases against the other lenders, otherwise brokers will remain in the firing line.

      How often do the FOS help brokers?

      – Mark Alexander