Mortgage Mis-Selling

After 20 years since the first mis-selling scandal involving pensions, the mis-selling within financial services rages on unabated. More widely defined as "To sell misleadingly, fraudulently, or in violation of laws or regulations is a more to the point, matter of fact definition".

Consumers now have two options, complaints that can be referred to the FOS apply only to events taking place after April 6 2007. Secondly, if your loan agreement is dated prior to this date certain loan agreements can be examined to determine whether they are enforceable.

The most recent precedent has been Mortgage mis-selling, mortgage mis-selling. A housing association tenant, who had been repossessed, had the valuable promise of a rent fixed for life. However, a mortgage adviser persuaded him to buy the property and failed to consider what would happen when the discounted mortgage rate ended. The Mortgage Code of Business along with The Financial Services act is there to protect consumers.

Mortgage mis-selling, albeit recent, could well be the tip of a very big iceberg. The inherent facets of regulated mortgages will no doubt prompt an all encompassing review of self certification and seemingly the more vulnerable council right to buy and sub prime borrowers. Council right to buy tenants have always been heavily canvassed.

What relentlessly drives and underpins twenty years of consumer complaints and recourse is greed, commission structures, incentives and a dysfunctional duty to shareholders. A firm must pay due regard to the needs and aspirations of its customers, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading. However what seems to be overlooked is the regard to the principle that consumers should start taking some responsibility for their own decisions.