missold a mortgage... what are my options?

mackinfella

Hi everyone...

very serious issue with my mortgage i need advise on (sorry in advance if this is not the right section)

to make a very long story short....

if a mortgage broker puts down false information on an application form to get an approval for his client can he/she or broker company be taken to court for this???

i went in with all my docs/bank statements/wage slips etc and was approved mortgage.. only reciently discovered that the income info on application was just over 3 times what i was actually earning...

need to know what my options are? has this happened to anyone else?

oh also when i rang mortgage company about it and told them what i actually earned at the time of application (cert of earnings from last job) they said i wouldnt have qualified for the mortgage in first place.

any advice on the matter would be great...

Paulw

So, you're unhappy that you got a mortgage?

I believe, if anything, the bank would have a case against the mortgage broker.

mari2222

mackinfella wrote: »

Hi everyone...

very serious issue with my mortgage i need advise on (sorry in advance if this is not the right section)

to make a very long story short....

if a mortgage broker puts down false information on an application form to get an approval for his client can he/she or broker company be taken to court for this???

i went in with all my docs/bank statements/wage slips etc and was approved mortgage.. only reciently discovered that the income info on application was just over 3 times what i was actually earning...

need to know what my options are? has this happened to anyone else?

oh also when i rang mortgage company about it and told them what i actually earned at the time of application (cert of earnings from last job) they said i wouldnt have qualified for the mortgage in first place.

any advice on the matter would be great...

Did you sign the document declaring your salary?

robtri

did you sign the mortgage application form agreeing that the above information was true and accurate...

Potentially you could be done for fraud if that is the case..

MagicSean

Did you not have to provide any supporting evidence such as pay slips orbank statements?

danbohan

mackinfella wrote: »

Hi everyone...

very serious issue with my mortgage i need advise on (sorry in advance if this is not the right section)

to make a very long story short....

if a mortgage broker puts down false information on an application form to get an approval for his client can he/she or broker company be taken to court for this???

i went in with all my docs/bank statements/wage slips etc and was approved mortgage.. only reciently discovered that the income info on application was just over 3 times what i was actually earning...

need to know what my options are? has this happened to anyone else?

oh also when i rang mortgage company about it and told them what i actually earned at the time of application (cert of earnings from last job) they said i wouldnt have qualified for the mortgage in first place.

any advice on the matter would be great...

you were not mis sold mon ami , you did like thousands upon thousands did and lied to the bank with a little help from the mortgage brokers and in a lot cases the banks as well . obviously you are in shi::::t street now and you want do what most irish people seem very good at blame somebody else for YOUR mess . you are a very good example of why any mortgage debt forgiveness is unfair , unjustified , and should never take place.

mackinfella

danbohan wrote: »

you were not mis sold mon ami , you did like thousands upon thousands did and lied to the bank with a little help from the mortgage brokers and in a lot cases the banks as well . obviously you are in shi::::t street now and you want do what most irish people seem very good at blame somebody else for YOUR mess . you are a very good example of why any mortgage debt forgiveness is unfair , unjustified , and should never take place.

ok im gonna make this very clear I DID NOT LIE TO THE BANK TO GET A MORTGAGE... when i went into the broker to apply he said ok all you gotta do is sign where x marks the spot and we will fill in the rest (i trusted the broker as 99% of people would) and didnt ask questions...

I DID SUPPLY WAGE SLIPS AND I DID GIVE 3 MONTHS BANK STATEMENTS... i was earning 25k basic and my wage slip confirmed this.. but the self employed cert stated i was in construction engineering and i was earning 70k a year (which i clearly wasnt)

so its clear to me the broker put down false info to get an approval from bank... I SURE AS HELL DID NOT WANT THAT... i want to post the name of the broker but im not sure if im allowed so for now i wont.

the self employed cert was signed by me but only because the broker said you sign it to declare non use because your not self employed. so the broker lied and knew exactly what he was doing...

Reloc8

mackinfella wrote: »

so its clear to me the broker put down false info to get an approval from bank... I SURE AS HELL DID NOT WANT THAT... i want to post the name of the broker but im not sure if im allowed so for now i wont.

You wanted the mortgage.

You're liable for the mortgage.

You're not entitled to rely on your own negligence so as to get out of it. That is generally the position. Your individual circumstances may vary.

Go to a solicitor or the financial ombudsman for more specific advice. The internet can do nothing for you here.

MagicSean

mackinfella wrote: »

ok im gonna make this very clear I DID NOT LIE TO THE BANK TO GET A MORTGAGE... when i went into the broker to apply he said ok all you gotta do is sign where x marks the spot and we will fill in the rest (i trusted the broker as 99% of people would) and didnt ask questions...

I DID SUPPLY WAGE SLIPS AND I DID GIVE 3 MONTHS BANK STATEMENTS... i was earning 25k basic and my wage slip confirmed this.. but the self employed cert stated i was in construction engineering and i was earning 70k a year (which i clearly wasnt)

so its clear to me the broker put down false info to get an approval from bank... I SURE AS HELL DID NOT WANT THAT... i want to post the name of the broker but im not sure if im allowed so for now i wont.

the self employed cert was signed by me but only because the broker said you sign it to declare non use because your not self employed. so the broker lied and knew exactly what he was doing...

So you signed blank documents were it siad something along the lines of "I declare the above information to be true"?

stargazer 68

Sorry Op you signed a blank form and you trusted this guy to fill in the blanks. Seems like it would be your word against his. Maybe Im wrong but that is how he would present it to any court.

Yawns

i trusted the broker as 99% of people would

Really? 99% of the people would trust someone else with a financial contract that will tie them down in debt for up 30 years....

Look a wallet inspector!

wildefalcon

I'm not so sure it's as clear cut as all that. Was the broker independent, or a tied agent?

The central argument centres around whether the broker was a person of "authority" or someone in a position of trust.

If the OP had a reasonable expectation of placing trust in a person, a person who was held out as an expert and in a position of relative power/authority then there is a case that the broker should be relied on to provide advice and honour that trust.

I would complain to the ombudsman, straight away, in person.

sealgaire

mackinfella wrote: »

ok im gonna make this very clear I DID NOT LIE TO THE BANK TO GET A MORTGAGE... when i went into the broker to apply he said ok all you gotta do is sign where x marks the spot and we will fill in the rest (i trusted the broker as 99% of people would) and didnt ask questions...

I DID SUPPLY WAGE SLIPS AND I DID GIVE 3 MONTHS BANK STATEMENTS... i was earning 25k basic and my wage slip confirmed this.. but the self employed cert stated i was in construction engineering and i was earning 70k a year (which i clearly wasnt)

so its clear to me the broker put down false info to get an approval from bank... I SURE AS HELL DID NOT WANT THAT... i want to post the name of the broker but im not sure if im allowed so for now i wont.

the self employed cert was signed by me but only because the broker said you sign it to declare non use because your not self employed. so the broker lied and knew exactly what he was doing...

Now come on, . . . . . You must have suspected SOMETHING when you were approved . .. .. . . . .. .

Paulw

mackinfella wrote: »

when i went into the broker to apply he said ok all you gotta do is sign where x marks the spot and we will fill in the rest (i trusted the broker as 99% of people would) and didnt ask questions...

You signed a blank document??? :eek: I used a broker, but made sure I signed only completed documents. The very same with my solicitor.

Both my solicitor and my mortgage broker are good personal friends, but there was still no way I would sign a blank or incomplete document.

Sounds like it will be your word against theirs.

mackinfella

wildefalcon wrote: »

I'm not so sure it's as clear cut as all that. Was the broker independent, or a tied agent?

The central argument centres around whether the broker was a person of "authority" or someone in a position of trust.

If the OP had a reasonable expectation of placing trust in a person, a person who was held out as an expert and in a position of relative power/authority then there is a case that the broker should be relied on to provide advice and honour that trust.

I would complain to the ombudsman, straight away, in person.

the broker in question worked for financial group.. and he took all my documents, copied them and said to speed things up we will fill out the forms so all you gotta do is sign... i trusted him as he was part of a broker group... i receintly learned that the fella in question no longer works for the group and i think the group has closed... maybe just maybe because this isnt the first time they have done this.. but thats just my opinion...

anyway i will go to solicitor about this because i dont think im to blame... i was honest with my earnings and proved that. ok maybe signing blank documents wasnt the smartest move but the broker helps and advises if you qualify for a mortgage going by your earnings... he should have said well im sorry but with those earnings you qualify for x amount...

thanks everyone for the imput and suggestions

littlemac1980

Well it seems to me that you'd be entitled to allow someone fill out a form for you. However, I don't think you could rely on someone else's 'expertise' or your own 'trustworthiness' to relieve you of the responsibility of reading your answers before you signed the document and had it submitted.

I assume you spent the money, not the Broker right?

Paulw

mackinfella wrote: »

anyway i will go to solicitor about this because i dont think im to blame... i was honest with my earnings and proved that. ok maybe signing blank documents wasnt the smartest move but the broker helps and advises if you qualify for a mortgage going by your earnings

What is your ultimate aim here? What do you want out of this?

I still can't see how you would not have any responsibility, since you signed the documents.

danbohan

mackinfella wrote: »

the broker in question worked for financial group.. and he took all my documents, copied them and said to speed things up we will fill out the forms so all you gotta do is sign... i trusted him as he was part of a broker group... i receintly learned that the fella in question no longer works for the group and i think the group has closed... maybe just maybe because this isnt the first time they have done this.. but thats just my opinion...

anyway i will go to solicitor about this because i dont think im to blame... i was honest with my earnings and proved that. ok maybe signing blank documents wasnt the smartest move but the broker helps and advises if you qualify for a mortgage going by your earnings... he should have said well im sorry but with those earnings you qualify for x amount...

thanks everyone for the imput and suggestions

to be perfectly honest with i dont believe a single word of it , nobody is that naive even in an Ireland that seems to exempt from any self blame, i am not sure any judge will either .

wildefalcon

Of course people in Ireland were that Naive, people trusted priests, people voted for Fianna Fail, the bank manager was somewhere up there beside Jesus, there was a lot of trust in Irish society, and still is.

inforfun

mackinfella wrote: »

I DID SUPPLY WAGE SLIPS AND I DID GIVE 3 MONTHS BANK STATEMENTS... i was earning 25k basic and my wage slip confirmed this.. but the self employed cert stated i was in construction engineering and i was earning 70k a year (which i clearly wasnt)

I know it is none of my business but how much was the mortgage you applied for?
Because for all I know the first mistake was going for a mortgage at all when you were on 25k if that mortgage exceeds 60/65k.

Trouble is for you now that you signed for something you didnt doublecheck.

danbohan

wildefalcon wrote: »

Of course people in Ireland were that Naive, people trusted priests, people voted for Fianna Fail, the bank manager was somewhere up there beside Jesus, there was a lot of trust in Irish society, and still is.

of course you could replace naivety with denial , now there certainly is a lot of that in Ireland. its 2011 not 1950

kizzyf

Easiest solution is to hand back the money that the bank lent you.

Oh or have you spent all that money now and can't repay it so you're trying to find a way out of it??

Whilst there may be some fault here with the mortgage broker I do not see how you can try to get out of this. You obviously signed an acceptance of loan offer and were happy with the loan amount at the time.

staker

In answer to your original question,I wouldn't say you'll get any satisfaction from your solicitor regarding legal binding papers you signed yourself.
You were not the only one caught out knowingly or unknowingly in this type of situation.

234

Even if you somehow managed to get the mortgage declared void the bank would have an unjust enrichmnet claim against you for the monye they transfered. You could end up having to pay it all back and possibly on less favourable terms than your current mortgage entails.

maryk123

At the end of the day you are an adult. you are asked to read through the documents before you sign them. If you signed them without reading them well thats down to you. You cant use the excuse I didnt know because he took them even though you signed completely blank forms and you didnt check them once he had them filled in and now you cant afford your mortgage and its his fault.

Most banks were giving 2 1/2 times your salary if you got more than this you knew what was going on. eg you earn 25,000 the bank gave you for example 300,000 hellllooooooooooooo

Honestly this must be a wind up.

JDD

Mackinfella, despite what people have said above what the broker has done is indeed quite serious. I work for the Financial Regulator (now back part of the Central Bank) and I am personally dealing with a large number of similar cases to yours, all relating to one broker. I would be interested to know whether your broker is the same one as we are investigating. I wonder could you send me a PM with the name of the broker, though obviously I won't be able to give any indication as to the identity of the broker that we are investigating.

I would suggest that you contact the consumer protection division of the Central Bank in the first instance and give them some background on your mortgage approval process. They may decide to conduct an investigation into that broker to see if there are other customers, similar to you, for whom the broker has falsified documentation.

Unfortunately, making a report to the Central Bank, and any subsequent case taken, will not benefit you financially, in that any fines made against the firm do not go to you personally.

To that end, I would suggest also contacting the Financial Services Ombudsman. He is able to make monetary awards in favour of individuals.

I would also copy any correspondence to your bank, to make them aware of the issues you have with this broker. They may consider terminating their agency agreement with the broker.

Just for information, the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is also in the process of pursuing brokers for fraud. Cases like yours are taken seriously.

Hope all this helps.

MagicSean

JDD wrote: »

Mackinfella, despite what people have said above what the broker has done is indeed quite serious. I work for the Financial Regulator (now back part of the Central Bank) and I am personally dealing with a large number of similar cases to yours, all relating to one broker. I would be interested to know whether your broker is the same one as we are investigating. I wonder could you send me a PM with the name of the broker, though obviously I won't be able to give any indication as to the identity of the broker that we are investigating.

I would suggest that you contact the consumer protection division of the Central Bank in the first instance and give them some background on your mortgage approval process. They may decide to conduct an investigation into that broker to see if there are other customers, similar to you, for whom the broker has falsified documentation.

Unfortunately, making a report to the Central Bank, and any subsequent case taken, will not benefit you financially, in that any fines made against the firm do not go to you personally.

To that end, I would suggest also contacting the Financial Services Ombudsman. He is able to make monetary awards in favour of individuals.

I would also copy any correspondence to your bank, to make them aware of the issues you have with this broker. They may consider terminating their agency agreement with the broker.

Just for information, the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is also in the process of pursuing brokers for fraud. Cases like yours are taken seriously.

Hope all this helps.

Just out of interest. Who is the party at a loss for the purpose of a fraud investigation?

JDD

k_mac wrote: »

Just out of interest. Who is the party at a loss for the purpose of a fraud investigation?

The lender. The broker is guilty of submitting false documents to the lender, for the purposes of ensuring that a mortgage is approved, and therefore the broker receives their commission.

MagicSean

JDD wrote: »

The lender. The broker is guilty of submitting false documents to the lender, for the purposes of ensuring that a mortgage is approved, and therefore the broker receives their commission.

But the lender isn't at a loss at all unless the mortgage is defaulted on.

Paulw

JDD wrote: »

The lender. The broker is guilty of submitting false documents to the lender, for the purposes of ensuring that a mortgage is approved, and therefore the broker receives their commission.

But, the OP, or borrower, is still liable for the mortgage? And has no easy route out?

JDD

The lender is essentially buying a product when giving out a loan. The product is a person's individual ability to repay a loan and interest over a number of years. The broker would have misrepresented the product to the lender by falsifying documentation. Therefore the product that the lender bought was faulty, while being misrepresented by the broker as being suitable. The bank is now at a loss as it now has bought a potentially faulty product. The fact that the product has yet to break does not diminish the fact it is now worth less to the Bank, as it is more a more risky product than represented.

Having said that, it's difficult to put a quantum on their loss. I'm sure the banks/GBFI have some way of putting a figure on it. I have a colleague who transferred over from the GBFI so I'll ask him when he gets back from holidays.

MagicSean

The increased risk is merely theoretical and not a tangible loss.

JDD

Paulw wrote: »

But, the OP, or borrower, is still liable for the mortgage? And has no easy route out?

The borrower is still liable for the mortgage, that is correct.

However there are some rumblings of cases being taken by customers against brokers, for selling them a mortgage that was unsuitable given their ability to repay. That is a breach of the contract between the broker and client, as that is the basic service that a broker offers. A judge may decide to put the clients back into whatever position they were in before entering into the contract. That could entail the broker paying the difference between the mortgage owed and the current value of the house. It's as yet an untested theory though.

danbohan

JDD wrote: »

Mackinfella, despite what people have said above what the broker has done is indeed quite serious. I work for the Financial Regulator (now back part of the Central Bank) and I am personally dealing with a large number of similar cases to yours, all relating to one broker. I would be interested to know whether your broker is the same one as we are investigating. I wonder could you send me a PM with the name of the broker, though obviously I won't be able to give any indication as to the identity of the broker that we are investigating.

I would suggest that you contact the consumer protection division of the Central Bank in the first instance and give them some background on your mortgage approval process. They may decide to conduct an investigation into that broker to see if there are other customers, similar to you, for whom the broker has falsified documentation.

Unfortunately, making a report to the Central Bank, and any subsequent case taken, will not benefit you financially, in that any fines made against the firm do not go to you personally.

To that end, I would suggest also contacting the Financial Services Ombudsman. He is able to make monetary awards in favour of individuals.

I would also copy any correspondence to your bank, to make them aware of the issues you have with this broker. They may consider terminating their agency agreement with the broker.

Just for information, the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is also in the process of pursuing brokers for fraud. Cases like yours are taken seriously.

Hope all this helps.

Just for information, the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is also in the process of pursuing brokers for fraud. Cases like yours are taken seriouly


of course they are , brokers are generally small fry after all , now is their any possibility of regulator and gardai to investigate and imprison the likes of fingers and fitz etc ,? , of course not , they are irelands elite untouchables .

hopefully the regulator is investigating the banks (unlikely) , as i seen mortgages for excessive amounts been refused at a brokers and then been given by both aib and boi directly for the full amount requested .both mortgages would be in arrears now .

MagicSean

JDD wrote: »

The borrower is still liable for the mortgage, that is correct.

However there are some rumblings of cases being taken by customers against brokers, for selling them a mortgage that was unsuitable given their ability to repay. That is a breach of the contract between the broker and client, as that is the basic service that a broker offers. A judge may decide to put the clients back into whatever position they were in before entering into the contract. That could entail the broker paying the difference between the mortgage owed and the current value of the house. It's as yet an untested theory though.

This would be ridiculous. Even if the judge does decide to absolve people of all responsability for their own actions I don't think he could do this because of the damage it would do should everyone follow suit. If the regulator is supporting these cases it has lost all credibility.

JDD

k_mac wrote: »

The increased risk is merely theoretical and not a tangible loss.

I don't know about that. Those with a bad credit history or lower income may be charged a higher interest rate. The bank would have missed out on the lost extra interest. That would be a tangible loss.

as i seen mortgages for excessive amounts been refused at a brokers and then been given by both aib and boi directly for the full amount requested .both mortgages would be in arrears now .

Well, that's not a breach of anything, it's up to the banks to take their own risks. Nobody has submitted false information in this case.

of course they are , brokers are generally small fry after all , now is their any possibility of regulator and gardai to investigate and imprison the likes of fingers and fitz etc ,? , of course not , they are irelands elite untouchables .

hopefully the regulator is investigating the banks (unlikely) ,

I can't really comment on that, except to say I understand your frustration. Especially since I'm posting this from a work computer and can't really be seen to be slagging off my employer, even if it is for things that were done (or not done) in the past.

COYW

mackinfella wrote: »

ok im gonna make this very clear I DID NOT LIE TO THE BANK TO GET A MORTGAGE... when i went into the broker to apply he said ok all you gotta do is sign where x marks the spot and we will fill in the rest (i trusted the broker as 99% of people would) and didnt ask questions...

Purchasing a home is the biggest single transaction that 90% of the population will ever commit to. I can't believe that anyone would willingly give someone else carte blanche in relation to something like that.

JDD

k_mac wrote: »

This would be ridiculous. Even if the judge does decide to absolve people of all responsability for their own actions I don't think he could do this because of the damage it would do should everyone follow suit. If the regulator is supporting these cases it has lost all credibility.

I have to say that would only be in cases where the broker was proven to have embellished documentation, without the client's knowledge or consent, in order to obtain the mortgage. Had they not done that, the client would have been refused. Unless a large amount of brokers were committing fraud, which I don't think there was, there shouldn't be a large impact.

There is no difference between being sold an unsuitable mortgage than there is being sold an unsuitable investment product. People go to brokers for their expert independent financial advice. If they failed to provide honest, professional advice, then I don't see why they should not be held liable for financial loss suffered.

littlemac1980

JDD wrote: »

I have to say that would only be in cases where the broker was proven to have embellished documentation, without the client's knowledge or consent, in order to obtain the mortgage. Had they not done that, the client would have been refused. Unless a large amount of brokers were committing fraud, which I don't think there was, there shouldn't be a large impact.

There is no difference between being sold an unsuitable mortgage than there is being sold an unsuitable investment product. People go to brokers for their expert independent financial advice. If they failed to provide honest, professional advice, then I don't see why they should not be held liable for financial loss suffered.

1. I don't think anyone has the impression that a broker is an independent financial expert. They work on commission, like car sales men. I would hope the regulator would be of the same view. It's common sense.

2. A Mortgage is a legally binding document. It has patently obvious onerous obligations to Repay monthly fixed amounts. Signing a blank mortgage application form might possibly be regarded by a court at best as reckless or at worst complicit fraud.

With respect JDD would you sign a blank cheque and hand it to car a salesman?

Also, the situation we are discussing here is very one-sided. we are taking the OP at their word that they did not make some mistake submitting the relevant documentation, which caused the incorrect information to be submitted by the Broker. Again, the details needed to be checked by the OP once they were in the form, and that was his responsibility, in order to be satisfied the Broker didn't make a mistake.

Further, if the OP signed a blank mortgage form, which we know he did, then one might reasonably wonder if he read the terms of the contract he entered into with the Broker prior to signing that document. I'm only guessing, but I imaging that that document is an agency agreement, with a full indemnification by the OP of the Broker in a situation where there has been some error in the application process (though its more likely worded much more generally, and much broader in scope).

Proving that the Broker deliberately (as opposed to negligently) entered misleading information will be very very difficult to do, and indemnity would likely cover any negligence on the part of the broker. It would most likely be upheld too, because it would have been the OP's duty to check the entire application document was correct BEFORE he signed it. That will probably be stated immediately above the place for the signature.

JDD

I can't really comment much further on this, given the cases we have in progress.Obviously, I'm basing my opinions on the OP telling the truth, which would emerge in any investigation. Our investigations are on foot of brokers deliberately entering false details. The practice is so blatant in some brokers that proving it is the least of our worries. No indemnity is going to cover a broker for forging bank statements, signatures, or tax documentation. Especially when they, like idiots, kept the original correctly submitted documentation on their files. And this isn't just one broker who acted like this. You or me, or any financially aware person would never sign a blank form. However there are people out there who either don't have the education or confidence to believe that they can compare products for themselves. That's why they go to brokers. The consumer protection code is there specifically to protect those people. There are quite onerous responsibilities on brokers when they sign a new client and sell them a product. A lot of brokers either seem to be unaware, or just ignore, those responsibilities. You cannot sell a blatantly unsuitable product to a client who has little or no financial awareness. (You can pretty much sell whatever you like to a professional investor, they are considered to know what they're doing).You cannot forge documents to submit to a lender who is paying you commission. It's not just to protect vulnerable investors. These kinds of sharp practices resulted in larger mortgages being approved for people who did not have the income to support them, thus scewing the true nature of the market and forcing prices falsely upwards. And we all know the damage that that did.I'm not talking about people who colluded with their brokers in providing false information. There has to be an element of caveat emptor there. And I've certainly come across those customers as well.

JDD

Why do my posts never come out with paragraphs?

littlemac1980

JDD wrote: »

Why do my posts never come out with paragraphs?

haha. I dunno. It might have something to do with your browser, or perhaps if you're submitting from a smart phone (I think I heard of that happening before).

It's OK though, the overall structure and flow of the sentences makes it easy to understand what you're saying, although at first glance it looks like you're having a right rant.

slimpickens

I took out a mortgage in 2007 through an employee mortgage scheme my company had with a bank. I went to HR and they asked me how much I was looking to borrow for the house and they dealt with the bank. I did a data request from the bank recently and discovered that my company stated in my mortgage application that my salary for the 3 years prior to taking out the mortgage averaged €100,000 per year. In fact my average salary was €40,000 for these three years. Can I sue the company or could the mortgage contract be unlawful. Yes I took out the loan, but there is no way I would have been given this loan if my company had not lied on the application. Surely the actions taken by the company were fraudulent. Other colleagues of mine also had their income misstated. We at no stage signed off on these income forms as they were between our company and the bank.

Yawns

No legal advice can be given here. What you need is a solicitor.

ResearchWill

OP if you are willing to walk away from the whole mess I.e. give up the house you may be able to claim "non est factum". You need good legal advice, you may be able to also sue the broker if his actions have caused you any loss.

Procrastastudy

I'd be very interested to know why the company did that - so desperate for a particular skill set they were willing to do anything to keep them? Were they making money on the side so how?

blueythebear

slimpickens wrote: »

I took out a mortgage in 2007 through an employee mortgage scheme my company had with a bank. I went to HR and they asked me how much I was looking to borrow for the house and they dealt with the bank. I did a data request from the bank recently and discovered that my company stated in my mortgage application that my salary for the 3 years prior to taking out the mortgage averaged €100,000 per year. In fact my average salary was €40,000 for these three years. Can I sue the company or could the mortgage contract be unlawful. Yes I took out the loan, but there is no way I would have been given this loan if my company had not lied on the application. Surely the actions taken by the company were fraudulent. Other colleagues of mine also had their income misstated. We at no stage signed off on these income forms as they were between our company and the bank.

A proper meeting with a solicitor should be sought if you want to explore your options. What I would say is that regardless of your stated income, you sought a certain sum and you entered into the contract. Your purported level of earnings at the time, I would suggest is not fundamental to the contract so as to render it void.

However, given the unusual nature of the loan agreements, I would consult a solicitor with dealings in this area to see if there is anything that can be done for you.

johnnyskeleton

Mortgage application form = invitation to treat.

Mortgage offer = offer.

I'm not sure that non est factum (or the shaggy defence) applies to an invitation to treat.

Procrastastudy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Mortgage application form = invitation to treat.

Mortgage offer = offer.

I'm not sure that non est factum (or the shaggy defence) applies to an invitation to treat.

LOL! I thought it was the dog?

ResearchWill

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Mortgage application form = invitation to treat.

Mortgage offer = offer.

I'm not sure that non est factum (or the shaggy defence) applies to an invitation to treat.

And the documents for the loanmust have contained either the same info or a declaration that the information on the application was correct. Hence why I said may be able to claim, and seek legal advice.

Are you aware what was on the mortgage deed, or on any of the other documents from the bank, because I am not, but I can guess that what ever was on them was a continuation of the application.

My other statement was the OP would be willing to walk away, dot here could be no issue of unjust enrichment. It amazes me that some advisors gave not just bad advice but where involved in possible criminal acts, and peoples reaction goths OP is tough, someone who purported to be a professional not only advised you incorrectly but involved him in a fraud, assisted him in taking on a debt he may not be able to afford and has possibly brought him to bankruptcy, a but who cares he was stupid to trust a person who put him self forward as a professional.

BTW if this case had just remained at the application stage (invitation to treat) we would not be talking on this thread.

Marcusm

Is it really non est factum if he has knowledge of what he is doing (ie how much he is borrowing and fo r what purpose) and the only misdeed is the misdisclosure of income? Surely the borrower would be capable of understanding the fact/deed of borrowing the particular sum even if he was unaware of the lies told to acquire it that opportunity. Pity that this is a specific case as otherwise this could turn into an interesting discussion.