Response to Britannia BS undervalued property which received MIG etc

I don't think the fact that you were a sitting tenant necessarily affects the value that the lender would attach to the property for the purposes of lending. You talk about 'equity' you had in the property as a sitting tenant, but only the owner would have the value of equity so I'm not sure what you mean by this. It's difficult to follow your argument, but you seem to be angry that a MIG policy was taken out by the lender. This would have been done to cover the lenders risk above a 75% loan to value level. If your partner had a mortgage that was more than 75% of the lenders valuation then reducing the value of the property because of your tenancy situation would have made this ratio worse not better! Although it sounds as if the Britannia is a bit at sea with it's records and may have made errors in it's administration for which you can claim some recompense, I think it would help your case if you presented your points more clearly. Perhaps you should write to Britannia on separate issues at a time rather than bundle in all of the grievances contained in your posting, some of which may be unfounded. If you fail to obtain satisfaction from your lender then make a formal complaint to the FSA.

[ Previous | Next ]