Single + Got Mortgage, Need Top-Up, Now Married

Kenjd

Hi all,
I hope someone can help me here!!
When i got my mortage 3 years ago with first active I was single. Since then I have gotten married. We never put my wifes name on the mortgage/deeds. But we are well aware that she now has a share in the house. And if I'm not mistaken i need her permission/signature to avail of any financing in regard to the house.
I went to my mortgage broker to ask for a top-up, but he said that i need to re-mortage. Incuring all the usual fees/penalties etc. surely this isnt the case.
So i rang first active myself. They said that all we need to do is change the ownership of the mortgage into both our names and then apply for a top-up!
So, who's right? any answers?
Thanks
Ken

boa-constrictor

You do need your wifes written permission to raise finance on the house but you don't need to remortgage. Her name can be put on the mortgage if you like but it doesn't make any difference - once she is your wife she has the same rights whether her name is on it or not. I'd imagine that seeing as your are releasing equity the bank will put her on it at this stage for the sake of good order.

Your broker was only telling you that because he gets a commission on the mortgage. The level of the commission depends on what volume of business he sends to the bank in question but would be somewhere between 0.5 and 1%.

0.5% of Refinance €300,000 = €1,500

0.5% of Equity Release €30,000 = €150

I think you should query this with the Financial Ombudsman. It appears that your broker was willing to shaft you for legal fees of around €1500 and penalties (if your were on a fixed rate) of God knows how much just so he could make a few quid.

I don't understand why people to to brokers anyway. Most of them haven't got a clue and they always advise you to go with the mortgage provider who pays them the biggest kickback. If you walk into a bank they have a mortgage adviser who has more training than most brokers, has no sneaky motives and is paid to simply provide good service. You can check out interest rates in the newspapers and on the internet.

Kenjd

Thanks boa-constrictor,
I went to first active and spoke to a mortgage advisor who was more than helpful. She put me straight on alot of things!
They are going to put my wifes name on the mortgage, and then give a me a top-up, no problems, fairly straight forward.
They will actually not change my mortgage at all, just give me a seperate loan over the remaining time of my mortgage, so no fees or penalties, and readjust my mortgage cover so it covers the top-up as well.
My LTV rate is 50% so they are more than happy to help me out!
As for my broker, i wont be going anywhere near him again,(or recommending him to my friends, a lot of whom are purchasing houses) and I will consider my position on the Financial Ombudsman.
thanks for your reply!
Ken

OneLife.ie

it does sound like you haven't recieved the best advice from this broker at all.

However...

boa-constrictor wrote:

I don't understand why people to to brokers anyway. Most of them haven't got a clue and they always advise you to go with the mortgage provider who pays them the biggest kickback. If you walk into a bank they have a mortgage adviser who has more training than most brokers, has no sneaky motives and is paid to simply provide good service. You can check out interest rates in the newspapers and on the internet.

I think that's an unfair generalisation based only, it seems, on anecdotal evidence.

Yes, I'm a broker and so "I would say that, wouldn't I?"

The consumer protection code recently launched by the Financial Regulator means that a mortgage broker must provide you with best advice for your particular circumstances and provide written reasons why as to why they are recommending a particular bank/product/rate/term.

Additionally any broker giving advice must meet the minimum competency requirements as set out by the regualtor.

There are many, many brokers that act in the best interests of their clients and of the marketplace in general, and there are many brokers that don't advertise and rely soley on referals from their existing clients, and therefore depend soley on the quality of their advice.

The sort of poor advice given in this instance is unquestionably wrong, but to label a whole profession with a sweep of the brush "most of them haven't a clue" is excessive, in my opinion.

boa-constrictor

I appreciate your point of view but my comments aren't based on anecdotal evidence. I'm a commercial and property lender and I used to deal with brokers until I got my fill of it. I won't accept referrals from them now as I have found that too many of them try to churn on the loan to another bank after a year or two in order to get another fee.

Also, brokers normally like to be the contact with the customer and some take umbrage at the lender contacting the customer directly. Because of this the key parts of the information can get lost in the telling.

It would be ok if the broker actually added any value to the deal but most brokers just let the bank do all the work. If they knew a bit about commercial lending and were able to put a proposal together and present it to the bank in a half bankable format they would be adding value. Most just ask the bank for X amount of money and then you have to tell them all the questions to ask the customer.

We had a deal from a broker where the customer was paying a €40k arrangement fee and as usual this was being split 50/50 with the broker. The day before the funds were due to draw the broker called to say that the customer was going to another bank unless we reduced the fee to €20k and he wanted all of the €20k. We reduced the fee, gave him the €20k and then cut him loose.

A wise businessman once said "always leave something for the other guy".

Also, last week I called into a broker for advice / rates on placing €125k on fixed deposit. He sent me a letter a few days later with a list of rates which were for demand deposits not fixed and were just cut and pasted from the internet. He never mentioned that there was a meeting scheduled for this week to decide whether to raise the ECB rate which is very relevant for someone putting funds on deposit. It just so happens that I knew this was happening due to my occupation (he doesn't know I'm a banker) and I arranged the fixed deposit with AIB myself by picking up the phone.

What is the point in using brokers if they don't add value. If brokers did what they're supposed to do I would use them all the time cos I am, like most people, time poor. Like auctioneers they have had it good and its going to take them a bit of time to get used of working now that the Celtic Tiger has calmed down.

In my view, if a person is part of a process where there are costs involved, and that person doesn't add value, they get pushed out eventually. Simple economics and totally correct that it should be that way.

boa-constrictor

I appreciate your point of view but my comments aren't based on anecdotal evidence. I'm a commercial and property lender and I used to deal with brokers until I got my fill of it. I won't accept referrals from them now as I have found that too many of them try to churn on the loan to another bank after a year or two in order to get another fee.

Also, brokers normally like to be the contact with the customer and some take umbrage at the lender contacting the customer directly. Because of this the key parts of the information can get lost in the telling.

It would be ok if the broker actually added any value to the deal but most brokers just let the bank do all the work. If they knew a bit about commercial lending and were able to put a proposal together and present it to the bank in a half bankable format they would be adding value. Most just ask the bank for X amount of money and then you have to tell them all the questions to ask the customer.

We had a deal from a broker where the customer was paying a €40k arrangement fee and as usual this was being split 50/50 with the broker. The day before the funds were due to draw the broker called to say that the customer was going to another bank unless we reduced the fee to €20k and he wanted all of the €20k. We reduced the fee, gave him the €20k and then cut him loose.

A wise businessman once said "always leave something for the other guy".

Also, last week I called into a broker for advice / rates on placing €125k on fixed deposit. He sent me a letter a few days later with a list of rates which were for demand deposits not fixed and were just cut and pasted from the internet. He never mentioned that there was a meeting scheduled for this week to decide whether to raise the ECB rate which is very relevant for someone putting funds on deposit. It just so happens that I knew this was happening due to my occupation (he doesn't know I'm a banker) and I arranged the fixed deposit with AIB myself by picking up the phone.

What is the point in using brokers if they don't add value. If brokers did what they're supposed to do I would use them all the time cos I am, like most people, time poor. Like auctioneers they have had it good and its going to take them a bit of time to get used of working now that the Celtic Tiger has calmed down.

In my view, if a person is part of a process where there are costs involved, and that person doesn't add value, they get pushed out eventually. Simple economics and totally correct that it should be that way.