Building Society Not in Members Interests

I'm a little annoyed. I last moved my mortgage from a building society to my current building society because they would not let me have a mortgage that was for new customers. I said sod it and moved building societies.

Now when i am looking to remortgage again this building society has two different rates for a product i want, one for home movers and the other for everyone else. Well i don't want to fund someone else's mortgage.

If this was a bank i would accept defeat but this being a building society where the society is run for the benefit of its members i don't believe the other members like me would accept this.

So how do i go about getting the building society to stop discriminating against existing customers. I don't want to move, i want the society to change.

Reply to
Jane Tweedynn
Loading thread data ...

Think the other members always want you to have a good deal, and therefore reduce their profits?

Ask before you move to a lender if they have a non discriminatory remortgage service for existing customers.

Reply to
Phil Deane

"Jane Tweedynn" wrote

Hmmmm. *I* don't want to be poor, I want everyone else to give me some of their money. So, Jane, please give me some of *your* money!!

Reply to
Tim

Stop bleating and move: keeps guys like me in work LOL!!

Reply to
henry partridge

And this type of reply is how you become number one poster of the week!

If you had read what i wrote you will find that all i want is equality among all members, not for someone to give me their money.

Go on, reply to this with something other than a reply to the original question, you have to work hard to keep your position at the top.

Reply to
Jane Tweedynn

"Jane Tweedynn" wrote

Ah but, as another poster has already pointed out - "equality" (as you see it) would simply move money from those who are currently better off ("others") to those who are currently worse off (eg "you"). So yes, you

*do* want the others to "give [you] their money".

I don't necessarily agree with your society's procedures, but they are their own choice. You need to vote with your feet!

Another example of your "equality" would end up with *everyone* having a credit card paying 0% interest, just because the CC companies offer 0% APR deals for 6 months (or 9 months etc). Are you asking them for 0%APR

*forever* too?
Reply to
Tim

It can't, even if it wants to (which many probably do because churning customers is expensive). The way the mortgage market works is that there are lots of people who never review their mortgages and sit on the standard variables rates, and a somewhat smaller number who chase the best deal. The lenders therefore have keen short-term discount rates to attract the latter, if they don't do that (e.g. Nationwide unless they've changed back) they get very little new business. However, they can't offer *some* existing customers the lower rates, it's all or nothing, and they couldn't afford to have all customers on the discounted rates.

Reply to
Stephen Burke

In message , Jane Tweedynn writes

IM a bit lost as to which b/soc you are complaining about, the original who you moved away from, the one you are with now, or another one?

Without the answer to my question above I can still give you the answer (I think). The Building Society was set up to enable its members to buy houses. It offers special rates to members wishing to buy houses because that it was set up for.

Since deregulation a few years ago b/socs can now lend for most other reasons as well, but the to which you are referring, like loads of other institutions, does not see why its house buying members should subsidise those who are a) borrowing more dosh for non 'house buying' purposes. Or b) are just hawking their mortgage round at the expense of the huge pile of existing borrowers who cant be bothered moving elsewhere.

If you were a house buying member you would.

Propose a motion at the next AGM, you will get a notice through the post.

Reply to
john boyle

The building society i am currently with. They have two offers for a fixed rate, one for home movers and one for i assume customers remortgaging. I have no problem with them having separate rates for BTL because of the increased risk, but to discriminate against existing customers should be stopped.

I believe b)

Thanks. I was wondering since we voted the current board that they should be allowed to manage as they see fit so for any product change i would have to remove the board members.

I will look into tabling it at the next AGM.

Reply to
Jane Tweedynn

They may well have a credit card offering six months of 0% interest to new customers, do you expect that to be offered to existing customers as well?

Reply to
Stephen Burke

No.

I think you are playing devils advocate. You cannot compare the two. Building Society credit cards are generally issued on behalf of the big American banks.

If anything the existing customers should be given a better rate since the admin costs to move is less, but i will settle for equality.

Reply to
Jane Tweedynn

In message , Jane Tweedynn writes

ok

How can an existing customer re-mortgage with the same lender?

I think you've missed the point. I assume you went to your current lender because they were offering you an introductory special rate to join them. You are now complaining about other new members getting a special intro deal like you did. Have I got you right?

Do so.

Reply to
john boyle

Easily. The word has two popular meanings, one (which we tend to consider erroneous) is to increase the size of one's borrowing, the other is basically to switch products. The latter often, indeed usually, involves switching providers too, but there is no reason why this has always to be so, what with (a) lenders offering so many products these days, and (b) many apparently different lenders in fact just being different trading names of the same lenders.

Reply to
Ronald Raygun

Thats a 'further advance'.

If you change products within the same lender then that is not a re-mortgage. A re-mortgage is when the original mortgage deed is redeem and replaced with another one. In house change of products rarely need a new mortgage deed.

>
Reply to
john boyle

As well I know. I've had one meself when I bought a bigger yacht.

True enough, but if there is an excuse (though feeble) for folk calling a further advance a remortgage, then the excuse for calling an in house product change a remortgage must be bigger. Anyway, what's in a name? Dare we assume Jane meant one of these two?

Also, I don't think my scenario (b) above would count as in-house. If I were, say, to change from Legal & General to Northern Rock, I strongly suspect this would involve churning the deed, even though NR now owns L&G (or at least L&G have transferred their mortgage business to NR).

Reply to
Ronald Raygun

In message , Ronald Raygun writes

NO, thats not a further advance, thats a public flotation.

Nothing, lets call all mortgages, remortgages and further advances 'Arnold' from now on. That should avoid any further confusion. I got a good Arnold from the Furness Building Society once.

Do you mean Arnold, Ronald, not Jane?

Depends on the wording of the original Armold deed and the mechanism used by NR when it took over the L&G book of Arnolds.

Reply to
john boyle

Rubbish, it was private. And overseas to boot. Not only that, it was boots to overseas, when I took my wellies with me on the flight to Lisbon.

Ah, but was it a Repayment Arnold, an Interest-Only Arnold, or an IOFTM&tCB@tE Arnold, John?

Given your definition, we can safely say Jane was referring to an Arnold of one kind or another.

Reply to
Ronald Raygun

"Jane Tweedynn" wrote

Doesn't your reply here actually give a reason for 0%APR CC's to be given to

*existing* CC customers, rather than new ones?

You appear to be "flogging a dead horse" - and giving arguments which don't actually back up your position!!

Reply to
Tim

In message , Ronald Raygun writes

I've seen you on 'airline' havent i?

Looks like we need a sub-set of Arnolds.... How about 'Smelly Arnold, Fatty Arnold, & Grumpy Arnold?

Reply to
john boyle

That isn't the point. The 0% is a teaser rate to get people to switch, they aren't going to give it to existing customers because they want to make money out of charging interest, and lots of people seem to be quite happy to keep using cards which charge even rather high rates. If everyone were sensible and went for the best deals you'd just get a single set of products with average rates. As it is the population is split into people who always chase the best deals and people who will pay whatever they're charged, hence products are split in a similar way. Personally I can only be grateful to all the people who are subsidising my special deals, and a bit of hassle to keep moving is a fairly small price to pay :) When it comes to credit cards it seems that at least some issuers (MBNA springs to mind) are in fact prepared to give a second bite at the cherry to people who make a fuss about it, but mortgage lenders wouldn't be able to get away with it.

Reply to
Stephen Burke

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.