Mortgage advisor in default? Get free advice!

Questioner

The question I would like to explore here is the following. Did the bank's mortgage advisor default in concluding the mortgage? Did he violate his duty to provide information and duty of care because he did not inform us about the possible increase in the NHG limit? My now ex-partner and I took out a mortgage without NHG guarantee. The deed was signed on 19 June 2009. The NHG limit was increased on 1 July 2009. My ex-partner and I divorced and after 4 years the house was sold and a residual debt arose. Which, if we had signed under NHG conditions, would have been waived. I quote a passage from the letter I sent to the ING board: 'NHG guarantee After further investigation, it appears that the House of Representatives approved a motion from the VVD on 9 December 2008 (see attached document) regarding the increase of the NHG from €265,000.00 to €350,000.00. See the attached document analysis housing market dated 30 January 2009, in which the increase of the NHG limit is discussed. It even states that the Rabobank has advocated an increase of the NHG limit. Partly in response to this, the Ministers of Housing, Neighborhoods and Integration (WWI) and Finance requested the CPB and ORTEC on May 14, 2009 to jointly conduct a study into the consequences of this proposal and some of its variants. See also the attached parliamentary document dated 15 May 2009. The CPB subsequently issued a report. My conclusion is that this data shows that ING was already aware of the standards and the consequences that this change would entail. ING is following this closely because it concerns the products that they supply to customers. I therefore believe that the ING mortgage advisor was in default and did not provide me with the correct information. As a starter on the housing market, I approach a mortgage advisor because I want sound advice. I also think that the mortgage advisor should have informed me of this. Then I would have had a new offer made under NHG conditions and I would have been spared all this misery of the past years. In my opinion, all standards could be met. The house we bought had been for sale since December 2008 and there had been no viewers or buyers. You know that the increase in the NHG limit was set to pull the housing market out of the doldrums.'

Lawyer

There has been a lot of discussion about the duty of care of financial institutions in recent years. In my opinion, a competent and reasonably acting mortgage advisor should have alerted you to the upcoming increase in the NHG limit. Failure to do so has several consequences: you will pay a higher mortgage interest rate (because the bank takes more risk) and when selling the house you may be faced with a residual debt. The bank can try to demonstrate that you would have 'simply' closed the house before 1 July even if you had provided the correct information, for example if the bank can demonstrate that you were in a great hurry to obtain financing at the time. Instead of an expensive procedure, you could consider filing a complaint with ING, and if it is not handled satisfactorily, you could go to KiFID. KiFID is the Financial Services Complaints Institute. A procedure with KiFID is many times cheaper than an expensive procedure in court.

Lawyer

The issue in this case is whether the mortgage advisor knows or should have known that the NHG standard applied to your situation, assuming that you meet the NHG standards. After all, it also depends on when the implementation of the application took place within the bank. The next issue is whether the 'error' of the advisor can be attributed to him/her on the basis of the duty of care and evidence will have to be provided for this. What agreements have been made between the parties, for example. If there is sufficient evidence, then there is a chance that the mortgage advisor can be held liable, although the claim may have expired. For more information or further assistance, you can contact me directly and free of charge.