Not upheld: Mortgage advice complaints complaint against Saffron Building Society
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-4222263 of 2023-08-03T00:00:00+00:00. Mortgage advice complaints complaint against Saffron Building Society. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-4222263 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2023-08-03T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Saffron Building Society |
| Product | Mortgage |
| Claim type | Mortgage advice complaints |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman declined to require Saffron to backdate a product switch or amend Mrs H's credit file, noting that credit file amendments should not be made simply because a complaint was raised, and that Mrs H should raise separate requests directly with Saffron for credit file corrections or interest-only payment arrangements. |
Summary
Mrs H complained that Saffron Building Society unfairly declined her request in April 2022 to switch her mortgage to a fixed interest rate product. Mrs H had lost her job in January 2020, received a payment deferral until August 2020, and subsequently accrued arrears until clearing them in May 2022. Saffron declined the switch based on arrears in the past 12 months and its lending criteria requiring six months clear of arrears. The ombudsman found that Saffron acted fairly given Mrs H's recent missed payments, increased borrowing with other lenders, and higher financial commitments, as a fixed-rate product with early repayment charges could have been detrimental to her financial position. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Saffron's requirement for a six-month arrears-free period before product switches is reasonable practice to ensure customers can meet contractual repayments. Mrs H's repayment history showed she had struggled to meet payments on and off for two years, with missed payments only months before her request. While the ombudsman acknowledged Mrs H's difficult circumstances, the combination of her recent arrears, missed payments, increased borrowing, and higher outgoings meant that locking her into a fixed-rate product with early repayment charges could have been detrimental to her. The ombudsman rejected the argument that Saffron should make an exception simply because it had done so previously.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Saffron Building Society, all decisions | 29 | 26% |
| Mortgage advice complaints, all decisions | 3,925 | 18% |
| Mortgage, all decisions | 25,098 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website