After his home was repossessed, Kit complained that the lender had sold the property too quickly, leading to a shortfall.
After his home was repossessed, Kit felt it was sold too quickly (and too cheaply). He complained that this had led to a shortfall, which wouldn’t have existed if the lender had waited for an upturn in the housing market. Kit showed us that a couple of years later, other houses on the same street were being marketed for much more.
What we said
We looked into how long the house was on the market – and how market conditions might have affected the sale price. The lender had got more than one valuation for the house, including at least one independent valuation.
The lender had accepted an offer below the average valuation. So we looked at what the estate agent said about the offer, to see if it seemed fair in the circumstances. Kit’s property had needed a good deal of improvement work compared to others, and while the local market had since picked up, it had been fairly flat at the time of the sale. Although there’d been several viewings, in six months of marketing the property this had been the only firm offer.
We explained to Kit that it was unlikely to be appropriate for the lender to delay selling to achieve a particular price, as he was being charged interest during this time – increasing what he owed. We felt the lender got the right balance of waiting for a fair offer, without keeping the house on the market indefinitely.
Related case studies
Consumer complains after being rejected a payment deferral on their mortgage
Consumer unhappy mortgage lender refused to extend a reduced payment arrangement