Review | 17 January 2017



Key issues: 

Reverse Mortgage | Lender | Agency | Unsuitable product | Non-disclosure | Misleading conduct








Summary of the complaint:










  • The consumers’ complaint related to the FSP being liable for representations made by a referrer.

  • The issue of the referrer being liable for misrepresentation/misleading conduct had already been dealt with by FOS.

  • The consumers stated that the FSP failed to disclose the amount or scale of the fixed interest break charge and risks associated with the mortgage.

  • The consumers also claimed that the break charges imposed by the FSP were unconscionable and not in accordance with the law.

  • We found that that the none of these claims were made out. 

Download Review 17 January 2017

This Review was referred to the Ombudsman for a Determination.