Mark Hartell

Registered with
Tuesday 21st October 2014

Latest Comments

Total Number of Property118 Comments: 5

Mark Hartell

17:36 PM, 17th January 2017
About 3 years ago

Management of properties via Ltd Co

Reply to the comment left by "Charles de Lastic" at "17/01/2017 - 17:29":

Thanks Charles - appreciated!... Read More

Mark Hartell

19:27 PM, 16th January 2017
About 3 years ago

Management of properties via Ltd Co

Reply to the comment left by "Neil Patterson" at "16/01/2017 - 14:14":

thanks for your reply When you suggest 15% as reasonable are you talking 15% in total for any services including finders, taking deposits, collecting rents etc or 15% on top of what a letting agent does?... Read More

Mark Hartell

14:45 PM, 23rd November 2016
About 3 years ago

Rent review letter post Autumn Statement

Mark - I'm a little worried that the second sentence of this letter and the link will reinforce the message given out by the government that its only super wealthy landlords who are affected and that we have somehow been avoiding paying the proper level of tax anyway

Think about this from the tenant perspective. They see the phrase "and for many landlords this will mean much larger tax bills" and then they follow the link to immediately see someone from "Platinum property partners".

Most are led to believe that we have been getting special treatment or avoiding taxes to date (after all, the government has said they just want to "level the playing field"). I think the crucial thing for tenants to understand is that we will be getting taxed on money that is not a profit and that you don't have to be a higher rate taxpayer under the old definition to be hit by this.... Read More

Mark Hartell

19:13 PM, 18th November 2014
About 5 years ago

FOS rule West Brom Tracker Rate Hike is fair

I am so glad that I signed up to this group. Previous experience of industry bodies has taught me they frequently fail to represent those they are supposed to and that their rigour is lacking. One very sage piece of advice I was given years ago is to consider the motivations of the other party in the transaction.

Too many individuals are prepared to be fobbed off with delays and official sounding responses but as far as I can see the FoS in this case have completely refused to address the central legal point as to whether the West Brom are entitled to do what they have.

Thankfully that will get tested and decided on Jan 21st. What will not get discussed in court is the injustice of the West Brom in applying these increases completely arbitarily based on the misuse of information they obtained. In my case I did acquire other properties after the mortgage in question. I did this to generate money to fund my daughters University fees and as an alternative to a pension scheme because I have also been stung there in the past.

Nowhere in my mortgage T&C does it say that actions I may take AFTER the mortgage was put into place could lead to be being discriminated against.

The West Brom knew that no one individual would be able to afford to take this case to law and could reasonably be assured that the financial regulators would support them - that is a sad indictment of the current situation and I am proud to be part of this collective action.... Read More

Mark Hartell

19:35 PM, 21st October 2014
About 5 years ago

West Bromwich Building Society Accounts

The apparent profit was achieved after a favourable £5.1million increase in their valuation of investment property and by £4.7million in additional interest taken from the arbitary increase in the rate applied to some tracker rate mortgages.

Whilst the outcome of the pending legal case cannot be known, a more true reading of ongoing trading performance for 2013/14 would be a LOSS of £7.7million.

This, 3 years into a recovery and when house prices seem to be topping out.

Astonishingly, the West Brom say that they have made no provisions regarding the legal case against them. This despite them having booked over £10million to date and incurred hundreds of thousands in legal fees.

They suggest that "all cases where the Company has been informed by FOS that there has been an adjudication, have been determined in favour of the Company" but is this true? Is not the case that the FoS have simply washed their hands of the cases citing that they are not consumer related.

If you are a member of the West Bromwich Building society you should be aware of the huge risks WBBS are running. They are presenting a turnaround picture but the reality is a company still making trading losses at this point in the economic cycle and misrepresenting the risks the business faces through their deeply flawed strategy - whether or not the case is in their favour the terms they are applying/changing are both selective and arbitary.

If you want to read more, check out their report under the "Your Society" heading on their site.... Read More