Had a few dealings with Court Bailiffs, evicting folk that haven't paid their rent. 1 in Warrington told me that there are a few that just keep cropping up again in the syst....
they'll rent a property off a landlord that comes to collect the rent, pay deposit & 1st rent on some tip of a terrace thats as cheap as possible, when he next comes for rent they tell him to Jog On, he tells them to get out & they say that if he gives them a 2 year reference they'll rent somewhere else from an agency and be out asap.
They then go in a rental agency and get as nice a place as they can, he has to back up the ref. or he wont get rid of them.
They then move into a gaff paying whatever they 1st have to pay & then no more, they go to CAB for advice citing all kinds of unresolved issues and are advised to become sitting tenants, this then prevents the landlord/agent from getting advice there as it will be a conflict of interests.
They than sit back knowing that they can ride it out rent free for a good while whilst it goes through the courts... sometimes (often) over a year.
When the rent is being paid by housing benefit the agent thinks theyre good for the rent as its paid direct, but if theres any change in circumstances that the tenant reports then the benefit then gets paid to them... which they then pocket.
Given how much folk ended up paying for them with the maximum discounts I doubt many will have got repossessed, they were sold off for amounts that you could draw on a credit card these days, wasnt it about an 85% discount that some got ? and back then they were probably only around £30k at full price.
Weren't endowments all based on the stock market ? I know my in-laws fell foul thinking that after 22 years the endowment should've settled the mortgage but when it came to it the money they'd put into it for 22 years was worth absolutely nothing. There was probably a great deal of underhandedness in the selling of endowments (like PPI) with folk who possibly didnt really understand not having it explained to them clearly enough.
The guy in the vid though it seems has had his mortgage bought by another institution who have changed the terms, maybe he received letters but didnt really understand what they were saying ?
You'd like to think that these kind of things are now unable to happen with regulators/watchdogs & ombudsmen ? I know when a firm wanted me out of their pension scheme they had to make available an independent financial advisor to explain to me the benefits or pitfalls.