Despite low interest rates looking like they will remain in place for the coming months and a new Government in place, many families are in desperate financial situations.

In a recent survey carried out by the charity “Shelter”, it showed many families are resorting to other sources of credit such as credit cards to fund mortgage payments.

Part of the Financial Services Authorities rules governing mortgage advice state that mortgage advisers must check the affordability of any proposed mortgage and keep evidence of how this was checked.

Many mortgage advisers gave total disregard for affordability and used self certification mortgages to get borrowers higher mortgage loans than should have been granted.

The survey carried out by Shelter showed six per cent of participants liable for rent or a mortgage admitting they had used a credit card to fund payments over the past year.

Kay Boycott, director of policy and campaigns at Shelter, described the findings as a “shocking discovery”…

Ms Boycott added: “It is absolutely vital that every single person using credit cards in this way seeks advice urgently to get the help they need to ensure they don’t lose their home.”In some circumstance mortgages were granted without affordability being properly assessed.

The Bank of England has confirmed that mortgage approvals in the UK has increased to their highest level for over a year.

Swindon mortgage broker Joseph Masi who traded as Select Mortgage Services has become the latest broker to be banned by the Financial Services Authority(FSA).

Following an investigation into systems and controls at Select Mortgage Sevices, the FSA took the decision to ban him.

Originally Masi had agreed to obtain sign off from an external compliance consultant for all mortgages he wrote after September 2007. During a visit by the FSA to his firm in March 2009, they discovered he had only obtained the sign off on one mortgage contract, despite lots more being processed. There is no evidence any of these applications were approved by an external compliance consultant.

The FSA concluded that Masi acted without honesty and integrity, demonstrating he is not a fit and proper person, and has therefore banned him from working in the financial services industry because he presents a risk to consumers.

European Property Management Ltd based in Merseyside has been wound up by the high court.

The firm was found guilty of misleading investors over the benefits of investing, to induce them to purchase shares.

The company was formed to secure and manage residential properties in European Capitals of Culture as they were announced.

Cold calling was used to attract potential investors and it is believed that up to 10 other companies may have been used.  None of these businesses were authorised by the Financial Services Authority.  They also made exaggerated and misleading claims about the benefits of investing in this way.

The Insolvency Service’s investigation also led to the winding-up in the High Court, of Corporate Business Angel Ltd, which was based in the Derby area.

The companies’ methods raised a total of £853,395 from private investors in the UK. From the sums raised, the company paid out commissions of £529,945 to the unauthorised entities, which amounted to 65% of funds raised, and as a consequence less than 30% of shareholders’ funds were used for purposes set out in the Company’s Information Memorandum.

Everyone should be wary of get rich quick schemes and the old adage applies: if it seems too good to be true, then it probably is.

Now the firms have been declared in default, which means t is understood that the firms are unable or likely to be unable to pay claims against them and triggers FSCS protection for their customers.

Kate Bartlett, director of operations at FSCS, said: “The FSCS’s role is to help people who have lost money as a result of doing business with an authorised firm that is unable or likely to be unable to meet claims made against it.

Bobby Kennedy of Gravitas Law said, “This is a positive step, demonstrating the interests of consumers are being taken seriously”

As well as the fine Baker has also been prohibited from performing any function in relation to any regulated activity. And Barclay has been prohibited from performing any significant influence function at an FSA-regulated firm.

Between January 2004 and March 2008, one of Baker’s responsibilities was accurate internal and external reporting at NR.

He had overall responsibility for much of this time for the firm’s debt management unit which managed its secured loan book.

Despite becoming aware in January 2007 that there were 1,917 loans omitted from the mortgage arrears figures, Baker failed to escalate the information internally and agreed a course of action which resulted in the loans not being reported.

He also made misleading statements regarding these impaired loans to external stakeholders, including market analysts, quoting inaccurate figures. If the 1,917 loans had been reported as being in arrears, the figures would have increased by approximately 50%.

Alternatively if the loans had been reported as in possession, the number would have increased from 662 to 2,579 cases.

As managing credit director of the DMU, Barclay was directly responsible for the provision of accurate management information concerning loan arrears and property possessions.

He knew that the firm’s arrears position enabled senior management within NR, analysts and the FSA to form a view of NR’s asset quality, but failed to ensure that the management information reported by the DMU was accurate despite warning signs at an early stage.

Although it is not possible to calculate the exact extent of this mis-reporting, if the correct figure had been reported, the arrears figures would have been significantly worse and closer to the Council of Mortgage Lenders average over an extended period of time.