What would you say to a significant rise in interest rates on your mortgage because you lose the job?

Help increase the pressure on Business Minister Rasmus Jarlov to save the Danish mortgage model.

Economic Weekly has described in several articles, no later than 28.10.2018, how the mortgage banks have found a shortcut to bypass the consumer protection rules.

They have done this by changing the practice

bank

So that the homeowners are no longer a party to the bond trades behind the loan payments.
And while the new practice is in direct contradiction to what the Danish FSA wants, namely transparency and consumer protection, the Authority has announced that it can do nothing unless the legislation is changed.

Fortunately for homeowners, co-owners and tenants, it has now got more parties on the field and demand a change of law.

It is all about who has the right to the bonds that are issued

bank

And by the right of advice is meant that it must be the borrower who decides who will sell the bonds and where to sell them.

For 200 years, the bonds have been sold on the stock exchange at the best possible rates, but now the mortgage lenders will decide the price themselves, and they buy the bonds themselves directly from the borrower. There is thus 0% transparency instead of 100% transparency.
One of the mortgage lenders has stated that the reason for the change in practice is that there was nevertheless no interest in even appointing a bond trader and trading place.

But does it fit now too? And if it did, then what’s the problem with allowing the borrower to choose for himself?
After all, when the borrower has the right of appeal, he can also ask the mortgage institution to handle the sale if he is comfortable with it.

What’s the problem then?

What

We are already seeing bank products financed with mortgage bonds that determine the basic interest rate on the loan.
And then we get to the very core – The interest rate is added to an individual interest rate supplement , which depends on individual circumstances.  

This is in direct contradiction to the entire mortgage concept, which is that everyone should be able to borrow on equal terms. Not that any customers need to finance extra cheap loans to other customers.