PRECISE. Avaliações 

Great service. On the ball. Good communication. Good experience dealing with this professional company.

Too slow , sent me the wrong forms to fill in at the beginning !
The forms are far too complicated , ended up signing in wrong boxes as too confusing ( why not number the boxes and say which box to sign)
The staff were very polite and prompt though ! But overall not a great service .
Also had costs on top of the quote which we were not made aware of !!

Clear guidance, explanations. Efficient service. Effective partnership with their elective solicitor.

Maybe on the higher end % but will definitely get you on the mortgage ladder. Brilliant.

The worst mortgage company. Avoid at all costs.

Very easy compared to other lenders.

Having provided a detailed schedule of works for our project and borrowing, Precise instructed a valuer. After the valuation had been undertaken, we were told that the works were classified as heavy rather than light refurbishment hence a second valuation (at additional cost) was required. Two weeks later the second valuation took place, A week later after that, the valuer had to be instructed a third time, this time to give a part built value as opposed to a value on completion of construction. This cost us four weeks delay in securing the funding which in turn caused unnecessary stress and frustration.
Having issued the offer, Precise decided that the affordability calcs did not stack up and hence we needed to put one of our three properties on the market. At no point were we told this and at no point was it made clear that this was a requirement.
At a result, completion was delayed in total by more than a month.
Never again.

An absolute pleasure to do business with.
Clear, transparent, precise,
Gets the job done without any pissing about.

Would highly recommend.

Very quick, efficient, responsive and simple to understand. Usual legal checks etc but minimal bureaucracy.

Thanks for the response.

I understand you operate via intermediaries, and my broker has been fully involved throughout. The issue here isn’t a lack of communication, but the basis on which the lending decision has been made.

I’ve since been informed that the application has been assessed on the basis of a Debt Management Plan being treated as ongoing, which is not the case. The arrangement was brief, has been resolved, and the accounts are now settled.

Your published criteria states that a DMP discharged within 3 years is acceptable, with an LTV restriction only applying where a DMP is ongoing or current.

As such, it’s unclear why the application has been assessed under this category but it clearly has, that is your right at the end of the day but it isn't great and was a complete waste of my time and money.

////////////////////

I’m extremely disappointed with how my mortgage application was handled.

My application was not declined, but I was only offered potential terms at a reduced loan-to-value, with very little explanation provided at the outset. This lack of clarity led me to believe there was an issue with incorrect credit reporting from Lloyds Bank, especially given the ongoing issues I’ve already experienced with them.

As a result, I spent a significant amount of time pursuing the wrong issue, only to later discover that the actual reason related to how a historic debt management situation had been interpreted.

The key issue is that I am not in an active Debt Management Plan. I previously managed my debts very briefly via StepChange but decided I would do it myself through informal arrangements and the lenders in question record it as a DMP regardless. I have since resolved those accounts. However, this appears to have been treated as if I am currently in an ongoing DMP.

What makes this particularly concerning is that your own published lending criteria clearly distinguishes between:

Debt Management Plans that are ongoing/current (with LTV restrictions)
Debt Management Plans that are historical/discharged

Despite this, my application appears to have been assessed under the “ongoing/current” category, which does not reflect my actual circumstances.

This suggests a misapplication of your own criteria.

The lack of transparency throughout meant I was not given a clear explanation at the outset, which led to confusion, unnecessary stress, and misdirected blame towards Lloyds Bank when they were not responsible in this instance.

I also paid £99 to proceed with this application, which in hindsight feels like a complete waste given the circumstances. The Decision in Principle gave no indication of this issue, making it effectively meaningless and not a reliable reflection of the outcome.

I expected accurate assessment and clear communication. Instead, I was left to piece everything together myself after the fact, only after some probing did Precise finally cave and explain it was this.

Overall, a frustrating experience that could have been avoided with proper application of your own criteria and transparency from the start.

Good service

Professional friendly good communication and reliable 👌

Sarah Barker has been amazing! So refreshing to work with someone who has a 'can do' attitude and understands how complex cases can sometimes be. We look forward to working with Sarah again soon

Flexible and accommodating

Despite a fairly detailed process in getting the Mortgage approved, we got there in the end and I’m very happy.

My experience with PRECISE Mortgages was extremely positive from start to finish. The team were professional, knowledgeable, and made the whole mortgage process feel straightforward and stress-free. Communication was clear throughout, and they took the time to explain everything properly, ensuring I understood each step before moving forward.

The start of the process was good but when the solicitor that was dealing with the paperwork side of things seemed to slow things down even to the point of coming up with issues that as a legal profession should of been aware sooner

Recommend , good