Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Steel Framed properties and Halifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6038 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I do not know where to post this one, but General Knowledge is as good as starting place as I can think…

 

I have a friend who bought a house 2 years ago. He tried to buy the one he was living in, but because it was Steel framed his Mortgage Broker talked him out of it as there could be problems later on in selling it or even remortgaging it, which in general is very true.

 

Well he found another house and bought it. Two years on it turns out that this house is also steel framed. He claims he never received a copy of the valuation that was done and so was not aware it was steel framed. If he had he would not have bought it. He spoke to his Mortgage Broker who was also shocked as he had told him not to buy that sort of building as well. The broker felt that the Halifax (that was his lender) did not accept steel framed properties two years ago and so wondered if there was a case here to ask the Lender for compensation as he should have been informed of the type of property and if they had noticed they would not have lent on it anyway.

 

Where should he being his enquiries and how? Or is he just stuck now?

 

Any ideas or advice would be appreciated,

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not familiar with steel framed houses or whether that would be obvious to the valluer but there may be a few things to consider here.

 

there is a big difference between a valuation for lending purposes and a survey. It needs to be clarified what was paid for.

 

A copy of the valuation and any comments should also have been sent to his solicitor - who should have advised on any adverse comments.

 

Although a steel frame house may not be obvious on just a valuation( not sure on this point) a valuer should have some local knowledge of this type of property.

 

If the BS has lent with full knowldege of this fact - then presumably it should not be too much of a problem for other lenders..

 

just food for thought

 

 

jan

Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Actually lenders vary a lot on steel framaed houses and the different types too (there are a few apparently). He paid for a valuation for mortgage purposes, so I guess the main thing is for him to SAR the lender, this should provide information regarding the valuation etc and he could also ask for their lending criteria at that time. Only 2 years ago and at this stage the lender is not being accused of anything.

 

Any other ideas please?

 

Thanks,

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought - was the buildings insurance arranged through the lender - and are they aware it is steel framed?

 

I dont know whether this would affect the premium or insurance - but what I do know ( having worked for a BS and insurance company) that unfortunately in the event of a claim thay would look for any non- disclosure of material facts - whether or not it affects the claim. therefore if either the solicitor or BS were aware of the construction they should have made your friend aware of the fact - otherwise he may have completed his insurance form incorrectly.

 

So I would definitely approach the solicitor ( they are paid enough!) for clarification of what was known at the time of purchase.

 

Jan:)

Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jan,

 

Yes I agree that is another point. I think SAR the Halifax to find out what they know then hit them with why they did not notify the client of this major issue which means they would not have insured the property properly. I will need to ask him to look carfully at all paperwork including the sols letters regarding the buildings insurance

 

Thanks,

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that a SAR will be useful as this only obliges them to send personal information held on a person. Not details regarding a house valuation. Although I would imagine they would comply with an enquiry for information.

 

I used to own a steel framed property, the only way you could tell was from the steel beams in the loft. Incidentally it was also mortgaged to the Halifax, although the mortgage would have been taken out about 4 years ago. There are some lenders that refuse to lend on steel framed buildings, although they are as robust as traditional built houses.

 

 

When we first purchesed the house it was a repossession owned by the Woolwich. When the valuation revealed that it was a steel framed building they conducted a full structural survey and showed us the pictures of the steel frame which was in perfect condition despite being 40 years old. There were several houses built on the estate in the same way and they had always kept their prices in line with other houses on the estate built in a traditional manner.

 

There are some restrictions on what you can do such as you can not have certain types of cavity wall insulation, but otherwise we did not really see any difference and had no problems selling the property.

 

Valuations for lending purposes are not too thorough, although I would imagine that a look in the loft would be required. The trouble is it is the lender who chooses the type of valuation required. These can range from simple drive by surveys where the valuer does not even enter the property to more in depth valuations. Although lenders do not generally undertake structural surveys that is the responsibility of the purchaser should they wish to have that level of piece of mind.

 

Another problem is that the contract is between the lender and the valuer (although the lender will charge the borrower) the borrower is not privy to the contract and so has no right to sue on the contract. An action in tort law may be available. The case of Smith V Eric Bush established that a surveyer engaged by a lender may owe a duty of care to the purchaser provided the property was of a modest value and it was reasonable to assume that the purchaser would rely upon the valuation. The question as to whether the valuer would be liable is whether another reaonable valuer would have identified the house as being of steel framed. This would ultimately depend on the level of service which the lender had asked for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zoot,

 

Yes I agree with your point. These is a reason lenders do not like steel framed, but that escapes me at the moment. Also it depends on the loan to value. There are many lenders that will lend, but only to 75% LTV. I will have a think and see what documentation he was given. Then decide from there.

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...