Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No you don't have to pay them.  it is their scam which the Courts know about. There was a classic case a few years ago that decided that £100 was not a penalty because that company had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear of cars that overstayed etc because they were there to maximise the availability of car park spaces. As Starbucks was closed in your case, Met have no legitimate interest so their £100 charge IS a penalty. Therefore the case would be thrown out. if they took you to Court and you turned up in Court to defend yourself. So no you shouldn't pay.
    • Thank you as always. Okay, will contact Tesco and will ignore the appeal, and will let you know what happens. You guys are superheroes.
    • A former Tesla engineer is in a decade-long battle with the car company, owned by Elon Musk.View the full article
    • what isn't working out....one very small issue, the rest is going perfectly fine. stop doing your usually running around waving arms and screaming on my god oh my god...sorry too used to you LMM even if you cant hold down a new bank account all is not lost .  ive not seen any reports that monzo refuse people  so go with them. pers as i said id NOT be using any switch service, as there are debts you want to stop paying and get them defaulted BEFORE you ever think of poss might could should pay them. its only a handful of stuff like rent/ctax/ etc that you need DD for ive not used DD's in almost 30yrs now nor use Standing orders, i do it by BACS each month priority bills first (can take roof from over my head if not paid) there REST all get paid if/when i've had the money. 2 well 3 things id dump too or get cheaper. cable/sat tv - ££6PCM . which i will is internet/tv/landline ? from whom that is very expensive. mine is £27PCM for 100MPS Broadband etc all in. 3 tv licence... who cant tell you are watching live tv even if you dont.... mobile phone £27? - go over to giffgaff no contract and as cheap as £6PCM even with mobile data (but use your home wf-fi when indoors!!) no need to keep using @Username, everyone that posted gets an alert like you do if someone posts. dx  
    • Critall windows date back to the 1880s but their steel construction makes them vulnerable to damp.View the full article
  • 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

Mortgage shortfall - shoosmiths for Halifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2614 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

Back in 2010 me and my now ex purchased a house (£135,000, the mortgage was only for £121,000)

I ended up leaving in early 2012 due to psycological abuse from my ex.

 

My ex chose to keep the house and continue by himself with the mortgage repayments.

We agreed that at the end of the first 3 year fixed rate term we would get my name taken off as the 2nd signitory and he could keep the house.

 

Early 2013 and after a last ditch attempt at emotionally blackmailing me to return by saying he couldn't afford the payments

(he declined my suggestion to just sell the house or take in lodgers etc to help him).

After I refused he then told me he had in fact stopped paying.

 

I tried to contact Halifax a couple of times whom refused to deal with me as I didn't have any details of the account (ex wouldn't give me them) and also threw in my face I was only the 2nd signatory.

 

Eventually in Aug 2013 I convinced someone in arrears to talk to me whom confirmed there was 6 months arrrears and my ex had discussed a voluntary repossession with the halifax.

Due to this, our account was standing at £126,000.

 

I was told if i agreed to the reppossession that the monthly repayments would still be added on until the property was sold.

 

I was also informed that my ex had notified the bank I had left back jn 2012 but stated he had no known address for me (he did) I passed over a forwarding address and I was assured anything else to do with the arrears and if the voluntary repossession went ahead then they would contact me as well.

 

I agreed to the voluntary repossession with my ex and signed the form he produced me with which again included my forwarding address

 

- to this day I have never heard from Halifax regarding anything to do with the arrears/house etc

- is this normal?

 

A few months later I saw online myself that the estate agents in charge wanted offers of over £90,000

 

in March 2014 it was sold but i don't know how much for as sold prices for auctioned property aren't made public knowledge.

 

I have been led to believe that it sold for no more than £105,000

- this would mean a shortfall of £21,000 going on the figure given to me back in Aug 2013.

 

There would also be another 6 months arrears added onto that figure from Aug 2013-March 2014 when the property sold so a shortfall would be at least £24,000.

 

This does not take into account the interest I was told that would be added on as well as all the legal costs of it.

 

The only contact that has ever been made with me over any of this, back from the original arrears starting in 2013 is now when

 

last week I received a letter from a lawfirm saying they wanted to recover the shortfall debt of £20,000 from me.

 

I have no idea what to do about it

- I am no longer in contact with my ex so have no idea what his intentions are.

 

My mum strongly suspects he may have accepted responsibility and even paid some shortfall off and stopped hence why they are now contacting me

- they have by-passed my original forwarding address (my mums) and gone straight through the electoral roll to contact me at my current address.

 

we are convinced the shortfall was originally more than £20,000

- my mums advised me to ignore the letters from the law firm and to not even ask for a breakdown of anything incase they take it as a acknowledgement of the debt

 

- citizens advice would not confirm with me if making an enquiry would be seen as acknowledgement or not.

 

They also said since i have no assets or savings and live with my new partner who has a mortgage in his own name (i don't pay into the house as such other than food/housekeeping) that he can be affected and his house/income will be taken into account when trying to recover the shortfall

- surely this can't be true?

 

Were not married and don't even share an account.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what has this got to do with shoos?

and who is their client?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoosmiths is the law firm that's been appointed by the Halifax whom we had the mortgage with to recover the shortfall.

 

 

as far as I'm aware I think their actually part of the Halifax division.

 

 

I just have no idea what to do about any of it

but I can't find anything helpful online to see where my new partner stands with all of this and what is regarded as an acknowledgement of debt (unless I'm looking in the wrong places) and I'm not in a position right now for legal fees.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Shoosmiths Solicitors chase debts for Halifax. As far as I know they are a separate company and have been around for a very long time.

 

Acknowledgement of a debt is you paying any sum or writing to them admitting to owing the debt. Asking for information is not acknowledgement.

 

Your new partner has nothing to do with the debt. What you are thinking about, is Halifax obtaining a CCJ or Bankruptcy against you and then a court or court appointed official looking at your household expenditure to determine how much you could afford to pay. Of course then your partners finances would be taken into consideration, but only in regard to what household bills they are paying. I.e You could not pay a higher proportion of the bills to avoid debt repayment.

 

In regard to your situation with Halifax, you could send them a Data Protection Subject Access Request to obtain copies of all data in regard to both the mortgage account and the repossession processing. I suspect Shoosmiths are also trying to contact your ex partner to see whether they can obtain payment. As the debt was joint, they are not bothered who pays them.

 

You don't have to respond to Shoosmiths yet. Mortgage debts can be enforced in courts in regard to limitations act for 12 years and unless they are confident in gaining repayment, i doubt any court claim will be made for a long time. When you are ready, send Halifax the subject access request.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoosmiths are independent there is no in house connection.

 

" We agreed that at the end of the first 3 year fixed rate term we would get my name taken off as the 2nd signatory and he could keep the house."

 

Im afraid this is a myth..mortgage companies will not release any parties in connection to a joint mortgage that you both applied for and it will remain joint and several.When divorce or separation happens in a relationship the only way you can be removed from a mortgage is t for one of the parties to remortgage clear the loan and then take it out as a singular agreement.

 

Is this a joint mortgage in both your names ?

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ever so much for your reply

- I actually feel like I've got a better idea of things than from visiting the C.A.B

 

 

who are just trying to rush me into accepting it and cracking on with organising a meeting with a debt woman to look through my finances to sort payment plan out and scaring me by saying my current partners own finances and property could be affected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could answer my question above ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoosmiths are independent there is no in house connection.

 

" We agreed that at the end of the first 3 year fixed rate term we would get my name taken off as the 2nd signatory and he could keep the house."

 

Im afraid this is a myth..mortgage companies will not release any parties in connection to a joint mortgage that you both applied for and it will remain joint and several.When divorce or separation happens in a relationship the only way you can be removed from a mortgage is t for one of the parties to remortgage clear the loan and then take it out as a singular agreement.

 

Is this a joint mortgage in both your names ?

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

Please bare with me as I'm still figuring out how to use the site.

 

 

Thank you for the info given although not relevant to me anymore

- wish I had known that at the time however.

 

 

Yes it was a joint mortgage with my ex

- sadly I'm no longer in contact with him or even know his where abouts in relation to finding out his intentions towards the shortfall debt,

 

 

I do have a sneaky feeling he will try to get away with taking responsibility as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...