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

Mortgage interest rate rises


determindator
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3590 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

There is notification Santander 'intend' to raise the int rate by half percent. The reason it is 'being considered' is because of 'the increased cost to Santander of raising the money which we lend to our customers, including what it costs us to provide you with your mortgage(what ever that is)' apparently those reasons in the mortgage conditions. Nothing mentioned about savers rates so I presume there's no connection there:madgrin: I just feel the BOE rate is low for a reason. How much can these lenders raise the int rate until someone decides to do something about it. I can hear the arguments from the hard line who say tough bananas but it doesn't have to be this way, I hear business economists are getting fraught over Government decisions.

 

Anyone else with an int rate rise from other lenders?

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Santander is a F**ked bank.

 

Santander does not get money for mortgages from saver's deposits (although look up fractional reserve banking). A mortgage contract with a bank magically borrows the funds into existence, so it should be win win.

 

However, Santander is a Spanish bank, & anyone who has looked at property in Spain knew that it was overvalued years ago, & is still mightily overvalued now. There are a colossal number of empty buildings in Spain, & the banks still really hold these assets, which technically will become their liability as the money advanced to the constructors will not be recouped by their sale.

 

Money market rates for Santander, & Spain in general, to stay afloat with all the new disclosures & capital requirements are therefore higher as they are more at risk of going bust.

 

I saw more blatant corruption at all levels in one hour trying to do a deal in Spain 6 years ago, & walking away from it, than I ever have in the UK. The Abogados (lawyers), Mayors, vendors, you name it. We're not in a good way in the UK, but I'll tell you now that the balance sheets of Spain & its financial companies are just a cheery fiction.

 

10 years ago, the only people who had a variable mortgage rate 4.25% above base like Santander were lowlife lenders like Kensington who dealt with the riskier bets. My mortgage is 1% above base. Most SVRs are 3.5% above. That's so they can still pay out the £13 billion the banks still pay annually in bonuses I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Thanks for reply TFL. Well first month to pay int rate hike. So Santander, I will find another mortgage lender. I can already feel the benefit from just saying it:-D

 

They have a 2yr fixed rate for newbies 2.39% I spose I contribute to that as well as the bonuses.

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

If borrowing will cost more to banks and building societies in light of the possible lowering of the BOE base rate, whats the odds banks and b/socys will pass the extra cost onto the customers by raising rates? IMO they should absorb the loss as increasing int rates affects the spending power of people, plus people could lose their homes putting more burden on the state. They should have saved up for the rainy day as they knew it would come!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just a thought, if mortgage borrowers had more in their pockets, this would revive the confidence lost by investors who are holding onto their money because they are nervous no one is spending. More people could afford to buy homes with low int rates which would stimulate the house building industry which in turn creates jobs in many other sectors.

 

As for the unregulated lenders causing havoc with their high int rates, that's something else to address.

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 10 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...