Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • thanks ae - yes  I understand the claims are between me and the lender.  But with regards to the order for sale the judge specifically said it is the receiver who is appointed to sell - and he hasn't/ and isn't - which is why I am asking if I can apply to the court v the receiver for an order for sale right now?   The receiver is not part of the current proceedings heading to trial.  But he is responsible for selling the property - and he has consistently rejected offers over >5y.   This is specifically why I would like to understand if I can apply to the court to enforce the sale ??? As above - The judge has said otherwise the order for sale v the lender has to be dealt with via the trial.  Which they have deliberately delayed via the adjournment. Valuation is an issue. The lender chose the valuer.  I paid but his report basically belongs to and is referred to by the lender.  He did a prof valuation without doing a site visit.  He had done a site visit 5 months earlier for different potential lender.  The 1st valuation he erroneously did as fh.  He just did a re-write 5m later - but kept the same value for lh. I had a great offer on the table from a niche buyer which would have cleared the loan and given me a lot of £s.  But the lender rushed through the repo and the buyer got spooked and ran.  The lender then slashed the price by 30%+ from their valuation (fire sale price?).  As you suggest - they fully expected potential buyers to quickly grab the property at such a discount.  But it turned out they couldn't.  The market had dropped anyway. Then covid hit.  Every potential buyer was questioning the valuation.  The lender and receivers actions have eroded the equity.  This wouldn't make sense to any normal lender.  99.9% would have just sold to the 1st buyer willing to transact.  The lender/ receiver had such a willing buyer on day 1 of marketing.  But they spent 15months trying not to sell to them.  As I said, disclosure shows the ceo wanted (wants?) to keep it for himself - so common sense didn't (doesn't) prevail.   The lender has made a MoneyClaim v me.  I am disputing it because I maintain it is their actions that has caused the erosion of equity/ a debt to accrue. The lender's problem now is that they have spent so much money and added so much interest over 5y that they cannot sell the property for what they need/ want.  They are trying to blame me for this.  But it is their fault; not mine - because I am not in possession or in charge of selling it. As I also said above - if there is some legal reason why I cannot make an application to the court for an order for the receiver to sell - then can I ask the other entity which has a charging order and threatened to do so. ???    
    • We registered our child with a nursery last year for a June 2024 start date. This was before how the new 15 hours free childcare was going to work. At the time my wife paid a £50 deposit. A few weeks ago they sent out an email about how the new funding was going to work. The nurseries can use it as they wish and they said if the child wants to come for one full day we still have to pay £50 and we can't use all the hours for one day. They also drastically increased their day rate. As a result of this we were looking elsewhere and have found a much cheaper nursery so we are changing.  The original nursery now said you only get the deposit back if she starts because it comes out of the first month of fees. I don't think we filled any any form or anything so there were no terms and conditions. Are we entitled to get the deposit back or is it our fault for not asking what the terms were when we paid. 
    • Hi Baldilocks. Welcome to CAG. I've done some minor formatting edits to your post to make it easier to read for people on mobile. Try to keep to 1 or 2 sentences max before creating a line break in your post. It's the Consumer Rights Act 2015, not the Sale of Goods Act 2015. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 superseded The Sale Of Goods Act 1979 and the latter does not apply as I imagine this purchase was made after 1st October 2015. Can you confirm the make and model of the vehicle? Some vehicles have their service history stored within the on board computers now or have it available to view online at any point. How did you pay for the vehicle? Finance (what type), Debit/Credit Card etc? I would argue, that should the above points not be correct, you would be right to claim that the goods are not as described under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  
    • Thanks everyone for all your help, but unfortunately my case was dismissed. This is the 2nd time I've had this happen now so I doubt ill be taking on any parking firms in future sadly. The judge said I lost it on the grounds that the sign said I had 28 days to declare who the owner of the vehicle was, and said I should have complied with this.  My costs are Judgment for the claimant £133.33 Issue fee Hearing fee Solicitors costs - total £265 grand total £398.33 Do those costs look about right?
  • 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 3591 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...