You still havent said anything about which party you are or what is your interest it in this. but it seems to be that you have to keep referring back to someone else You havent said how long the lease is or answered any of the other pertinent questions. It is not split into 2 lease units, they are not units for starters.

It is a freehold property owned by a person who happens to have leased out part of that. No lessee has the right to purchase the freehold but IF there are separate entrances and a separate footprint then it would be wise for them to enquire whether the freeholder would be willing to sell the freehold for that property. If it has its own footprint then the leaseholder may have the right to purchase the freehold.

The fact that the freeholder lives in part of what was once one dwelling is irrelevant other than to say that part isnt subject to a lease unless they are particularly stupid in drawing up the lease on the part that is subject to the lease (or they had intended to sell both flats at the time the lease was created)

Imagine you on a taxi, you dont get charged on the mileage you do to get to work and if you took your kids to the seaside in your cab your next door neighbour cant force them to pay you to do so.

I have had some legal advice.

There were some issues with the claim and we filed a defence pointing out mistakes.

In meantime I managed to raise the full amount that they wanted.

But now the lender wants more money because time has passed - added costs and interest.

Court scheduled in April - but even waiting til then will just add more interest.

And if court agrees an adjournment this further delay is only going to waste more days and add more interest.

Am trying to settle now. That is best solution.

They say they will be amicable.... But each time I have tried to settle, they keep saying no, the amount is not enough.

I raised the extra, and then they say its still not enough...

At first the lender wanted 10% more than 1st offer.

I managed to raise the extra 10%.

Now they say I still need to raise another 6%.

I'd raised 100% of what was owed; they say its now only 94%.

They also won't let go of 1st charge, which my new source of funds requires, unless their balance is settled in full.

If they won't settle on what I have raised and I have to go to court, is a judge likely to deny possession because I did raise the full amount they required 2-3 months ago??

Or is the the judge likely to give possession because I haven't raised the recent extra interest/ costs accrued?

Managed to resolve this.

I have a question about a secured loan.

Two loans secured against a property - the lender assigned one of the loans without sending the borrower a Notice of Assignment. Subsequently the lender served notice for repossession as if it was one loan, not two. The borrower lawyer picked up on the lack of NOA and filed that as part of the Defence.

The borrower/ lender came to a separate financial agreement to delay the whole process - but only if the Defence argument about lack of NOA was struck out of the Tomlin.

I have experience of fighting smaller credit card companies on the lack of NOA meaning the debt was unenforceable. The Defence lawyer said it was just a technicality and lender could still claim the whole debt.

I am just wondering how essential it is for a Lender to always follow the processes absolutely correctly? Its a lot of money, but the lender lawyer seems to be really pushing to remove this clause from the Defence. Makes me wonder if the lender is worried?

" Subsequently the lender served notice for repossession as if it was one loan, not two "

But if he had assigned one then why would he need to refer to the second assigned loan in repossession ?

Andy

That's kind of the point - they served notice as if it was one loan for total amount of two loans; but they hadn't sent the borrower the NOA. They just assigned the 2nd loan to the 1st loan - w/o telling the borrower they'd consolidated the 2 into 1

They tried to repossess using the two loans.....even though they had sold one ?

How can they assign the 2nd loan to the 1st loan...they sold it to themselves ?

Yes! It's a large company with subsidiaries. One company sold it to another company - separate entities but ultimately similar directors.

Then they used a lawyer to serve notice with the total of the 2 loans bundled up as 1.

Then not technically an Assignment of debt more of an internal adjustment ?

So - borrower went to a lender. The lender loaned sum of money but split the amount between 2 companies on separate signed contracts. But when they served notice they served notice as if it was 1 company. When borrower lawyer looked into it he saw they'd bundled the 2nd separate loan into the 1st loan - without sending borrower a NOA and no separate signed paperwork

The companies are 2 distinct separate companies. So internal adjustment is what they've done - but can they?

That's the crux of my question - surely 2 companies can't just shift money between themselves if they are separate registered companies? The employees may all work in the same building but the companies are separate legal entities. Surely one company should have assigned the debt properly with a NOA and notified the lender?

If they didn't - would the debt be enforceable?

sorry I meant ' should have notified the borrower'

And have you been receiving 2 sets of statements over the years from each company ?

Notification in writing about both 'accounts', yes. Not for many years but during the term.

Lender paperwork talks about 2 loans - but it appears they consolidated as one loan about 6 months ago w/o notifying borrower.

And they were separate contracts/ separate legal companies.

Just following up on this.

When in the past I've looked at credit card debt being sold on to a dca - it's been clear to see where the card company has been at fault - ie they didn't issue a Default notice and didn't issue a NOA - and this made, in some instances, the debt unenforceable. In this instance, borrower was dealing with one team, but the loans were separate signed contracts, that were suddenly presented as one combined debt, for purpose of serving Notice for repo. But no Default notice and no NOA and no new signed contract for one loan for the combined debt.

Can the lender do this?

Or have they 'technically' made one of the loans unenforceable??

Are regulated loans charged against property different from credit card debt?

Or all loans are covered by same rules?

Mortgages because of the values involved (over 25K) were exempt from regulation CCA1974.

" Are regulated loans charged against property different from credit card debt?

Or all loans are covered by same rules? "

Ok - that's very useful Andyorch. Thank you for that clarity.

Then I guess despite the lender being in the wrong with consolidating 2 into 1, that borrower has no argument in saying it is unenforceable and should just let it be...

Thanks.

Hi and hoping it will be a happy year for most people on here....

I wanted to ask a bit of legal advice.

Have a court hearing in 3w regarding a debt to a private lender.

Its a serious situation. ie repo hearing cos i secured loan against property.

I can't borrow/ remortgage.

This asset and contents are all I have.

There is equity. But in this bad market and if there is a repo process, who knows...

I have been trying for ages to sell my asset and repay debt; it just hasn't happened.

Til now.

I now in talks with 2 serious buyers. Both sorting finances (cash).

Am hoping one will confirm in next few days.

The next stage would be to proceed with legals with one of them.

But I would not have any funds before the court hearing date.

Exchange may be possible?

Completion on the asset sale will mean problem solved; oh happy days....

Due to these 2 options - can I ask for an adjournment? Ask for enough time to pursue them?

I don't want to go to court and incur more/ huge expenses

I can't afford a lawyer and the lender will have a top tough lawyer.

I now have medical issues caused by the stress.

I think I have to allow 5 days in writing before hearing to ask for adjournment?

Is there a cost?

I don't want to even consider either of the above options falling through....

Of course you can ask for an adjournment and I think that if you provide the paperwork to the court then it seems unlikely that they will disagree – but have you talked to the claimant? I would have thought that if you explained everything to the claimant and asked to hang on until you could show that the necessary papers have been signed and your purchaser is committed, that they would be happy to do this.

Otherwise your claimant will be obliged to go through the court process, risk the very likely possibility that on the evidence that you present about the possible purchaser that they will only get a suspended repossession – also if they forced sale of the property and they may not even get the money that they are road.

Have you spoken to the claimant? If you haven't then I would suggest that you do so and then if they agree that you should confirm immediately in writing the fact that they have agreed and inform the court.

thank you Bankfodder

I have delayed replying because I have been trying to make headway with the buyers before i called the Claimaint.

My position is my buyers remain on board. But so far I have nothing in writing to verify it. One - am hoping a written offer very soon. The other is still waiting for funds - they definitely want to purchase. But I see this will take time... Trying to get a firm commitment. But I can't push too hard. This buyer is the better potential of the two; albeit being slow...

I did speak to the claimaint - and they refuse to adjourn. They wish to proceed with the court process and to leave it to a judge to determine. They are well-funded and forceful.

Simply - They don't believe me. They say too much time passed / don't believe I have the buyers. they want control. They will place with an agent to just clear debt, no allowance for me.

No spare funds at all.

ie no alternative accommodation / no storage sorted

Trying to understand the court process.

Moving forward solo - I am listing all attempts to sell.

I assume I have to prepare a witness statement before the hearing? Everything has been handled by lawyer so I am out of touch with paperwork at the very wrong moment.

It doesn't change the fact that as of today the asset has not sold and I have not repaid lender.

In the next week a sale may get firmed up but it may not.

What happens if lender is granted possession?

Can I ask for a long period before execution? Like 6-8w to try to firm up sale.

Or does lender immediately step in and take over with receiver and we have no control and have to exit in hours/days...

Hi

I'm not quite sure in which forum to post this thread, so this is just a taster of what's to follow, so perhaps someone can ensure its in the right area for best advice??

In essence, a broker placed a loan with a lender. 

The loan was secured on an owner occupied private residence. 

Few years later borrower is in trouble & takes independent financial advice. 

Borrower sends in a SAR to broker. 

Turns out the broker did not act correctly. 

They did no fact find;

have no Suitability letter;

they did not fill out an income and affordability form,

they filled in the application form on behalf of the borrower

just emailed the signature page for borrower to sign

- so borrower had no sight of what the application form contained;

the broker did the same for the Terms

- just sent the signature page for borrower to sign. 

The broker did all this on an "Advised" basis.

There's a whole story to follow

- but I just want to ensure its in best forum before continuing.

Thanks 

moved to the mortgages and secured loans forum.

split the beans..name names..

I will.

I just need to get all the info together...

Thanks

Is the broker still in business?

The broker firm is still very much in business yes.

The specific broker has left the firm