Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Taking house off 76yr old with Dementia, as Interest Only Mortgage has expired


dementia-elderly
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2009 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

My mum has had a mortgage for 45 years. It represents 17% of it's value.

They don't want to continue it, once it reached the end of it's term, even after agreeing to continue it in May of this year. We only get to know a repossession court date is due on 30th of this month, 10 days ago. Barclays know she was staying with me over summer and it was only a neighbour checking post, that alerted us.

(Barclays has made it very difficult for me to assist my mum on the issue)

 

They wanted a message from the doctor, which they got, now they changed their mind and want a more formal letter via the post. Before 'possibly' reconsidering.

 

Her rate was/is a minimum of 5% and went higher when rates increased recently. So they are earning well from her. Plus she paid off two loans they sold her, to pay off overdrafts, they kept letting her fill up! Until we asked them to stop. Both stink of miss selling.

 

The impact of this will worry her, cause her to fear leaving her home and disrupt her recuperation with us. An effort that took her from being skin and bones, close to death (even with carers/social workers visiting), to eating and being more healthy.

Edited by stu007
Edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry we cant carry photos removed

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

Hi DE and welcome to CAG

 

We need some more info here :-

 

1. Do you have Power of Attorney for YM or at least an "Authority to Act" that the bank recognises.

 

2. If there was a normal repayment mgge, did that not run it's full course.

 

3. Your mum is not likely to have had an interest only mortgage for 45 years so how did the I.O. mgge come about.

 

4. Did you not know the Int Only mgge was expiring.

 

5. Did YM make any arrangement to pay off what was owed on expiry of the Int Only term.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you slick132

 

1. No Power of Attorney but yes "Authority to Act" that the bank recognises

(though each new staff member has me waiting 30 minutes on the phone, whilst they confirm that they can talk to me!)

 

2. Not sure if there was a normal repayment mgge, that did that not run it's full course. 45 years ago.

 

3. Again not sure. But they sold her one that goes up and up, but never goes lower than 5%!

 

4. Took a year to be able to talk to them. Knew in May 2018 that Int Only mgge was expiring.

They agreed to extend it then changed their mind!

 

5. They want 79K, which my mum might not be able to get with Dementia (even with the next Banking con, Equity Release).

I would struggle to provide that in the next 18 days

 

Hopefully Barclays will see sense, if they have a heart/logic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is your mother's dementia such that she no longer has mental capacity? if so have you considered applying to the Court of Protection to be her Deputy? https://www.gov.uk/become-deputy

 

You say she stayed with you for the summer. Is she likely to continue living in the house on her own or will she be moving elsewhere, whether that's to live with you/another relative. or into sheltered accommodation, or to move in a care home? If so you would presumably sell the house? On your figures the house is worth more than £450,000 so (depending where in the country it is) sounds like there is scope for downsizing and moving into sheltered housing. If that is appropriate (I realise I know nothing about your mother's condition, I'm just speculating). If Barclays knew that was the plan they may be happy to wait for you to sell rather than them seeking repossession.

 

There's no other source of funds your mother could access for the £79k? Loan from a family member etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ethel Street, yes becoming a 'deputy' sounds like a good idea.

She has not seen her solicitor in a decade, so will need to get in touch with them (her one may have retired).

 

Her house is the only place she will settle, back with carers and me if needed, as the only remaining relative. So plan to do that once she is out of danger (puts on more weight). She might downsize one day, but would rather Barclays let her decide when to do it and continue her mortgage. As she is happy in her home. 79k isn't available within 18 days and I am likely to struggle to re-finance, as self employed.

 

Hopefully Barclays will see sense, if they have a heart/logic

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hopefully Barclays will see sense, if they have a heart/logic

 

 

I doubt they have a heart, although they've identified that their borrower is a vulnerable person and backed off for the moment. But they won't stay backed off for ever unless there is a plan how you are going to repay this. If you are looking at equity release as the only way to raise capital to pay off the mortgage do take professional advice before you commit. And I'd think you would have to be a court appointed Deputy to go down this route on your mother's behalf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

The thing is that I assume Barclays informed your Mum that there was still money owing. Given that it was an interest only mortgage there should have been a plan in place to repay the capital.

 

Is it possible you could take one of the options Ethel Street mentioned?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not seen a letter, warning/giving a settlement figure and I cleared her place on every visit.

As she was being uninitiated with 'winning offers' & dodgy deals (being sent toy tractors / Eddie Stowbart Lorries!)

Neighbour says only the court letter came, since she has been away.

 

Her or I don't have any likely 79k fiance options & no time to sell, before 30th.

Plus any effort will mean her return to London & the end of her recuperation.

She is doing well, but needs longer, before the carers take over again, back in her home.

Edited by Mr.P
Rwmove link to mothr's photos.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cláusula Suelo

 

Barclays selling 'fixed minimum rate mortgages', as mum appears to have, was found to be 'miss-selling' in Spain

 

theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/08/spanish-consumers-win-victory-over-mortgage-payments-barclays-santander-class-action

Banks including Barclays and Santander face a €5bn (£4bn) bill after a Spanish court ruled that millions of fixed minimum rate mortgages were null and void because of the “lack of transparency” in the way they were sold

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if a Spanish case will apply to your Mum, hopefully someone else will.

 

 

This link from the FCA says what lenders should be have been doing about communicating with interest only borrowers. Do you think they did this with your Mum?

 

 

Guidance consultation: Dealing fairly with interest-only mortgage ...

 

 

 

HB

Edited by Mr.P
Fix the link (hopefully)

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the Bankers must have less powerful friends in Spain. Thought it did take them 10 years to get justice.

One would imagine they have covered themselves... even when sending a court doc, to a house they know is empty.

Pretty sure they have done zero with mum and know they did nothing with me, other than agree to everything in May, then do the opposite!

But as with being miss sold my Endowment, I do not trust that they can be brought to task.

(They got away with sinking the world, already!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an SAR to the bank may be an idea so you can find exactly HOW the bank came to lend money to YM by way of and Int Only mgge.

 

She needs to sign the SAR. See the link here - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?387306-Full-Subject-Access-Request-under-the-new-GDPR-2018-regime&p=4192184&viewfull=1#post4192184

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thank you.

 

Found a couple of letters in the past. Not found any since they agreed to continue the mortgage in May this year. Not there as they know but not received any communications direct to me. Just the court date docs, were found in mums letter box, by a neighbour looking after the house, 30 days ago.

 

Barclays got the doctors email confirming Dementia which might stop the repossession, then changed their mind and demanded a letter.

 

It should be with them Monday, with days to go before the court date, for their Panel to reconsider.

 

Thank you.

It would be good to understand how they sold her a 'win win for them', Int Only mgge!

(but don't trust they would incriminate themselves, they are a bank, after-all!)

Or at least how many victims there are or whether there is a class action, as in Spain

(EU Courts upheld miss selling, so UK should follow Spain, surely)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SAR may well disclose info that is useful in several ways.

 

Have you sent it off yet ?

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's your prerogative, to not send the SAR. However, many cases here over years have been helped significantly by info disclosed by the bank in this way.

 

You may also now need to seek advice from the Court of Protection about getting formal recognition as YM's Representative. Remember that the bank will see the confirmation of Dementia not only as a reason to consider YM's condition but ALSO to make sure you or anyone else has proper authority to act and represent.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...