Jump to content

mercyblue

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

mercyblue last won the day on November 11 2016

mercyblue had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

153 Excellent

1 Follower

About mercyblue

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Entirely my point as soon as it gets to the conveyancing stage the buyer isn't going to obtain free title as the 2nd charge isn't going to be paid off and the sale simply collapses. There really wouldn't be much point to securing a charge on a property if you could simply sell it and effectively negate the charge.
  2. It is much simpler than that the 2nd charge holder would just block the sale in the first place as they aint going to get paid.
  3. You have been to an oral examination as to your means (or whatever it is called now) the court official (not a judge) has asked the questions submitted by the creditor. That information is forwarded to the creditor and they decide on any, or none, further enforcement action. It wont been seen by a judge. When I was made to attend one (many years ago) it was actually a benefit because I heard nothing ever after from the creditor as it was clear I didn't have anything and it was pointless spending more money pursuing it.
  4. If the friend has been abroad for 10 years how has the claimant been able to issue a claim considering a mcol claim must be to a uk address?
  5. For what its worth if anybody is interested a mortgage is a deed as opposed to a "simple contract". A deed has a 12 year limitation period against 6 for a simple contract.
  6. You cant issue a claim to a non existent address see cpr 6 (6.6(2)) specifically. As the claim cannot ever have been served the default judgement is erroneous and must be set aside part 13.3 shouldn't apply here. Admittedly that is just my opinion but I'm pretty sure I could make that fly. Secondly once the creditor was aware they had sent a claim to a non existent address meaning that they knew full well the defendant couldn't possibly have received the claim (which nicely blows out any argument using cpr 6.9) why they didn't themselves apply for a set aside. Thirdly someone has sig
  7. A court would have to consider exceptional circumstances which could be a physical or mental condition but that would usually apply to the mortgagor's primary residence which doesn't apply here. I assume this is a buy to let mortgage? I assume then that the tenancy is on a (rolling) 6/12 month tenancy? If both those assumptions are correct the tenant only ever has the security of the notice period. I cant see a court ever increasing that. Did you have any sort of agreement with the council over the adaptations they made? Did they do them in the expectation of the person staying in th
  8. Thanks BazzaS I do remember having that problem before, the link was getting mangled. Cag changes pdf to capitals it must see pdf and change it because I know I used pdf (in lower case) on my last link and it now shows as a PDF hoverlink. http://gala.gre.ac.uk/14119/20/14119_PAWLOWSKI_Sale_of_the_Family_Home_2016.pdf Does the link above work for people please? That's using insert link off here rather than just pasting the link in
  9. The link works now with the pdf in the right case sorry about that.
  10. http://gala.gre.ac.uk/14119/20/14119_PAWLOWSKI_Sale_of_the_Family_Home_2016.pdf For some reason it seems the PDF is capitals on the post when it should be pdf. The link works in the email sent from cag but it doesn't show it as capitals. If I click on the link I posted it uses capitals a university will be using unix which is case sensitive.
  11. Inabind I think perhaps the judge would be referring to barclays bank plc vs Hendricks. That case mentions the 20% in that the bank stood to recover 20% of its debt. But in that case the wife owned a second home in any case. The OP might want to read this http://gala.gre.ac.uk/14119/20/14119_PAWLOWSKI_Sale_of_the_Family_Home_2016.pdf if they are thinking of bankruptcy it is heavy going but you may find it relevant to the situation.
  12. It is going to be quite easy to argue that the original lenders system would be automated that following a missed payment there would be a 1st, 2nd and final reminder before a DN was issued (they probably should be able to provide sample template letters of such.) That (as Andy says) gives a DN time line of June/July 2011. I would suspect that these parasitical firms use software that flags up the account shortly before (according to them) it goes statute barred - allowing them to claim years of juicy section 69 interest. Personally I don't think there is much chance of using an SB
  13. The creditor doesn't need to register the full CO the ICO is sufficient to register their interest. They could but it would just cost money for no gain - so they don't. Lots of people sadly but understandably look at their LR records and think ah they've made a cock up and not "finished off" for want of a better phrase the charging order. However when you think of it dispassionately it does make sense. At the final charge hearing there are two choices 1) A full charging order is granted or 2) the interim order is dismissed. If it's the latter the
×
×
  • Create New...