Jump to content

mungos mum

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About mungos mum

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thanks caro, any help would be much appreciated. The property was valued (by 'independant!' valuers, commisioned by the receivers) at £170k Similar property in the area is on the market at between £100k to £150k I owe roughly £150k Would an injunction by something I would get my solicitor to do or is it something that I could do fairly easily myself? I don't know the first thing about how injunctions work. Our experience of navigating the court system on our own has been quite dismal. Last year we took a receiver to court for blatent non compliance of the data protection act, th
  2. I also meant to say that we had a go at mediation with MX early last year. We (ourselves & our solicitor) had several meetings with someone in MX who was only answerable to the two directors, Dick Pym & Dick Banks. We really thought that we were making progress and the person we were dealing with could see the sense in our proposals, our solicitor was having regular telephone conversations with this person & everything was moving along at quite a pace. All of a sudden things changed & the receivers seemed to take charge, three properties were sold (simultaneous exchange
  3. Hi jut & chillin Well done on the progress you have made, I am so pleased for you. I probably need to get back in the saddle & start fighting again as MX & receivers have now taken all of my properties bar three! I had an attempt at trying to stop the eviction of two of my tenants a few weeks ago. The tenants are a couple who are in their 70's, they've been with me, in the same property for 12 years, they've never missed a rental payment to either me or the receiver, the house is immaculate and the property is in credit. As you can imagine, saying that my tenants are in
  4. I believe that most of us on this site (ourselves included) have not been made bankrupt, the lender has employed the services of LPA receivers to 'manage' the properties on our behalf, we are in law still the legal owners with all the responsibility that goes with ownership including resposibility to pay council tax if property is vacant. We are entitled to a 6 month exemption period but seeing that some of our properties have now been under the control of the receiver and empty of tenants for nearly 3 years, the council have been chasing us and have obtained CCJ's against us for non paymen
  5. The trouble is, our properties have not been repossessed, they are only managed (laughable I know) on our behalf by the receivers and because of this we are still legally responsible for the council tax. MX themselves have investigated this for us (bless'em) along with our solicitor and as the legal owners we are allowed the 6 months exemption, if the property is empty, but after that the bill does come due to us.
  6. Council tax exemption seems to rely on the individual councils. In my experience some councils accept that once a receiver is appointed there is no point in chasing the owner for the council tax, others have been far harder about this and despite meeting with council staff and proving that the properties are in the hands of the receivers they (correctly) insist that the law states unless a property has actually been repossessed (which ours haven't) then we are liable for all council tax payments until such time as the receiver decides to sell. We now have CCJ's against us for non payment o
  7. Hi guys I've eventually had a reply from my MP in response to the letter I wrote asking her to support The Lending Reform Bill being presented by George Eustice M.P. The basis of her response is as follows; 'George Eustice is to be commended for his examination of the wide body of law covering business mortgages, which I know many people believe is in need of reform. He argues, for example, that under the Law of Property Act 1925, it was envisaged that receivers would be able to receive income earned from assets and not receive the proceeds of the sale of such assets. I have p
  8. Hi Ed Thank you for all the info, it certainly makes for interesting reading. As far as contacting M.P's are concerned a few of us have 'hit a brick wall', the only M.P that I know of who is the slightest bit interested in this fiasco is George Eustice, MP for Redruth, Cornwall. He has a 2nd reading of his 'Secured Lending Reform Bill' in the House of Commons on (I think) the 10th of June. I have tried to make contact on several occasions with our local MP asking her to support the bill, she has completely ignored me...I know that I should kick up a fuss but to be honest after 3 years
  9. Hi Guys Does anyone have any idea what the legal standing is regarding the letting of a 'buy to let' to family members, or more to the point where the law stands regarding the repossession of such a property? I know that letting to a family member is a breach of most lenders mortgage contract, but if I were (in theory) to have a family member renting a property from myself, then in law if a lender (or receiver) went for possession of the 'buy to let' property then would the court treat family as though they were living in a property that has a residential mortgage? Sorry if I'm r
  10. Hi Murphy I am so sorry to learn that you have also been affected by these un-fair practices. I agree that at the moment doing a SAR doesn't seem to be a step forward and it will take quite a while for the lender, receiver etc to comply (they hate receiving them) and they will do all they can to wriggle out of providing you with the information, What it will mean in the long term is that eventually you should end up with copies of all communication you have had and they have had with each other, from these muppets. This should include transcripts of any 'phone calls you made to len
  11. For what it's worth, I believe that the 'unfairness' of this should be highlighted. Bradford & Bingley (Mortgage Express) are now a nationalised company and so owned by the British tax payer, their practices of underselling and leaving the account holder with huge shortfalls means that the British public will have to swallow the millions of pounds that will be lost (most of us mortgage express customers will not have the spare cash to pay back these shortfall arrears) and so in short, the Government treasury is actively encouraging this huge loss of money to the tax payer. When it's
  12. Hi chillin I'm sorry to say that we had exactly the same thing happen to us last year. I went with the tenants to CAB & Shelter and they were at a loss as to what to do. When it came to the court hearing the judge was very sympathetic but said she had no option but to allow the eviction process to go ahead as the receiver had been legally appointed by the lender and had served the paperwork correctly. The same as you, the only knowledge I had of this was when the tenant contacted me to find out what was going on. Our tenants (who had been in the property for 10 years paying rent)
  13. Hi cartmell Have you checked directly with Mortgage Express staff at head office that these calls are being directed by them? Even though I loath everything about MX, this does seem rather 'fishy'. We have numerous problems with MX & their recievers but neither have ever called us from a mobile number. I'm sure that there must be a way of stopping these calls, maybe if you were to do a Subject Access Request you would see who has been given your number and why. Mungos mum
  14. Thanks Patrick, that made me giggle. I can't imagine it being left on the forum for long!
  15. Hi peeps We've had exactly same problem as chillin, ICO are 'toothless tigers'. Having had a slap in the face when we took lpa to court for non compliance of SAR & judge not understanding the law then the ICO not wanting to know, it does make you really doubt the fairness of the legal system. Sorry, having a bit of a wallow in self pity at the mo!
×
×
  • Create New...