Jump to content

mungos mum

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mungos mum

  1. Hi chillin Keep your 'chin up' & keep ploughing through the paperwork. I know that it's a bit like trying to wade through treacle but I'm sure that you will soon start to see patterns emerging. I'll send you a pm & let you know how we found bits MM x
  2. according to MX's t&c they state 'The power of attorney you give us in this condition cannot be cancelled while any part of the debt is still owing' Do you think this is right or are they just 'pushing their luck' & hoping that we will accept this as being true?
  3. patrickq you are a star, that's brilliant. Will spend afternoon digging again for info re power of attorney MM x
  4. Hi patrickq Being a 'bear of little brain' I echo chilling's post. Trouble is we have absolutley no legal training at all & find case law quite hard to understand, especially when trying to read it in relation to our particular problem. I realise that this must be quite frustrating for you, as you dig up all this info only for the likes of us coming back back to say "help, please translate" Many thanks MM x
  5. patrickq, you really are a star, thanks for all your help. Do you not get fed up with having to explain the basics to us, the great un-educated? Sent you a pm earlier but I think that maybe gremlins got to the words before they reached you, as looking at the message now it's all over the place. Again, thanks for your support MM x
  6. Hi patrickq In our case &, if I remember correctly chillins case, the lender has made no attempt to re-possess the properties. Instead they have appointed the lpa under the power of attorney clause in the contract and from then on allow (they do have knowledge of the lpa's appalling practices) the receivers to empty the properties of tenants & then sell them out BMV. If by chance any of the properties make a profit when sold, then the lender applies the surplus across the remaining properties in the portfolio. They are doing this under their 'all monies charge' clause. This is why we have not been able to challenge the lender in Court. regarding re-possessions. MM x
  7. Hi Chillinlong Thanks for that, I will certainly check out unilateral notices. Our solicitor is pretty good, he gets us to do all the ground work, thus saving money, and then checks things over for us so we don't end up in the mire. He seems to be one of the good guys. Have you applied this to any of your properties? Will certainly let you know how we get on, not just with this but with everything else thats also going on. Best wishes MM x
  8. Hi patrickq As per your previous post, I've been in touch with land registry to ask how I go about registering that there is a problem or dispute with my properties. They've come back to me saying that in reality the only disputes that can be registered against a property are boundary disputes, any thoughts on this? Thanks MM x
  9. Hi Bombs Away We've been debating very similar questions ourselves, could really do with a crystal ball. Have you put together any proposals, worst case senario & best case senario? Just to see how things look on paper. The thing is if they do not work with you, what will they achieve? sure they'll get £1 mill of their money back but there is (I presume) no way you will ever be able to re-pay the shortfall of the outstanding £1.4 mill. For us it's finding a way of convincing the bank that they are better off working with us & eventually, over time, getting their money back. After all the press love this sort of stuff at the moment don't they? We don't feel that we could ever work along side the lpa, as you know, they are outright crooks & we do not feel we could ever trust them. I'm sure some other caggers will come along soon with their thoughts...in the end you can only do what you feel is best for you. Mungos mum x
  10. Hi Caro We realised it would be the cost for a tradesman....but honestly, a tradesman to change a lightbulb? Bills such as this are being added to our accounts all the time & no-one gives a toss, it really is money for 'old rope'. What makes me really cross is that the receiver stated in a letter that 'he will run our properties in the same manner we ran them'. Yeah right. What makes it worse is that they hide behind a cloak of 'respectability' because they are Chartered surveyors. There is nothing respectable about being a receiver. When we managed the properties, we were quite capable of changing lightbulbs ourselves, in fact the AST states that the tenants should replace lightbulbs themselves. Sorry, I don't mean to rant but they really do take the p**s. I would love to have the money to afford to bring a serious case against the receivers to Court. Trouble is it seems as though it will take a change of law to MAKE them behave in a responsible manner. I can't think of any other organisation who would be allowed to get away with such appalling disregard to common decency. They must be the last of the great un-touchables, in law anyway. Sorry again for the rant Mungos Mum
  11. Hi Peeps Just a quick response (as it's well past my bedtime) to Bombs Away's earlier post. With regard to Court cases involving LPA Receivers... there have been plenty of Court cases against Receivers but very few cases where people have won. The 'Law of Property Act' goes back (I think) to Victorian times & seems to protect the Receivers totally. My understanding is that it will take a change of law (not a cheap nor quick answer) to fight these ****** companies. A little snippet that may make you all want to have a re think re future careers! We have finally received a spreadsheet from the Receiver showing credits & debits for the properties they are 'managing'. On one of our properties, the management company (appointed by the Receivers) have charged to our mortgage account £42.00 for replacing a couple of kitchen lightbulbs. I am working in the wrong job! Best wishes MM
  12. Hi citzenB Finally received in the post from the second court the Notice of Issue to say they have served the defendant, all was accepted with a £45 fee, still unsure why one court will accept and another won't, but finally in. Mungos Mum
  13. Hi patrickq1 Even though I posted up about the POA clause in MEx's contract & whether or not it would be seen to be an 'unbalanced' contract, I also wonder how this all sits with MEx appointing lpa receivers on our behalf. We do not have a contract with any of the receivers (except that MEx have POA over our properties & passed this to receivers) & we probably would NOT have agreed to the receivers T&C's had we been involved with their appointments. What I am trying to say is; 1, we do not know what is in receivers contract & so do not know if it is a fair & balanced contract. 2, as we have not signed or agreed to receivers T&C's, does this make it unfair under the unfair contracts regulations? 3; is this a 'catch 22' situation that we cannot get an answer to? We have asked both MEx & the receivers to provide us with proof of the T&C's & copies of the contracts they have under our Subject access requests but they will not supply this data. What do you think? Am I barking up the wrong tree? best wishes Mungos mum
  14. Hi Bombs Away, We found out in the t&c's we agreed to when we signed our mortgage contract with MEx that there is a clause allowing MEx to appoint whoever they choose, whenever they choose, under the power of attorney clause. Below is part of a quote from supersleuth which, in my mind, has thrown serious doubt over the validity of these appointements. 'I must add, that I believe that the granting of the power of attorney, always happens without the borrower really knowing that they are granting the lender such extreme legal powers, which are always used to the extreme detriment of the borrowers. The borrowers are rarely ever aware that the contract contains such a serious power. Given that this power is always used to completely screw over the borrower, and given that this power is hidden in the standard contractual terms, there may be a case to argue that the power of attorney clause is unfair. The standard form terms are subject to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations S.I.1999/2083' Mungos mum x
  15. Hi marley 1 What MEx & THEIR receivers have done is exactly the same as what has happened to the rest of us....it's a total mess. I agree with both Pigland & Meerkat One, there are enough of us now to take further action. With regard to letting your own properties the people who can give you the best advice (I think) is Meerkat & Chillinlong, I'm sure that they will come along soon with some helpful pointers. Keep your 'chin up' & let us know how you get on Best wishes Mungos mum
  16. Hi marley 1 You have come to the right place & will receive lots of help from people on this site, as you've probably already realised there are a lot of us at various stages in this battle. I agree with Diddled, try to do a S.A.R on both WS & MEx, send them the letters needed (you'll find templates on this site), a cheque each for £10 (write on the back that this is ONLY to be used for your SAR & NOT to be applied to your accounts) and send them recorded delivery (staple receipts from post office to the copies of the letters you keep for your records) You may or may not get acknowledgement letters back & possibly some excuses as to why they do not have to comply, come back to this site if this happens & someone will help. They have 40 days to send all your data, they probably won't comply fully. After 30 days have passed send another letter reminding them that they only have 10 days left to comply, they probably still won't comply fully. Maybe on the 40th day, you will receive some data, I will be amazed if they send you everything,copies of e mails, contact between ws & MEx, copies of phone logs etc. I do not know anyone who has received all of their data from either MEx nor any receiver.....I wonder what it is that they don't want us to see! All of this is to to start building a case showing their incompetence. In the meantime try to go through all your paperwork & statements with 'a fine tooth comb' and check there are no errors regarding costs applied to your accounts, dates tally up with receivers being appointed etc. You may well realise that mistakes have been made by both MEx & WS. Hopefully this evidence will show a much larger picture of just how incompetant WS have been in managing your properties & this in turn will give you the leverage you need to get your properties back. Incidentely, when were WS appointed as receivers? Late 2008-early 2009? Best wishes Mungos mum
  17. Hi citzenB I went to the court office again today armed with a bit more information and tried to submit the papers again. The court officer stood firm and said that because the wording stated we were asking for the judge to Order them to comply we needed to pay another £150 on top of the £30. Court officer would not listen to reason or budge, so I have taken the papers to another court, I explained that I was submitting them as a 7 not an 8, they took them and said they would put them to the judge and I would hear in the next few days. mungos mum
  18. Hi gezwee Thanks for the advice and link, will try again this morning to submit the forms. mungos mum
  19. Hi Havinastella This is the wording we used and which the Court office is saying the fee must be £150 on top of the £30 for damages, 1) The Defendant is a Data Controller within the meaning of the Data Protection Act and is responsible for the processing of data of which the Claimant is a Subject. 2) The Claimant has had the following account numbers ("the accounts") with the Defendant; 3) On 11th February 2010 the Claimant sent a Subject Access Request, pursuant to Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to the Defendant. 4) The Defendant has failed to fully comply. 5) By virtue of the Defendant's failure to comply with the Subject Access Request the Claimant has suffered damage. 6) The damage caused is: Extra costs incurred in addition to court costs, due to the Defendant’s failure to comply - this includes the cost of additional correspondence and time spent preparing documents and seeking legal advice, I estimate the cost to be £... (see attached schedule 1). 7) The Claimant seeks an order that the Defendant do comply with the Claimant's Subject Access Request. 8) Under the terms of Section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998, where the Defendant contests that information requested under the Claimant's Subject Access Request is not included within the scope of Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998, the Claimant requests the that the Court inspects that information, and where it finds that the Defendant's opinion is unfounded, that it orders such information be included within the information supplied to the Claimant under the Subject Access Request. 9) Damages and costs within the discretion of the Court. It didn't seem that disimilar to your own N1 form, or are we missing something? mungos mum
  20. Hi citizenB We have been following this thread for awhile and finally summoned the courage to put in our own N1 forms to the court for non compliance to a SAR's request. Our forms were filled in a similar way to havinastella (different wording but similar vein) and duly presented in triplicate to the Court with a £30 fee for each. The Court have returnded the papers with a note saying that we have to pay a further £150 per application as we are asking for an Order, if we were solely asking for money the £30 would be okay, but any application asking for an Order to comply attracts an extra fee of £150. Any idea if this is correct? Any help or advice greatly received. mungos mum
  21. Hi GBGM To find template for SAR; go to 1, main heading for consumer forum 2, consumer forums libraries 3, bank charges template letters 4, data protection is article 4 I'm not sure if I'm allowed to put this on here but I'm sure a site moderator will remove it if I've broken the rules, mobile number for director, David Burgess at Templetons LPA is EDIT Templetons have taken over the running of Stephenson Alexander. Good luck with your SAR's, don't expect initially to receive very much info though, they obstruct all the way down the line, it almost seems as though they cannot let you have your data as they have something to hide.....now I wonder what that could be??? colluding with the lender?, lack of 'due dilegence'? the list goes on & on. They may well ask you what it is you are looking for, that is immaterial as they have to provide all data relating to you or that leads to you, ie; account numbers, property addresses etc. What may be of interest is what they don't send. Come back if we can be of any further help Best wishes Mungos mum x
  22. Hi Patrickq1 Are you refering to section 2.1 of the pre-action protocol? It is interesting that this covers both regulated & un-regulated mortgages but in our cases the lender is not going to court for possession orders, they hand properties to LPA receivers to manage & then eventually sell.
  23. Hi Patrickq1 We have written to both our local mp & Alister Darling, as expected Darling did not even acknowledge my letter and mp came back to say that as buy to lets are unregulated there is nothing he can do (although he was kind enough to agree that the situation is appaling!!). We knew these were unregulated mortgages before we signed up for them. At the moment quite a few of our properties are being sold. We have not been able to get any info from lender as to which properties have been sold, when they were sold, how much they were sold for etc etc. The only reason we know some have sold is that we have either been told by people we know, the local council have informed us that 1 of the properties have beeb sold or we've seen sold boards outside the properties. Having done subject access requests, we have been sent some of our data, basically that concerning the (miss) management of our properties, statements etc, but the things we want to see have not been sent and we are really struggling to get answers. For example neither lender nor receiver will send us copies of instruction between them, we want to see who (for the lender) was able to act under their power of attorny clause & so be able to instruct receivers, we want copies of the deeds, we are trying to get one of the receivers to show us proof that he has insured a property as this is being sold at a very low price due to water damage, receiver will not claim under their insurance (if they do actually have it insured) prefering to sell it cheaply instead. The list goes on & on. There are a few of us who are all 'in the same boat' gathering & sharing info but at the moment we know we are still missing some of the vital information that we need to piece everything together & then move forward with an attack.
  • Create New...