Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ecobabe

  1. Hi,


    gosh I haven't posted in this forum for years.

    I originally joined in 2006 and was very active.

    The forum was a great help to me when I had a change of circumstances.

    It is so good that it is still going.


    I digress.....


    One of my old posts was around my mortgage.


    At the time (2007) I didn't pursue the issue, and pretty much forgot about it.

    insomnia makes the mind do strange things and it sprang back into my mind .


    To recap I re-mortgaged my house in June 2006, the lawyer was very slow processing things and I didn't appear to sign any docs.

    I am not experienced in these matters so I wouldn't have known if that was correct or not.


    However in Oct 2007 (over 1 year later) I received a letter from my mortgage company's lawyer asking me to sign the Standard Security document

    - with some story about why it was being re-issued.


    I got advice from the forum.

    I contacted the Land Registry who said that the standard security had been cancelled in July 2006.

    I never signed the document.

    Months later I re-contacted the Land Registry who said that a signed Standard Security had been returned in 2008.


    I never signed this.

    I am going to recontact them and ask for a copy and I am also going to do a DPA form to my lender to request info.


    At the time I was too caught up in everything else that was going on in my life, however my situation has changed now and I am curious about what this actually means.


    Does anyone know what it would mean if I have never signed a Standard Security document for my house or indeed if the lender has signed this for me as it would seem to point to?


    many thanks in advance



  2. Hi, this is actually my friends daughters issue. I di deal with HR issues in my work but haven't dealt with pregnanacy ones for ages, also think I'm too close to this one to be objective. I'd be thankful for any advice. here goes


    my friends 20 yr old daughter( she's a really nice girl and a hard worker ...just so you know she's not a shirker or trouble maker)6months ago left her job to start a new one, she had trainig for 3 months. Anyway she has unexpectedly gotten pregnant, family devestated etc. her and her partner live together both work but this wasn't planned. anyway she informed her work so that she could attnd clinic. Her boyfriend has just graduated so is currently working in fairly low paid work, so they hhave little money other than for necessities. her job has a sales element to it and she was struggling with this, and finding the targets quite hard to meet but she was doing so and quite stressed. anyway they sem to do a lot of fund raising and there was always a sheet going round to sponser something or other. Her manager had a meeting with them all and 'told' them that she was

    putting a form round with an envelope for some charity and that they should all donate some part of their 'target' money to it, she said £5 should be put in. My friends daughter said at the time that she was struggling to just pay her bills so she couldn't do this. several additional comments were made to the team reminding them of this. Anyway when the time came she didn't put into the sheet, a meeting was called by her manager and she was very annoyed that the target hadn't been met forr the sheet...she singled this young woman out and said it had been agreed that they would all contribute but since she hadn't done it they didn't reach whatever target she needed, she kept on and eventually the girl said to her that she never agreed to it and had told her at the start that she couldn't afford it. the manager then said 'well thanks to ***** meaness we can't do this' the girl was so embaressed that she said,' I never agreed to this and i told you that my circumstances won't allow me to donate money, I can't even afford to pay all my bills so I certainly can't donate to this. Thanks for humiliating me in front of all my colleagues and making them all aware off my personal problems' she was so embarassed and upset (bearing in mind her family etc were all still in shock so she was dealing with that as well) that she was crying. She spent a couple of days feeling

    very upset, she then started having cramps and bleeding and had o go home. she did go back but the manager brought this up several more times and the girl ended up going off sick and getting a GP line. She was called into ameeting at work and she told them about it this and that the stress this manager had caused her made her ill and jeopordised her pregnanacy, they said well she's not your manager anymore and we don't think she would have ddone this, you look fine to us so you can just start back at work today (bearing mind she had put a GP line in with pregnancy complications on it and it still had 2 weeks to run). They then said well you're not getting paid if you don't come back now. Now given that she hadn't worked there very long this may well be her entitlement but given the circumstances and that she was pregnant it seems very harsh. that was about a week ago. today she received no money from them even though she had money due from before she went off sick and her bonus for reaching targets. Now I know that she has only been there 6 months and technically couldn't go to a tribunal but my feelings are that they have treated her so badly, even tho vicarously, that I think she has grounds for constructive dismissal on grounds of her pregnancy.


    does anyone have any suggestions, she can't even get anyone to answer her calls about her salary today, but they are open, as a result she has not a penny to her name.

  3. Hi, agree about the work issue while you are off, you may not be happy about it but thats your employers problem, just as if you took ill unexpectedly they would need to deal with it, and you would have no say in it.....equally you cannot be held accountable for anything that happens as a result of the way your employer deals with your workload while you are off. It is normal procedure for employer to tell suspendee to have no contact with colleagues and customers/clients....it would be in your best interest to observe this. It is far more professional to do so and will reflect well on you if you do; otherwise you could be facing further allegations. From personal experience, staff that I have had dealings with that do not observe this tend to be viewed negatively and as 'trouble makers'. Apart from this, it is quite complicated. If your employer has a 'no alcohol' policy then you would need to show that 1/ it was outwith work time 2/ that you were not aware that this was a no-no, and in order to do this illustrate times whenit had been allowed before 3/ employers do need to treat all employees fairly, equally and justly, so if your employer has been aware of other instances of staff drinking after hours on the premises and have taken no action then there would be an issue. However the xmas party one probably won't wash, unless you were drinking at a special occassion. You will be told tomorrow either that there are no grounds for for an investigation or that there will be an investigation. You should take a union rep or other person in with you. You should be given access to policies particularly the disciplinary policy and the alcohol one. If tomorrow is anything other than that then you need to make sure that you object as you should be sent out a copy of the disciplinary investigation report before the meeting with a list of allegations and the findings with evidence. Again this will all be detailed in your companies disciplinary policy,

  4. well it looks like tenancy should be ok (thanks citizenkane). housing officers visted and they had spoken to neighbours who confirmed he stayed there with his mum for years, and he had all his mail. so they seemed to be fine with it; they said he couldn't buy it, but at the moment thats the last thing he's thinking about. with abit of luck that should be that. now he just needs to worry about the benefits

  5. thanks for that. The house has a Scottish Secure Tenancy agreement, I saw it last night when I went to visit. A rep from housing is going to visit him at home this morning, so he has looked out all his letters etc Yesteray they told him that the problrm was that his mum signed a form 4 months ago saying no one else stayed there; i have told him that this does not affect his rights as he has right in law to succed and tenanacy agreemnet can only enhance his rights, not reduce them (so i've been told by housing officer). he's about to have a serious meltdown, he is really worried as he has a very responsible job with another council and the thought of them being contacted and benefit fraud being mentioned is sending him into a spin

  6. thanks. Ray can I ask a question, I don't understand part of it. My partners mum was the named person on the tenancy and the council tax. his name does not appear on it. what has come to light is that he paid his own poll tax while resident at the house and only recently threw out a really old bill from poll tax with his name and that address on it, but when it changed to council tax it appears that his mum didn't declare him as living there when she completed the form and claimed full housing benefit. so in effect he is not listed anywhere for council tax from poll tax was thrown out til now. he has always listed his address as his mums since he went there, his bank statements , credit cards, mobile phone bills, car log book from DVLA and work all have his mums address as his home; so he has never tried to pretend that he wasn't there. His mum was really hard working woman who was widowed young and raised 3 children and worked to do so; thats what makes it really difficult because it just doesnt fit her. we think she maybe did it initially for some unknown reason and then got deeper and deeper and couldnt find a way to finish it. But the end result is the pickle he finds himself in. As I said he always was generous and never tried to shirt his share, as far as he was aware he gave her £350 per month as his share of council tax and rent, he than paid half gas , electric and most of phone bill, paid for the shopping and did lots of household chores(as he should have done). he also works for a nearby local authority and they share information so as I said he was never party to it. so where would he fit into the 'heirarchy' and what would his liability. thanks so much; its hard enough dealing with the bereavement without this on top. to boot the housing association are being absolutely beastly to him I have a friend who is a housing officer at the same association; she states that the tenancy is clear cut, he can prove he has been resident there and that means that he can succeed the tenancy- even tho he is not on tenancy agreement. so we are trying to get thru this as well. thanks for ur help

  7. thank you erika. He has a meeting with housing tomorrow re his request for succession of tenancy, he emailed them on sunday night to tell them of his mums death and his intention to succeed the tenancy. they were not particularly pleasant when he spke to them as well. at the mo i'm working on him to be tough as he could probably be easily bullied into giving up house; it says on the housing associations website and I know its part of scottish law that to succeed he needs to have resided there for 6 months as his sole residence; since he has been there for more than 10 years and all his mail is delivered there as he never tried to pretend that he didnt stay there, he should be able to prove this. You said he could be liable to repay the council tax; even though he understood that his mum paid this? he gave his mum £350 per month and on top of this paid half the gas and electric bills and all of the phone bill, bought his own food. it could amount to a fortune over the years in council tax.

  8. Hi, looking for some advice about a situation my partner finds himself in. years ago when my partner split from his wife he moved back to his family home with his mum who was widowed and lived alone. he has stayed there since as it suited him and his mum. he has always paid rent to her and paid half of all the bills and bought his own shopping. he didn't spend a lot of time there except for sleeping, as he works full time in a good job and has lots of interests and spends time with me;he doesn't have any kids. anyway last week his mum died very suddenly in her sleep, she hadn't been ill but took heart attack in her sleep. apart from dealing with the shock of it, he realised he could become homeless as house which his mum lived in for ~40yrs was a council house. anyway we found out that he could most probably succeed the tenancy as he lived there as his sole residence for long time, so he submitted letter to housing stating his intention to do so and req d/d forms etc so that he can pay the rent. during clearout of house he has discovered that his mum has claimed full housing benefit and council tax benefit through all years he stayed there, >10yrs !! he is now ill in case he is implicated in this in some way; he has a good job working for a council and worried that it will affect him. I have told him that it shouldn't affect him as he didnt do it. Apparently she recently declared to benefits officer that no one else stayed in house. does anyone have any advice? he's a very shy decent person (as was his mother ) and he is really worried about the situation. he's torn between not dumping it on his mum whos no longer around & just giving up the tenancy and keeping tenancy on and being implicated somehow.

  9. Hi having dealt with most of my debt issues with the support of this forum, i am helping a friend at the moment who is paralysed by the whole thing. She had a next account fell into arrears due to having her hours cut at work, she wrote to them and offered to pay £10 per month for next 6 months until she was in full employment again. they ignored this and carried on with letters, then they wrote to say that her offer was unacceptable. We sent CCa request away and to date they had not complied and its now 7 weeks, they did send her a statemnet crediting the £1 payment to her account so we know that they got request. anyway we sent another letter from this forum last week reminding them of default. Today a letter arrived with a completely blank agreement, its a proforma with no personal details at all. they state that under s 78 of CCA a true copy need not be an exact copy as long as it contains every material provision of the agreemnet, so it doesn't need to have non statutory info, ie signature boxes. also that they do not need to supply a signed copy of the agreemnet due to section 3(2) 0f Consumer Credit (cancellation notices & copies of documents)regulations.


    now i know that they can get round supplying agreement with copy signatures due to other legislation, but can they simply supply a blank proforma agreement? friend is sure she didn't ever sign agreemnet and has had account since ~ 2004. Would a DPSAR force them to produce docs. as i say we don't think they've got one, so not particulary worroed by their threat other than they are continuing with entering default on her credit file. when I tackled next in 2006 for myself they were not nearly so aggressive. any thought?

  10. hi there. my son has 2 PCN from glasgow city council. I have read thru posts but still not entirely sure about something. HIs notices were for his pay & display notice being 15 mins out. his lectures over ran at uni!! both of tickets state 'Date of Notice' on top part and payment slip, is this the same as 'Date of Issue'? also one of tickets is unreadable due to ticket being out of alignment, ie the details the parking warden entered have been printed over the top of the ticket, so youcan't make out the parking contravention or the time, or amount. ta much

  11. thanks for advice. Its got stranger now. i never signed the standard security and sent off to the land register of scotland to find out if there was a security on my property. In response i was sent document stating that no, the standard security had been cancelled in july 2006 and no security was registered. I never signed the form. I recently found out that the company registered a standard security against my property in Oct 2008......despite me not signing it.! I have contacted land register for scotland to find out if I can see the signed document. Surely a mortage company wouldn't forge something like this?

  12. Thanks tweeney. it's the standard security for my mortgage. the right amount, my name and house address. When I think about it, I never signed one of these, in fact I remember at the time thinking that I didn't seem to sign anything. The solicitor was really awful, I'm not just saying that. I had to chase her the whole way and it was only when I contacted the Law Society about the length of time it was taking that she moved herself. I don't think that "the Standard Security wasn't returned to them by the Registers of Scotland", I think that she never got me to sign it in the first place and never sent it to them. Surely she would be able to sort it out with Register if the former was case. The actual document looks like these forms you mention. What does this mean if she hasn't actually got me to sign this last year, and they don't have it? I've read about but I'm no clearer about implications. thanks again for answering.

  13. hi,

    I posted this in the mortgage section, but no one has answered so far, maybe because it's in scotland. I wondered if anyone knows anything about the Standard Security for mortgages in Scotland? reason I ask is that I remortgaged my house in June 2006 with differnt lender, the solicitors recommended by mortgage providers were numpties and it took 3 months to complete despite the mortgage being approved within coupledays. Anyway yesterday I received a letter from same lawyer (16 months later) saying that "the Standard Security has been returned to us by the Registers of Scotland, unfortunately we didn't receieve this, please sign the enclosed Security and return in enclosed stamped addressed envelope" there is a legal document enclosed, which I assume is this Security. So my question is, what is this and what does it mean? why a year after completion am i being sent this. I can't help thinking that something dodgy is happening. the lawyer worked for mortgage company as well. any help would be great, I know i could phone this solicitor but i suspect i would only get half a story.

  14. like it says on tin!!! i remortgaged last year(june 2006) with different company (GMAC!!!) conveyancing lawyer was numpty and it ook 3 months to complete. anyway got a letter from her this morning saying that they don't have the Standard Security (well really she says that the Registers of Scotland sent it but they didn't get it) enclosed is a Security for me to sign and return. what does this mean? i can't imagine the Register for Scotland sending something that sounds important thru ordinary mail. any ideas

  15. they list three account (none of which I recognise) and state that the defender obtained loan facilities from pursuers and state account number , then say that at 19 jan. 1999 had drawn on said account to extent of £3697.91 three differnet accounts with three different amounts but totalling ~£11, 000, then adding compounded interest on from 1999. they also say that they have called on defender for payment of the sums but defender refuses to pay :confused: !! I've never been asked to pay anything.

  16. I don't understand any of it. But I particularly don't understand how it can go from no contact at all to a writ for court!! surely there must be a procedure such as we go through to reclaim charges ie letter of warning, second letter and then court?

  • Create New...