If you have not file your appeal on this matter and you want to appeal I think you should state in your appeal that your application was for unfair relationship under s.140B (2)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act under - CPR 7B (3.1) (5). Make sure you read the CPR 7B and you will know the reason. Although you supposed to have use a different claim form as well. In future, anyone that want to file a claim under CCA should make sure they use proper claim form. CPR 7B 2.1 2.1 A claimant must use the Consumer Credit Act procedure where he makes a claim under a provision of the Act to which paragraph 3 of this practice direction applies.

Hi, Yes, Judge Wakem was very bias. I was unable to attend the hearing because I was abroad but I told the court that I would not be available for hearing between September 2011 and February 2012 but the court ignored my request and scheduled the hearing for January 9 2012. I submitted my argument for the hearing and asked my sister to attend the hearing and she told me that the woman was bias and did not want to listen to her at all. This is her judgment Before District Judge Wakem sitting at Lambeth County Court, Cleaver Street, Kennington, London , Se11 4DZ Upon hearing Counsel for the Defendant and Claimant not attending IT IS ORDERED THAT Claim Dismissed as totally without merit, all the matter being res judicata with the exception of the claims for harassment and the claim that the claimant has been deprived of a fair trial which are dismissed on the basis of Clause of Action estoppal as (Hendenson v Hendson 1843). Claimant to pay Defendant cost's summarily assessed in the sum of 1734.61. I appealed against the decision that Judge Wakem erred in law and breach the principle of procedure fairness and natural justice. The case was referred to the court to be heard again in June 2012 but I couldn't attend so the judgment still stands. I hope to appeal someday or wait for the defendant to pursue the money for the judgment or file a claim that I breach my lease because I've stopped paying for the service charge since 2008. I asked the defendant to provide me a receipt and breakdown of the money it received from my lender because it does not reflect in my service charge account that it received the money but the defendant refused. Furthermore, I just realized that it was Judge Wakem that made an order for the consent order to reinstate my lease that never forfeited in 2008 and I stated in my claim that the order was sham. So she should not have allowed to dealt with my claim. I think she wanted to stop me from pursuing the matter because of the embarrassment it might cause her and the court because the initial judgment was just a judgment entered by the court clerk. I asked the court for the audio on the forfeiture hearing of 2007 and the court said it has destroyed the audio. I attached my statement and grounds. I welcome further suggestion on this matter.

Hi, I am in a similar situation with Barclays. I took a mortgage with two further advances before October 31 2004. Since your further Advance was April 2004,those further advances are not likely to secure on your property and they are not regulated mortgage contract. So they might not be enforceable and you should file a claim for unfair relationship under s.140. I didn't know this until few months ago when I wrote the land registry to provide me details of any charges on my title deeds and the mortgage conditions registered on it because I couldn't visibly see it on the legal charge. Below is the reply from the land registry and it also confirmed that the condition on the charge was 1989 Barclays condition Thank you for your recent Email regarding title number TGLXXXXXx Since the creation of this title there has only been two editions of the register. The first is dated XX XXX 1999, when the title was created. The second is dated 23 January 2006, a copy of which I believe you have. The second edition was created by a change in Land Registry practice and not by any application lodged by another person. Effectively the change in practice resulted in the entry number 5 of the A Register– Property Register– being moved from the top of the page, where it was on the first edition, to the bottom of the page where it is now. In all other aspects the register remains unchanged. If it had not been for that change in practice there would never have been a second edition of the register. You are welcome to apply for the first edition by completing the application form HC1 as mentioned in my colleagues earlier email to you. Condition I would like to know if it is possible to obtain the mortgage condition referred to in the Legal Charge. The date of the mortgage condition stated on page 2 of the Legal Charge dated xx xxxx 1999 you sent not readable. Could you confirm the date of the condition filed under MD524A/01 and how to obtain this document? The short answer to your question is no, Land Registry cannot supply a copy of the mortgage conditions. Clause 1.4 of the mortgage on page 2 says, amongst other things that “……a copy of which has been supplied to the Borrower.” You should have received a copy with the Mortgage back in 1999. Most of the larger lending institutes seek to have their mortgage forms approved by Land Registry in order to speed up the registration process. They lodge with us a blank copy of the mortgage form and conditions they intend to use, we then confirm that the mortgage is satisfactory for Land Registry and provide them with a reference number – the MD number you refer to. If I could get a copy, which I can’t, it would not relate to you personally but would be blank. Your best bet, if you have not got a copy, is to ask your lender to supply one. Thank for your quick response. But do you know the date because that part couldn't show on the document you sent me. "Conditions": Barclays ( Mortgage Conditions England & Wales Edition). Could you confirm the year for me? The date is obscured on the copy we hold too. But after a bit of digging round and using the ref MD524A, I have found the that the Mortgage Conditions were dated 1989. I hope this helps. The land Registry said it would reimburse me any costs incur to obtain the Mortgage conditions. Regarding FOS, I agree with previous posts that using them is a waste of time, moreover, you do not know the information Barclays provided for FOS and Further Advance before October 31 2004 are not regulated contract. If you want to start a court action make sure you get a good lawyer and file your claim under s.140 of CCA. I hope this help

Thanks.

I filed a claim against my landlord for its failure to excise its statutory duties and failure to perform its obligation under the terms of my lease. The landlord violated s.168 and s.155 of the comonhold and leasehold Reform Act 2002 and paragraph 16C of schedule 6 of the Housing Act 1985. The Landlord breach s.2(3) c of the lease and paragraph 4,5,6 of the Third Schedule of the Lease. The District Judge Wakem sitting at Lambeth County Court Ordered in September 2011 as follows IT IS ORDERED THAT Listed for allocation/directions on November 2011 at 11.30 am,time estimate 1hour at Lambeth Court, Court House............. to clarify claim/defence - it appears most if not all the matters pleaded in the claim are res judicata. If the Defendants make an application to strike out the claim prior to the allocation/directions hearing the allocation/direction hearing will be adjourned to be dealt with at the conclusion of the hearing of any strike out application. In October 2011, The court Issued another Order Upon reading an application from the Defendant IT IS ORDERED THAT 1. The hearing of 2 November 2011 be adjourned to be heard with the attached defendant's application(see attached) on January 2012.............. where you should attend. This hearing has been allocated a time estiate of 2 hours .................. and if the defendant application is to fail, allocation and directions shall be given at the conclusion of the hearing. Do you think it is legal for the judge to ask the Defendant to file an application to struck out a claim? Bearing in mind that the Defendant previously filed its defence and did not ask the claim to be struck out. If No, Do you know which of the court rules the judge violated and do you know of any case Law regarding this? I want to file an application to disputes the jurisdiction of the court to hear the Defendant application because I believe the judge was biased and hearing the Defendant Application will deprive me a fair trial and this will leads to the principle of natural justice. Also, I want to dispute the jurisdiction of this court to hear my claim because I do not believe I will obtain a fair trial from the court. The reason for this as follows. In September 2011 I filed a complain against the court because of the way it handled my application on this claim. The court issued a claim number on my application in December 2010, when I wanted to submit my reply to the Defendant statement in January 2011, I was told the claimed number was wrong and was given another number. The court did not send any Allocation Questionnaires ("AQ") but later ordered that I failed to submit one. The order was received the last date indicated in the order that the AQ must be filed in court.When I called the court again quoting the claim number stated in the order, I was told that the claim number stated in the order was wrong. Again I was given another claim number to use to file the AQ. I filed the AQ, few months later I received another letter from the court asking me to provide a copy of the AQ because the court could not locate it. A month later I received another letter asking me to submit all the document on the claim because the court could not locate them. In September 2011 the court Ordered me to submit another AQ, which I did, in the form I indicated that I will not be available for hearing between 18 September 2011 and February 28 2012 but the court scheduled a hearing for November 2011 and January 2012. Thank you for your time.

Swift 1st Limited fined over mortgage arrears failings and will pay an estimated £2.35 million in customer redress FSA/PN/079/2011 08 September 2011 The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has today fined Essex based mortgage lender Swift 1st Limited (Swift) £630,000 for unfair treatment of some customers facing mortgage arrears. The firm has also agreed to carry out a programme to provide redress to customers who were in arrears, and who were charged certain arrears fees and charges that were excessive. Swift will also provide redress to customers who redeemed their mortgages early where it miscalculated the interest on the redemption balance. It is estimated that the total cost of the redress to customers will be approximately £2.35 million. The FSA has identified a number of serious failings by Swift which occurred between June 2007 and July 2009 in relation to its arrears fees and charges, and in its dealings with customers in arrears. These include: Swift applied certain charges to its customers’ accounts that were in arrears which were excessive in that they did not reflect a reasonable estimate of the cost of administering an account in arrears. These were: Arrears management fee: a monthly management fee applied to a customer in arrears; Default notice fee: a default fee applied when a customer’s account fell into arrears; Unpaid mortgage payment fee: applied when a cheque, direct debit or standing order was not honoured by a customer’s bank; and Litigation fees: fees applied to customers’ accounts when Swift started legal proceedings. In addition: Swift applied excessive early repayment charges to the redemption figures of customers who were, or had been, in arrears; Swift failed to send all its customers in arrears certain prescribed documents, providing information on the options available to them; Swift focussed on the collection of arrears without always proactively engaging with customers to establish an appropriate “Arrangement To Pay” based on their individual circumstances; and Swift also failed to have adequate systems and controls in place to deal with early redemptions which resulted in some customers who redeemed their mortgages overpaying. The FSA considers that Swift’s failings are serious as under FSA rules, a firm must consider the interests of its customers and ensure that they are treated fairly. Swift’s failings continued over a significant period of time and impacted about 2,500 customers. As Swift specialised in the sub-prime sector, a number of customers who already had an adverse credit status were put at further risk of financial detriment. Tracey McDermott, acting director of enforcement and financial crime, said: “Firms must ensure they treat their customers fairly. Many of Swift’s customers were already in a vulnerable position, having fallen into arrears on their mortgage payments, and they could ill afford excessive and unfair fees. The FSA will take robust action to ensure not only that firms are fined for such failings but also that they identify and compensate customers who have been disadvantaged. The costs of doing so are often much more than the fine.” Swift reported its failings in relation to early repayment charges and redemption balances to the FSA. Swift also agreed to settle at an early stage and therefore qualified for a 30% reduction in penalty. Were it not for this discount the FSA would have imposed a financial penalty of £900,000. Notes to Editors Read the Final Notice for Swift 1st Limited. Swift is the fifth lender referred to enforcement following the FSA’s thematic project on mortgage arrears handling. Final notices were also given for GMAC-RFC, Kensington Mortgages, Redstone Mortgages Limited and DB Mortgages. In June 2009, the FSA published the results of a review which found continued weaknesses in the way specialist lending firms were handling mortgage arrears and repossessions. In July 2010, the FSA published proposals to establish stronger standards for responsible lending in the mortgage market and to provide extra protection for vulnerable consumers. Consultation on these proposals closed in November 2010. The FSA regulates the financial services industry and has four objectives under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000: maintaining market confidence; securing the appropriate degree of protection for consumers; fighting financial crime; and contributing to the protection and enhancement of the stability of the UK financial system. swift_1st.pdf

Mortgage sold to a new lender is still the same mortgage. You were not involved in the changes. I think what the judge meant was a fresh new mortgage, though the judge asked me if I sought legal advice regarding this issue. I hope to ask for a re-determination hearing but at the moment I have an application before FOS once the FOS makes its final decision I will decide. I also have another question, at the hearing the judge suspended the eviction but the letter from the court stated Notice of Adjourned hearing. It says the hearing has been adjourned to June 28 2011. I called the court to asked for the reason for this Notice and the court said the eviction was suspended and the hearing was adjourned. But I have a letter from the lender solicitor dated before the hearing stated the eviction warrant was withdrawn. Do I have to ask the court to cancel my application or adjourn the hearing until after FOS decision? In my witness statement I raised some other issues regarding the debt and asked the SOP to be set aside. Attached is my witness statement. Thanks

At my application hearing, I told the judge that the arrears on the SPO were previously cleared and that the SPO is no more valid. The judge said as long as the mortgage is still with the same lender the SPO still valid. But my argument was not based on the lender's failure to follow the MCOB rules before the SPO.

I think the rules apply to suspended possession order. Here is my story. I had a Suspended Possession Order on my property in 2007 and a warrant for possession was schedule for May 3 2011. I wrote the Lender (Barclays) that their action was a violation of Mortgage Conduct of Business Rules( MCOB) 13.3, 13.4 and 13.5. I also told them that the possession warrant not according to CCR 26 (Rule 17) 3A. I asked them to provide me details of all the charges applied to my account and that if I did not receive the information as requested I will ask the judge for an order "Putting Barclays to strict Proof". The solicitor replied me with some bogus breakdown via email. (NB: I will soon file a third party complain against this solicitor to the solicitor regulations board for this bogus breakdown) I ignored the breakdown and filed my application notice (N244) and the hearing was scheduled for April 27 2011. At the end of my witness statement I stated " THE CLAIMANT MUST BRING 2 COMPLETED COPIES OF FORM 123 (PROTOCOL CHECKLIST) to the hearing. The solicitor that came for the hearing asked the judge to adjourned the hearing because he did not know much about the case. The judge adjourned the hearing and suspended the eviction asking them to make sure they carefully look into the payment breakdown that I provided. After the hearing I received a letter from the solicitor dated 21st April 2011, which was the same date I filed my application that the eviction has been withdrawn. I think the warrant was quickly withdrawn because I stated that they must bring 2 completed copies of Form N123 but I didn’t receive the letter until after the hearing. Also, I noticed when Barclays received my letter requesting for breakdown, they carefully sorted my account and capitalize the arrears with details of my monthly payment and this was dated April 11 2011 which was the date they promised me they were going to reply my letters but I didn’t receive the statement and my new monthly installment until after the hearing. I also think it is better to deal directly with the lender instead of their solicitor. Below is an extract from my witness statement 1. The Claimant’s claim for possession of the mortgages premises is falsely premised and vexatiously sought. 2. It is falsely premised because: a) The eviction warrant issued by the Claimant on 17th March 2011 is a violation of MCOB 13.4 & CCR 26 Rule 17 (3A). The Claimant letter of March 24, 2011 claimed the arrears of £5313.90 and its solicitor letter of March 22 2011 claimed £7705.48 in arrears. I requested for breakdown of the arrears but the Claimant refused. The Claimant requires under MCOB 13.4 to provide (1) current FSA information sheet on my mortgage arrears; (2) a list of the due payments either missed or only paid in part; (3) the total sum of the payment shortfall; and (4) the charges incurred as a result of the payment shortfall. Exhibit 1 are details of my correspondences requesting for these information ………………etc 3. The claim is vexatiously sought, as the lender has not observed the Civil Justice Council’s pre-action protocol on mortgage repossession. Specifically: “The court takes the view that starting a possession claim is usually a last resort and that such a claim should not normally be started when a settlement is still actively being explored. Discussion between the parties may include options such as: a) extending the term of the mortgage; b) changing the type of a mortgage; c) deferring payment of interest due under the mortgage; d) or capitalising the arrears” I respectfully submit that the Claimant has explored none of these options. I cite Norgan V Cheltenham & Gloucester 1996 as an authority creating precedent from the Court of Appeal that the terms of the mortgage contract can be varied to allow repayment of the genuinely constituted arrears over the remainder of the mortgage term. ...........................etc Hearing The Claimant must bring 2 completed copies of Form N123 (Protocol Checklist)

Site team could you help me delete the attachment on this thread dated 29 March 2011? I already deleted them from my folder. Thanks

Updated the attachment

I think you should dispute the payment with your mortgage company. Your mortgage company is not suppose to pay the money unless it has been determined by the leasehold valuation tribunal that you are liable to pay the cost. You should ask your mortgage company for a determination under section 155 (27A) of Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. If your landlord want the money, he should go to leasehold valuation to determine your liability to pay. If you did not receive any demand from your landlord regarding the costs, you should use this case LON/OOAD/LSC/2009/0039 for failure to complies with s.152 of the 2002 Act and the court of appeal judgment on Leonora Investment Company Limited vs. Mott Macdonald ltd Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWCA Civ 857 and London Borough of Southwark vs. Jean-Paul LON/00BE/LSC/2009/0082. I hope this help. Below is s.155 of 2002 Act s.155(27A) of Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act, 2002 155 Liability to pay service charges: jurisdiction (1)After section 27 of the 1985 Act insert— “27A Liability to pay service charges: jurisdiction (1)An application may be made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to— (a)the person by whom it is payable, (b)the person to whom it is payable, ©the amount which is payable, (d)the date at or by which it is payable, and (e)the manner in which it is payable. (2)Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3)An application may also be made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to— (a)the person by whom it would be payable, (b)the person to whom it would be payable, ©the amount which would be payable, (d)the date at or by which it would be payable, and (e)the manner in which it would be payable. (4)No application under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which— (a)has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b)has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, ©has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d)has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5)But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. (6)An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a)in a particular manner, or (b)on particular evidence,of any question which may be the subject of an application under subsection (1) or (3). (7)The jurisdiction conferred on a leasehold valuation tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of this section is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter.” I hope this help.

Here are the attachment on this thread. Any advice on this claim?

Hi campari2 Thank you very much for your reply. I deleted the attachment because it seems no one was willing to reply my post. But I really appreciate your effort without the attachment. I have attached the necessary document and I also sent Barclays a letter today asking for statement of Overdue Account since 1999 to March 2011. Copy of this letter is in the attachment call " 2011 eviction proceedings'" this also document all our conversation regarding the eviction and details of my payment since the judgment of 2008. The mortgage statement details all the fees and charges debited into my account. I did not remortgage since I took the mortgage in 1999 but I took some mortgage addition in 2000 and 2004 and I do not know the reason why Barclays kept changing my account. This account changes started before the hearing of 2007. I was once told that my account was in their old mortgage terms not according to their current terms of mortgage. In May 2008 Barclays added the money it paid the council to my account and the monthly installment was based on the total balance. Please look at the interest rate changes in February 2008 and May 2008. Regarding the adjournment you suggested, could you tell me how to adjourn the case? I already lodge a complain with Ombudsman since 2 weeks ago and have applied for the Subject Access request from Barclays. I called Ombudsman today to let them know that I have eviction date for May 3 2011 and they said they will put a note on my file to speed it up but I should seek legal advice. Could you please have a look at the attachment again? Thank you for your time.

I believe I have permission to edit my posts but I was unable to do so. Site team could you pls look into this for me? Thanks

I received a warrant for possession from the court today. The eviction date is May 2 2011. I do not know exactly how much I am in default with Barclays. The application not according to CCR 26(1) Application for warrant of execution Rule 1 (1) A judgment creditor desiring a warrant of execution to be issued shall file a request in that behalf certifying – (a) the amount remaining due under the judgment or order; and (b) where the order made is for payment of a sum of money by instalments – (i) that the whole or part of any instalment due remains unpaid; and (ii) the amount for which the warrant is to be issued. I asked the court how much Barclays stated in the application that I owe and the court do not have the amount. Do you think I should write the court for failing to follow the procedures first or I should just fill form N244? At the moment the property is rented. I wanted to change it to buy to let but I do not have good credit I would like to sell the property because I am no more staying there. Can you tell me what I should ask the judge to do with my application? Thanks

Any comment on this thread? Thanks

Any advice on this claim. Thanks

Please I need your help on a claim that I filed against London Borough of Southwark for a breach of lease, harassment and perjury. I also asked the court to declare its judgment of 2007 null and void because the judgment was based on lies and not valid in law. I attached the Claim form, Defence and Reply. I also attached details of the judgment I asked the court to declare null. Thank you for your time.

Hello, Thank you for reading my thread. Hope you can help. There was a suspended order on my property dated August 2007; the order was later varied in 2008. Attached are both orders and some other documents regarding my mortgage? Few weeks ago Barclay’s solicitor wrote me that it has requested for a possession warrant from the court on 9th March 2011. I would like to know if the order of 2008 is still a suspended Possession order. My mortgage is repayment. The mortgage is about £95,000 and the interest is 1.45% and the property value is about £210, 000 In 2007 Barclays obtained a suspended possession order on my property. I maintained the payment and in 2008 Barclays paid the council for a service charge disputes on my property. Although there was no determination that I was liable for the service charge but the council obtained a default judgment because I did not reply the claim form. The council later used this default judgment to apply for forfeiture on my property. I appeal against the judgment but it was dismissed. Barclays hired a solicitor to apply as 2nd defendant and asked the court for a relief from forfeiture. Later I realized that the judgment was not valid in law. But that is a separate issue. Barclays paid the money and later asked the court to vary the suspended order to secure the money paid to the council on my mortgage. It also wants me to pay about £4,000 solicitor fees. These fees already added into my mortgage account. I told them that I am not liable because the solicitor sent me a letter that she was only acting on behalf of Barclays. Moreover, I asked Barclays not to be involved. The court varied the judgment and asked us to apply for a review if there is any problem in future. Since then Barclays messed up my account and it has been charging me Admin arrears fees of £40 every month and interest on arrears etc. In 2008 Barclays added the debt on my mortgage and my current mortgage is based on the total amount owing and Barclays still want me to be paying the arrears. In 2009 Barclays issued a warrant for possession and asked me to pay certain amount before they can cancel the possession warrant. I paid the money and the possession warrant was cancelled. Last year I received another letter threatening me for possession, at that time my payments was up-to-date. I told the solicitor that I’ve been making my payment and that the account quoted in her letter was different from the account I've been making payment into because Barclays wrote me that my account has been changed. Moreover, Barclays did not apply payments into my account accordingly. Thank you again for your time.