If you can prove you are financially better off, the judge will not favour Kensington. It is only if affordability is an issue that the judge will have to seriously consider awarding possession to them. Do an I&E and work out what you can comfortably afford, whilst leaving yourself with a little on the side for emergencies. Present your I&E in court to back up what you say. You must be able to maintain the offer you make, so make it realistic. As Ell said, they can't increase your monthly payments in a court order - however, if you breached the court order, they can decide either to execute the warrant or tell you that you need to make another payment plan. Good luck.

No problem - just wanted you to be on the right foot with the judge, and they don't like when defendants blame everyone else but themselves. You want the judge to look at the fact that the pre-action protocol wasn't followed, that the mortgagee hasn't followed MCOB (guidance, not written in stone), and that as a result of that, the possession proceedings are not 'the last resort', which is what the Mortgage Code (Conduct) of Business states it should be. You can tell the judge that you fully accept your part in the failure to pay, but you have tried to resolve the issue and have come up against a brick wall with no responses to your attempts to resolve the issue. Labour on the fact that whilst you have had no agreement, you have continued to pay what you offered as you are committed to reducing the arrears (judges like that). An adjournment for them to comply with the pre-action protocol could be as little as 14 days, or as long as three months, depending on what they have to do to satisfy the court that the protocol has been followed. Normally it would be around 14 days. If you make an offer and it is refused, then you cannot ask the judge to not award costs, as due to the refusal the mortgagee is entitled to take further court action. If they continue to ignore your offers and do not respond, then they have not complied with the pre-action protocol, and that is when you ask the judge to consider making an order not to allow them their costs. See my previous comments about it for the fuller picture. In certain other types of cases involving monetary issues, the involvement of FOS can stall proceedings - but not when your complaint is about the lack of following pre-action protocols, a judge is more than capable of dealing with that directly, with the ultimate issue for the mortgagee being that the judge can make an order that refuses them their costs. You should include all documentation. Please write a witness/defence statement, and number each paragraph, and number each appendix for letters, or documents, that you refer to within the defence statement - then when you put them together, preferably in a folder, with tabs to make it easier for the judge, ensure that you have included everything that you refer to in the statement. Ideally you should be making three copies of this - one for you, one for the judge and one for the claimant (a copy to their solicitor is the best way). The reason for providing information to all parties is that it prevents delay in the proceedings - the court can copy and send, but whether they do so in time is debatable, so send it yourself. It's called filing and serving - the former is to the court, the latter is to the claimant/solicitor. Possession hearings are very brief - if the matter needs to go to trial because there is contention or dispute as to the amount of arrears, then it will be relisted with a longer time frame than 5 minutes. If you have not reached an agreement with the lender, then you can give your proposal to the court. If you are offering CMI plus something towards the arrears that will clear the arrears within the remaining term of the mortgage, the court will accept that, and will either adjourn on those terms (depends on how high the arrears are), or grant a suspended possession order on those terms (serious, but if you maintain payments nothing else will happen). If you can't offer the full CMI, and are reliant on the payment being IO, then the court will find itself in an awkward position as it means affordability is an issue, which they are duty bound to look at. Depending on the judge an outright order may follow, though in my experience most of them will adjourn whilst you continue paying what you can, whilst directing the mortgagee to look again at the IO option (but they can't order them to). Yes, your plan re Q27 is fine (see my comment about that above). Keep it simple - don't try to overcomplicate things, don't fill your statement with things that aren't factual (i.e. don't editorialise it - it's a statement, not a story). You're welcome - I am hoping your mortgagee will agree to IO - seems reasonable to at least allow you a chance to get straight.

How much is the rent each week/month, however you pay it - exactly? How much are the arrears (exactly)? How much were the arrears when the PO was granted?

Surely you mean £20186? If yes, the Norgan compliant figure is £74.49 per month - so there's your answer to why your initial offer was rejected. You cannot offer less than £74.49 a month. What was the original loan term? As per above, the reason for the refusal to accept your offer is that it doesn't meet the minumum amount you'd need to pay to clear the loan by the end of the term. Plus, because there has been an SPO for the last six years, it is calling into question the affordability of the mortgage. Okay, time for a reality check - you've missed more than 'a few payments here and there', your arrears indicate that you are almost 32 months behind - that's almost three years of non-payment of your monthly amount. (I suggest you check to see whether additional charges have been added to the arrears figure as the court will not accept anything but missed payments being included in 'arrears' - someone else will direct you on how to do this, it's not an area of interest of mine.) It is always in your interests to make the payments you offer - the court likes that. What they don't like is when someone says they've made offers and no one has agreed them, so they don't bother to pay at all. Again, affordability appears to be a very clear issue with the conduct of your mortgage account since the outset, so maybe you bit off more than you could chew? It might be worthwhile considering whether all the stress involved in trying to hold onto the property is worth it...is there equity in the property? Panicking won't save you, so it's pointless - though entirely understandable. I am extremely concerned that you simply cannot afford this mortgage - you were unable to keep to the court order of CMI plus £50, and your arrears are almost three years worth of missed payments - I know you have said that your finances have changed, but have they really? Be honest with yourself - as making an offer of £840 per month and then failing to keep to it is really going to fail to impress a judge if you have to return to court for another stay in the future. My thought is that a judge will look at the offer, look at the history and ask himself 'why is this person going to stick to an offer four times greater than the original order?' and come up wanting unless there has been a substantial financial change...

Firstly, to be abundantly clear, I spend a good deal of my week defending possession proceedings, so this is not me being 'mean' - you need to get rid of the thought that the mortgagee's solicitors are 'in the wrong' - they are instructed by their client to possess the property you gave as security for the mortgage because you failed to make payment. Your failure, not theirs. The law gives you protection, but it doesn't make the failure to pay the mortgage right, or the claim to possess 'wrong'. The court has no jurisdiction over the content of your mortgage contract, so they can't change the terms and conditions unless they are unfair and are, as such, struck out, by the court. This is not going to be the case with a request to move from repayment to interest only - that is a mortgage code of conduct issue, but since possession is supposed to be a last resort, it will not endear the mortgagee to the judge if they have not considered the option of interest only for a period of time. The judge cannot compel them to accept it. He can, however, choose to make an order that reflects it - but he is effectively then just causing the mortgagee an issue and they will appeal his decision (and likely win, even though it might have bought you a little bit of extra time). You can ask the judge for an adjournment based on the mortgagee not following the protocol - it will result in one quite probably, in order for them to comply with the protocol. Complying with it does not mean they have to agree with whatever you are offering or demanding - please be aware of that. You have to be specific and ask for it in the terms I stated. The judge (particularly if it's a deputy) may not realise he has the jurisdiction to do so - it has to be a serious breach in order for the judge to decide that a costs sanction should be applied, so complete lack of following the protocol would be needed. You will need to point out that had they followed the protocol, the parties would not be in court, therefore the costs of such proceedings could have been avoided. No, it's not the same thing. But as I reiterated above, the judge cannot interfere in the terms of the contract unless they are unfair. It is up to the mortgagee to agree to IO instead of repayment - the court cannot force them to, but MCOB does state that possession should be a last resort, and that interest only for a period should be considered. So you need to get agreement from the mortgagee - but there is no harm if they refuse, in pointing that out to the judge. Be careful about stating that you cannot afford your mortgage - if the judge finds that affordability is an issue, he'll have to award possession to the other side. Your strongest way forward is to get an agreement from the mortgagee for an IO period, and if that hasn't happened before the court case, to ask the judge to adjourn as they haven't complied with the pre-action protocol nor given due consideration to your request for IO under the MCOB - mentioning (again) that repossession is supposed to be a last resort. You're the one in difficulty, so you're the one that should be approaching them to resolve it. But you can't resolve it without their assistance and agreement, or rejection, to your proposals, so they need to respond to you and perhaps come back with what they're willing to accept. They're not doing that, which is why they are failing the protocol. Nope. I don't know why so many people think this is the case (probably reading advice from people who've never been inside a court except for their own cases and have misunderstood). The court is not bound by any decision FOS makes, so they have no reason to wait for their decision on an issue that relates to court pre-action protocol, when they can decide on it themselves - i.e. adjourn, give the claimant directions to comply to the protocol, and then bring the case back to court. If you have a lot of documentation you must provide it to the judge, and to the claimant, before the hearing - if it's just a page of income and expenditure and a one or two page defence statement, then on the day will be fine. Bundles of paperwork presented on the day will not get read by the judge. Possession proceedings are five minute hearings. The claimant has a right to respond to your defence, and it is up to you to include the documents are relying on, you can't say 'you should have it'. You're welcome. You need to get your paperwork completed and in to court - preferably by Friday. Don't forget to send a copy to the claimant.

The money judgment is for the amount outstanding at the time the possession order is made - it's the least amount that the mortgagee will be entitled to, thereafter they are entitled (by contract) to add any further charges that they incur in the possession of the property and up to and including the sale. It can cost as much as 40k (or more!) on top of a mortgage to repossess, which is why, if there is some equity, mortgagors should seek, as far as they can, to sell the property themselves and ask the courts for permission to do this, citing the fact that properties that are occupied sell for more than those that have been repossessed. Where there is equity in the property (at least 50k) a judge can be persuaded by this argument, so long as the sale doesn't take longer than say 6 months, even when no payments or low payments are being made towards the mortgage. Sillygirl's explanation about the 'secured' issue isn't correct - a money judgment is a money judgment, it has no bearing on whether the loan is secured or not (all mortgages are secure) - and rent is never a 'loan'; a money judgment is simply a court order ratifying in stone that the defendant owes the claimant a specified sum on that specified date. Money judgments are given in possession cases involving rent - both social and private rentals, when a suspended or outright possession order is granted.

Outright possession (or even suspended PO) is usually accompanied by a money judgment. OP will find that information on the original order from the court.

If you want to keep your home, you are going about it the wrong way. Stop making offers to pay and then not paying - the court dislike this intensely. At the VERY least you should be making the current monthly instalment (CMI), so that the arrears do not increase. Are you saying the arrears are £20,018.46, or is that the full outstanding amount of the mortgage/loan? If the latter, how much are the actual arrears? Oh...and don't panic. If you can afford an amount to clear the arrears (whatever they are) in the remaining term of the loan, it would be a rare thing for a judge to grant an outright possession order. That said, you state that Eversheds are going for a warrant, which indicates there is already a possession order on the property. If that is the case, when was it granted, and on what terms did the judge suspend it. That is, how much were you supposed to pay towards the arrears? Please confine yourself to answering the specific questions as briefly as possible - we'll get there a lot quicker if there's no waffling.

What a horrendous set of circumstances. What they did was perform an illegal eviction and you should have held out for full compensation and damages for such, which would have included payments for the period of time you were not able to have access to your home (even if you were away, it should still have been available for you), as well as any additional payments you made to live elsewhere. It is incredibly unfortunate that you felt desperate enough to accept their puny offering of payment for your belongings, you were definitely due far more than that! If they want to take you to court, I would suggest you tell them to go right ahead and get on with it, and then you can make a counterclaim alongside your defence, detailing precisely what happened. Clearly money is tight, but I would suggest you try to get enough money together to see a solicitor with all the details as they will then be best placed to calculate your losses and damages. If you really cannot afford a solicitor, I strongly suggest that you see your local CAB, or your local MP, or law centre, any of which can refer you to the Pro Bono Unit for the expert assistance of a barrister (free of charge to you if you meet their criteria). You need a lawyer.

1) Yes, the mortgagee will pay it off, in order to protect their own security. They should capitalise it, but they are not obliged to and can simply proceed to court for possession on the basis of you having an amount outstanding that shouldn't be. That is a discussion you should be having with them now, before they are approached by someone else...as that allows you to ask them to pay and capitalise. 2) Only the amount in dispute would be at issue, the remainder would still be subject to the mortgagee being asked to pay it off.

Excellent, if you have made offers and actually made the payments, this will look good for you if it goes to court. The court will be very interested in the fact that they are failing to come to an agreement with you, or to reject your offer within the time frames set down in the pre-action protocol (10 days - if I recall correctly) and as a result of their own inaction, their court proceedings are a bit previous. If it does go to court and the offer you made is accepted by the court then you should ask the judge to consider not allowing the mortgagee their costs in the case as there would have been no need for proceedings if they had followed the pre-action protocol and agreed to the sum offered. That said, the court has no jurisdiction over the terms of a mortgage, so they cannot change it to interest only, or restructure the monthly payment amount - that is for loans governed under the CCA 1974. All the court can do is order that you pay the CMI plus an amount towards the arrears which will clear them before the end of the term of the mortgage. But possession is supposed to be a last resort, so you should be writing to the mortgagee, pointing this out to them, and pointing out that you are asking them to consider interest only for a specified period, after which you hope to resume full payment. You should also ask them to capitalise the arrears during the IO period, to prevent you falling further into arrears during that time. The more you can show that you tried to resolve this, the better it will go for you in court - though if you cannot afford the full CMI and the mortgagee refuse IO, then the court may find against you, irrespective of their lack of following protocol.

It means that the order that was previously granted on your property has got 'stale' - in the sense that it is more than six years old. Possession Orders don't fade away, they just go stale and need to be 'refreshed', which is what your mortgagee is doing by applying to the court. If you are still in arrears, then the likelihood is that the court will agree to refresh it, if you are not, or have been out of arrears for a substantial period of time and have now fallen back into arrears, the court may dismiss the application and tell the mortgagee to start the process from the beginning. The likelihood is that the court will refresh it, and if you have not made an agreement to pay, then an eviction notice will be forthcoming at some point. You can respond to the court paperwork when you receive it and file a defence.

In all the 'offerings' you have made, have you actually made any payments?

I am afraid that you will not be able to stay the possession order any longer. The maximum allowable time for possession is 42 days from the date of the order...that actually takes you to Monday and you have until Wednesday, so you are over the 42 days already. There doesn't need to be a hearing for accelerated proceedings - it's a paper exercise, and so long as all criteria met, possession will be granted. The plus side is that it's not a fault based possession, so the local authority will have to assist you in finding some temporary accommodation until your new place is ready (in fact, even with a fault possession they have to do this for a specified period). The only thing that could lead to a different outcome is if you paid a deposit and it was not protected in one of the government schemes. Was this the case?

On what date (exactly) was the possession order granted? The date of the judgment should be on the actual information that came from the court - i.e. the date the judge made the judgment.

How many days/nights did your partner stay out of the six month period you have been in the property? 1. How do you know the LL is not acting in his/her capacity as a parent in advising their child re how to split the bills? There is nothing wrong in the LL having an input - and certainly nothing wrong in the parent of a child explaining how to work such things out. 2. Contribution would almost certainly be based on the time the additional person spent in the property. 3.A period from midnight to midnight - a day is a 24 hour period, i.e. not a series of hours making up 24 hours.

Possession Orders aren't 'voided'. OP - if you repay the loan in full then there will be no charge for the secured loan on your property, therefore no possession order can be executed. In order to get the loan company to accept your offer, you first need to make it to them and inform them that what you are offering is in full and final settlement. They do not have to accept it if it falls short of the amount they believe they are owed.

I am saying that with any court case there is always a side that loses. If you claim for non-compliance, the fees are higher, there is a very good chance that even if you win at first instance that there will be an appeal, in which case you WILL need a lawyer and costs will begin to rack up. Sure, someone needs to claim and take it through the appeal courts, but someone with money to pay the fees when things start going wrong or they lose. I doubt that any lawyers will give pro bono assistance on a case like this (though some might) - with the cuts to legal aid, there are far more deserving issues to spend our time on. My view is that your LBA will result in the LL paying you the deposit back in full with no deductions, as that is his only logical course of action. You will have six years to claim for non-compliance, so if you want to make a point, you can wait until you have some money behind you to pay those legal fees. If it doesn't result in him paying up, then you can go to the small claims court for the return of your deposit - cheaper than fast track, no exposure to huge costs, and will definitely result in a win. Though to be honest, winning doesn't mean you'll get your money - that may require enforcement action.

It's one court fee - two claimants. I would not suggest attempting to claim for non-compliance - there are no precedents as yet and it seems most district judges are reluctant to rule on it, though they will happily rule on returning an unprotected deposit. Look to your contents insurance to see if you have legal cover - they may assist with this type of claim. The only sure-fire way I know of reducing legal fees is not to get involved in litigation that is unnecessary.

You also can't sue by yourself - you have to have the other tenant sue alongside you. And court fees are the least of your worries - it's the cost of the lawyer that'll hit you hardest.

Doesn't sound like the full story. Presumably you haven't moved - as if you had, the loan would have been repaid, so therefore you are attempting to claim that all correspondence relating to this, from the lender and from the court, have gone astray until the bailiffs sent the eviction notice? You'll probably see how inconceivable that is when you count up just how many items of post that would have amounted to. In any case, it is unlikely the lender gained possession for an outstanding amount of £470 - nor for an outstanding amount of that plus the solicitors fees - so you'll need to check what the judgment for possession states regarding the money judgment in order to find out precisely how much they have an MJ for - it is that amount that will need to be paid. You can challenge both the possession order and the money judgment on the basis that you did not receive any paperwork, but you do that by applying to have the original judgment set aside (also on N244), and the judge, if he decides in your favour, will then proceed as if that order had not been made, and will make an order based on the facts on the day of the new hearing. It is in your benefit to pay the outstanding loan payment. I see you posted whilst I was typing my post. You then need to make a stay application - given the circumstances, it is quite likely your expected final payment isn't actually the full amount owed. If there are unreasonable charges on the account you can reclaim those separately.

The above statement is illogical. How can they be making 'profits' from the charges? The OP isn't even paying the mortgage, let alone the charges. The account is just in deficit. OP, you're spending an awful lot of time saying 'I want to make an offer', but you haven't actually made one. That will not look good in court - nor will 15 months of non-payment, irrespective of any charges. Make an actual offer, in writing and then start making payment according to that offer. If it goes to court you'll be in a position to tell the judge that even though you failed to make payment for such a long period of time, you are now able to do so and have indeed started to do so. It'll take at least a couple of months to get into court, so you should be able to show two, maybe even three payments IF you start paying now. All this delay shows one thing: lack of affordability. Charges can be reclaimed as and when, your priority is to make an offer and stick to it. Incidentally, when this goes to court, don't labour over paying whoever shouted loudest, there are priority debts and your mortgage is one of those along with any other secured loans and council tax. Anything else is secondary and judges don't take kindly to people saying they prioritised other things above keeping the roof over their heads.

I got a further message saying that you still hadn't got it, before you amended it to the above. Christ.

Oh, it's a mortgage. In which case the two month/8 week thing doesn't even apply! You need to ask the judge to adjourn the hearing with liberty to restore for a fixed period of one year (you ask for the fixed period otherwise the adjournment will stand indefinitely) - this is the best outcome for you as the arrears will be cleared shortly and there is no need for a suspended possession order if one week later the arrears are cleared. If the judge doesn't seem sure, ask him/her to adjourn until after the date you say you can clear the arrears - that way when it next comes into court there won't be any arrears and he can adjourn with liberty to restore at that stage - he may see the sense in just doing the former in the first place in order to save you costs. Do NOT agree to a suspended order - that is not in your best interests and if you clear the arrears it just isn't fair either.

Try reading what I actually wrote instead of inserting additional words, then you'll be less confused.