HELP!!! My house has been repossessed and being sold at a totally unfair price!!!

[GEM782]

My house was recently repossessed by my mortgage lender (fair enough). The problem I am having is the price they are asking for it. First, it was valued at 575k by 2 local agents and 475k by 1 non-local agent. So the mortgage company is asking for 490k (which I do not think is a reasonable price based on the valuations). Secondly, there are further charges on the house (from loans for expansion of property, etc.) which add up to about 220k. So, the outstanding owed (including the mortgage) is roughly 530k.

 

Now, here's the part where I think the mortgage company is being unfair.... Someone I know has offered 550k to the mortgage company for the house a few days before it was put on the market (because it has a lot of potential and could be worth a lot more so he sees it as a good investment). Later he received a call from the mortgage company's estate agents saying that they received an offer of 480k for the house, and that his offer of 550k was too much - they were only looking for 490k from him.

 

Is that fair? If they sell the house for 490k there is going to be a shortfall (which I'll have to pay for). Shouldn't they have to take the highest offer? It doesn't seem right at all to me. Maybe someone could shed some light on the issues for me. I would really appreciate ANY advice. Thanks!

[sillygirl1]

If you can contact the purchases ark him for the info IN WRITING. You can then use it in any claim against the company.

[hagenuk]

Good advice. Have the agent confirm, in writing, that they consider £550k too much and are are prepared to sell him the property for £490k.

[Kai-Boshed]

I think the lender is breaking the law by accepting a lower offer that what has been offered. They are legally obliged to take 'resonable' care to ensure they get a fair price for your property. I would apply for a injuction to stop the sale of the property on the grounds that the sale price is grossly under the market value. You would help your case if you good provide offers in writing with your form to back up your reasoning. Some quick cash sale companies, like mine below, do provide such in writing upon request in 24 hours if required. Please do shop around - the cash offer you get will be a 'below market value' offer, but it may well be more than the offer via the mortgage lender, just one case ive dealt with recently, a property valued by 2 x local E.A at 1.3m (yes million) was repossessed and the mortgage lender accepted an offer of £580k which would have left in well in excess of £200k shortfall. Obviously we got this sorted in the end - but it does show just how little effort they put in to getting a reasonable price on your behalf!!!!

[nuke em]

The lender is totaly at fault here, they most certainly do have a "duty of care" to their borrower to obtain the best market price. The offer needs to be in writing to the agent concerned, This person could also publish his own "public notice" stating the offer to be made. The lender will then be in a very sticky situation if they accept £490k

[Killerschick]

The mortgage company does have a duty of care to act in the best interest of the customer when selling a property in possession. Bearing this in mind they may accept a lower offer than an owner in occupation because they are trying to minimise the costs and interest being added to the debt by achieving a quick sale. This is often known as the forced sale value of the property and when obtaining comparables from estate agents make sure this is the valuation they are giving rather than full market value.

With regard to the situation with your acquaintance making an offer for the property, the mortgage company would not accept an offer from someone direct. They would refer them to the estate agent handling the sale, partly so the prospective purchaser could be vetted and partly so they could ensure the property received reasonable exposure to make sure the best possible price was being achieved for the property.

It seems very strange that the estate agent would tell your acquaintance to reduce their offer. Was this person definitely still offering £550K? If they were and the estate agents knocked them down there is very likely to be a case against the mortgage company AND estate agents (it's possible the estate agents didn't go to the mortgage company with the £550k offer). Alternatively, did they go to the estate agents and say they wanted the property and were willing to pay up to £550k but asking what they needed to offer to secure it? If that was the situation and the estate agents then told them that the asking price of £490k would be accepted there is nothing wrong with this.

I can't understand why an offer of £480k was being considered if your acquaintance made his offer of £550k known to the estate agents as soon as they were instructed. Surely they would have saved themselves a lot of time and trouble by just accepting it straight away? It sounds like your acquaintance is perhaps not describing the situation entirely accurately and was maybe holding out to get a good deal.

[zander]

Which part of the UK are you in? Scots Law is different. lenders do have obligations to their former borrowers as in the eyes of the law the borrower retains an equity of redemption which means you have a right to settle the debt at any time.

Many lenders will, having obtained an acceptable offer for the property, place an advert in a newspaper seeking last & final offers by a particular date (England & Wales)

lenders have to take great care in acheiving the best possible price as the lender can be sued for damages if there are omissions from the sale particulars. It is a fact though, that properties held by lenders in possession don't attract the same prices as sold by their owners.

[Diana Appleyard]

Hi - I am writing a feature for the daily mail at the moment about the scandal of repossessions and would very much liek to speak to you - can pay you for taking part too. Can you email me at [email protected] Regards, Diana Appleyard, Daily Mail

[HermieMonk]

My home was repossessed and the Lender paid compensation because they exchanged at a lower price than highest received during the currency of the Public Notices. It turns out that the agent that accepted the offer and published the Public Notices stopped taking enquiries after they accepted the successful offer which means that the last 20 days of the sale were 'sabotaged' by this action. Higher offers were being accepted by the second agent and this influenced the compehsation settlement but the settlement was lower than it should be (I argue).

 

I am probably going to have trouble suing the Lender despite a number of anomolies including undervaluing but it is difficult with the way that the Courts interpret 'best price...' in that you seem to have to prove intent to undersell.

 

Can I sue the Estate Agent even though in theory his client is the Lender?

 

Anyone with a view on this would receive my gratitude.

[supersleuth]

HermieMonk,

 

Yes you probably can sue the Estate Agent because in theory actually his client is you! Check out your mortgage contract - you will find that you granted your lender a power of attorney and when the lender appoints the Estate Agent, the lender is actually appoint the agent on your behalf under the power of attorney. Thus, you will probably find that at law, the agent was appointed by you! (i.e. by the lender acting as your attorney on your behalf acting under the power that you gave him under the power of attorney..did you follow that?) The power of attorney clause will be in your mortgage contract - check it out.

 

So you probably can sue the estate agent and recover damages from him for his breach of his duty of care, breach of contract etc. But this will be a very hard job and so do lots of research and get advice before you take on this task.

 

Supersleuth

Edited February 20, 2010 by supersleuth

[HermieMonk]

Super SuperSleuth- Many thanks for that.

 

I will do as you say and check the contract which is in my pile in an orderly fashion!

 

I will contact a solicitor or two and do my own reseach as I've learned that in these affairs, you have to know enough to ask the right questions.

 

This also means, therefore that the Asset Management firm, a solicitor, who admitted negligence but paid inadequate compensation (I think) could also be sued if the power of attorney applies.

 

Many thanks again and I'll investigate and let you know how I get on.

 

Hermie.

[HermieMonk]

SuperSleuth,

 

Just thinking about this, if the Asset Manager appointed he Estate Agent then has my power of attorney 'chain' been broken as I should look at the Asset Management firm (who are a solicitors frm) as the primary responsibility??

 

Hemie

[supersleuth]

Hi Hermie

 

Don't think that the chain has been 'broken', it IS the chain. They are all acting ultimately from the powers you (allegedly) gave them as your attorney. The 'asset management' firm took the attorney power to act on your behalf, and instructed the estate agents to act (ultimately) on your behalf. But do check it out with your lawyers. In the field of law dealing with 'principal and agent', at all times, I believe that you are the principal on behalf of whom, your agents are acting.

 

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. This means that if a court should find that the term is unfair (which it is) the term is not enforceable against you and void. Therefore, you could argue that none of them had any power to act on your behalf and that you are not liable to pay any of their charges and they are liable to pay you damages for the loss and harm they caused you. Also, with respect to powers of attorney, and the lenders right to appoint a receiver, research the power of attorney Act 1971 and the provisions of the Law of Property Act 1925 that deals with appointment of receivers and powers of attorney. It could be argued that because the POA does not comply with the POA Act 1971, they do not have a legal POA

 

Supersleuth

Edited February 21, 2010 by supersleuth

[Gemma.]

I know this is an old thread but is there any update on the POA for residential/home mortgages? Is it something we should try and revoke somehow or are there any newer cases or law etc?

 

(Apologise if there is a newer thread somewhere, my head is spinning with links and info right now)

[lollyjoy6]

I have a complaint regarding the under valuation of my old property sold in May 2014 with the FOS.I am going to check the mortgage contract as I'm sure I've come across this wording of repossession.I do have some of the information I requested regarding the sale of the property the surveyors reports but also an email of the estate agent stating to go in on a lower offer and test the waters and see what happens..I did email under another name to the Estate Agents and they were making out that there was a lots and lots of people lining up to view this house.They make reference to an other property repossessed by another estate agent in the area in emails to the Mortgage lender.I know it was a cash buyer there is no mortgage on the property and it is still empty now but the buyer came in at £160,000 the Mortgage Lender said it was too low then they offered £180,000 and it sold for £172,000.It was put up for £190,000 but houses on that side of the street have sold for £225,000 £255,00 and on the other side for £225,000 upwards.The estate agent did receive an official complaint from me about the Public Notice offer on the property but were told they could not speak to me by the mortgage lender.so they forwarded my emails but didn't reply back.I know that my next door neighbour cut down all the trees in the garden after I left and left the mess in the garden and the unsolicited mail was piled up in the front porch.So I don't think they visited until they had a viewing.I only moved 10 mins from the property so I used to call back to check the post even though I had a redirection in place and my sister lives around the corner from it. Can I get any information from the estate agent regarding the sale and visits to the property?like I have done from the mortgage lender?It seems that the mortgage Lender is always pleading that they have to rely upon 3rd parties on anything.On one surveyors report the surveyor is relying upon advise taken from my old next door neighbour when I bought the house under the RTB and the information is totally a lie and incorrect.I've never spoken to my neighbour about any private matters and only ever said the occasional hello.

[lollyjoy6]

FOC didn't uphold my complaint but the wording of the letter more or less left them sitting on the fence...I did have a statement of accounts from my mortgage lender but they had printed written off...but no doubt they've written it off from one of their companies and passed the shortfall to their sister company to collect it.There is a money judgement on the repossession papers from the court to be adjourned and restored at liberty.Not that I've got anything to give to them other than a pound!like I give to my other unsecured debtors.I'm thinking any day soon they'll have me back in court not that I'm worried as I've lost my house and have no other assets and live on £284.00 a week.I claim no benefits so rent and council tax etc are all paid in full my son pays the internet for me I only shop for food.I've one dependant still at school so can't give any more.

[emanevs]

Section 91 Law of Property Act 1925 will help someone who wants to sell their house, when a lender refuses.

 

If more than 30k is involved, application needed to High Court.

 

See also Palk -v- Mortgage ServicesFunding Plc [1993] Ch 330

 

Hope this helps.