Debt over 10 years old

[JP08]

2) under any agreement which may be made between the borrower and the bank after the date herof and expressley provides that it is to be secured by this legal charge ("a future legal charge") and

3) Under the provision of this legal charge ("the legal charge") by way of further security for the said monies herby assigns unto the bank all that the beneficial interest of the borrower in the property and the proceeds of sale thereof to hold the same unto the bank absolutely provided that on redemption of the legal charge the bank will at the request of the borrower re-assign to the borrower such beneficial interest.

 

This is what I found previously

[caro]

Was the loan over £25k. I'm struggling to get my head round this. I'll go back and read the thread to see if I can make sense of events.

 

I see from your recent letter they're saying that the debt was you and your ex. Have you had any statements showing what you've paid, what you owe etc?

[JP08]

Hi, basically my ex had about 3 or 4 bank accounts with them, they then consolidated them in to one debt. It was all his debt, but I was pressured into agreeing to have a charge on the house. But they have sold the debt and the charge, so it should not be on there should it? No I have no statements or anything just the info from when I asked for a subject access request. I have been paying £15 into their account in cash since hillesden took it over. All the threats of taking my house was what amde me pay that. But I have not paid them anythig this month. The sum when they sold it was 35k

JP

[JP08]

Hi Caro have you had any thoughts yet? I need ot know if I should still pay? do you think they could enforce the charge even though they do not own the debt any more?

?

[JP08]

Hi Is there anyone that can advise me on what my next step should be? I have still not heard anything from them about my not paying this month, but can they do anything?

I don't know know what ot do about this charge either, can I force them to take it off? seeing as they sold on the debt?

Thanks

JP08

[citizenB]

I imagine it all depends what the original order said when the charge was obtained.

 

Do you have the original court paperwork where it lays down what could happen if payments are missed ?

 

Is this debt in joint names ? and who is the first named on the account ?

[JP08]

Hi Citizen B there was no court case, they did it something like a mortgage and they have sold the debt so no debt is attached to it now. In their letter they say that they assigned the debt and the charge to Hillesden, but as it was in their name originally that they will keep it on there in their name until Hillesden say it has been paid off? is that not illegal? I believe that you cannot have a charge on the house without a debt attached to it. Initially they wrote it off before selling it as well, years ago. Please help!

JP

[citizenB]

Aha, I see.

 

I am not able to help you, but will try and attract the attention of those who might be able to .

 

Have sent out a couple of SOS's. Hopefully, they will be able to look in on you.

 

I rather suspect that it might not be for a while. Will keep an eye on your thread to keep it in the public eye so to speak.

Edited December 22, 2009 by citizenB

[pelham9]

This is a long thread and I am going away until after Christmas in 4 hours! But somebody needs to cut across the legal and family complications.

 

My advice (I am not a lawyer) is to pay nothing further to anyone - they are bluffing! They have no agreement therefore no debt in court and any charge on your property is worthless to them. Stop paying and call their

bluff. Let HFC keep their charge - it is scaring Hillsden. Why haven't you been taken to court? Are you intent on paying your share?

 

I will write fuirther after Christmas -enjoy yours.

 

NB Is this a CCA (1974) loan? What are implications of a joint loan? What was the CAA threshold (it is now £25000) at the time that the loan was taken. Your joint loan was for £16000+?. I would think this well within CCA.

[42man]

With regard to the Land Registry....I called mine recently and they were very helpful (try it)....you could get it removed due to a court order or anything else viable (I think via a solicitor) but I know it costs £1 to apply on the correct 'form'...

[42man]

You might have to take it to court though....did you receive a legal assignment ?

[sequenci]

I've just had this thread drawn to my attention, I shall take a read of the whole thing and try my best to help too. brb!

[JP08]

Hi Citizen B Thanks for sending out the SOS.

Hi 42Man, I did initially go to the Land Registry and they told me that HFC Bank had to remove it? I will try them again now that i have it in writing that they sold the debt and supposedly the charge, according to their last letter. Which form would I need to use?

Thanks

JP

[JP08]

Hi I have not heard anything from Hillesden about not paying this month, I did not get a assignment form HFC, just a letter from Hillesden saying they had taken it over. I do not want to pay anymore of this debt. It was not mine to begin with. I would like to get the charge off the property. But what do you think my chances are? Banks seem to be a law unto themselves even when I have seen extracts when I googled it, that you cannot have a charge on a property without a debt attached to it? I will look forward to any help I can get on this.

Thank you all for your help and support I appreciate it.

JP

[JP08]

Hi All

Happy New year!

Has anyone any ideas on what I should do yet? I have not paid Hillesden for 2 months now, just wondering if they can do anything? from what HFC Bank said, they are supposedly holding me liable purley because I was paying Hillesden? I was only paying because of the threats, and now that I know that the charge was supposedly sold at the same time as this debt, how can they possibly say that because it was in their name originally, they can still keep it that way?

Thanks

JP08

[pmhcfc]

bump

[JP08]

Hi has anyone any Ideas yet?

JP

[sequenci]

Just having a read through the trhead again, I can see that there is some very good information provided by Surface Agent, especially the undue influence stuff. Was any of this information acted upon at this stage?

 

From what I can see, this loan is a secured loan rather than anything to do with being a judgment debt. A secured loan would be secured by the charge so when the loan agreement was signed but parties should have agreed for it to be secured. I can also see that the loan arrangement that we are talking about is unregulated.

 

Are my facts correct? I just want to make sure we are clear as I can see quite a lot of confusing information within the thread.

 

Thanks,

 

Seq.

[JP08]

Hi Sequenci

 

Yes Surface Agent was very good, but disapeared for some reason. at the time I was told that the undue influence woudl be a very hard fight, and very hard to prove.

 

yes they were working it like a secured loan, I was pressurised in to agreeing for this to have a charge on the house, when it was a debt of my ex's. He had 5 bank accounts that he had amalgamated in to one, they then kept insisting that a charge be put on the house. But since then they have firstly written off the debt and then sold it as well. if you look at the letter, you will see that they are saying they even sold the charge but were going to keep it in their name? they cannot do this can they?

Thanks

JP

[make them aktiv runners]

HFO hold legal title for the Charge. Hillsden claim to be owner.

 

There are 2 options

 

1...Assignment was Equitable. This could put Hillesden as beneficiary. Collections can also be delegated to them.

 

2...A full legal assignment happened. Land registry cannot be changed without your permission, or a court to agree.

 

You need the original agreement to see if assignment and transfer by them was in the terms and conditions. Without the agreement.

 

For clarification. Debts are assigned and Charge entries are transferred.

 

Suetonius is hot on this subject. Send a pm with a link from the letter on page 8.

 

Both yourself and your ex can be chased for the debt. This is because both your names appear on the application. As to who is liable is a civil case between you and your ex.

[sequenci]

JP08. I'll take a look at the letter too, I can't view it from where I am at the moment as my work PC cannot open it, I'll do it once I'm home.

 

Best regards,

 

Seq.

[JP08]

Hi Make them Acktiv and Sequenci,

 

Thank you both for your posts. in addition to this, Hillesden knew nothing about the charge, they even tried to add a second one to the house, pulled out when I told them there already was one.

 

There is no paperwork at all, no assignment, no original agreement nothing. They are saying that I have a relationship with them purely because I was paying a token sum of money each month. I have not paid for 2 months now. They said that they sold the debt and the charge but as they were the original they would keep the charge in their name until Hillesden say it has been paid off? I will pm Suetonius and see what they say as well.

Thanks for this

JP

[sequenci]

I didn't get to download the letter last night as I didn't get home 'till late.

 

Have you asked Hilesden for a copy of the notice of assignment?

[JP08]

Hi Sequenci, they say they have nothing, but are only going on the fact that I have been paying, that I must have a relationship with them?

I did both a subject access request and the letter by Lickthewall fatboy post 123 on page 7. I have never received anything bar copies of what they had on their database and a so called copy of an agreement, which had both the wrong address and unsigned by anyone.

On the database bump there is an entry that says sold to Hillesden. That is it?

 

Thanks

JP

[JP08]

Hi

Is there any news yet Please? thanks

JP