Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Mortgage Securitisation - Paragon V Pender Title to Sue Judgements - For Debate & Discussion


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4046 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

anybody want to check out what info there are on these links

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • :spy:
     
     

http://www6.paragon-group.co.uk/pgroup.nsf/securitisationMainFS

 

here is a goodie --- it takes forever to load (when it does download suggest you save a copy amazing ino in there )

 

http://www6.paragon-group.co.uk/pgroup.nsf/nasec/5BDD369D99C49DBC802579270037E583/$FILE/02%20Mortgage%20Sale%20Agreement.pdf

Edited by tertiary alcohol
Link to post
Share on other sites

Message from The Consumer Action Group

 

To be able to send PMs your post count must be 30 or greater.

 

You currently have 11 posts and you can send PMs to following users only:

Docubot, BankFodder, Reviewer, alanfromderby, MARTIN3030, CAGBlogger, Admin, WebMaster, BookMan, NewsBot, librarian, CAGAdmin1, qwe987, MoneyBAGs, caro, sequenci, maroondevo52, havinastella, seanamarts, ukaviator, the_shadow, Mr lex, GuidoT, steven4064, dx100uk, Sidewinder, IdaInFife, slick132, Conniff, ScarletPimpernel, Pat Mustard, freakyleaky, car2403, 42man, cerberusalert, Ell-enn, andyorch, NOMBot, citizenB, ErikaPNP, pete2, andydd, antone, rebel11, honeybee13, BRIGADIER2JCS, ims21, Gbarbm

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Has any one read the papers, but you can't get the MORTGAGE SALE AGREEMENT or the CHARGE why is that?

 

For Accord this is the Mortgage Sale Agreement

 

http://www.ybs.co.uk/your_society/treasury/documents/transaction-documents/Mortgage-Sale_Agreem.PDF

 

And the Deed of Charge

 

http://www.ybs.co.uk/your_society/treasury/documents/transaction-documents/Deed-of-Charge.PDF

 

Wasn't hard to find, just googled Accord "mortgage sale agreement" and then Accord "Deed of Charge"

 

Hope these are of interest to you ITM?

 

Suggest you download a copy before they go missing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks wfspayback found it and downloaded it.

Yes I am looking into this BIG time and may be now found the way forward, have you read these Hopefully Suetouis will read these now as they show that the seller has transferred ALL rights to the mortgages to the TRUSTEE.

I think they will be removed soon!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks wfspayback found it and downloaded it.

Yes I am looking into this BIG time and may be now found the way forward, have you read these Hopefully Suetouis will read these now as they show that the seller has transferred ALL rights to the mortgages to the TRUSTEE.

I think they will be removed soon!

 

I have indeed read it...

 

6.2 For the avoidance of doubt, prior to the completion of the assignment, assignation, or transfer (as appropriate) of any Loan and its Related Security to the Issuer pursuant to Clause 6.1 , with effect from the Closing Date relating to that Loan and its Related Security legal title to each Loan and its Related Security in the Portfolio shall be vested in the Seller and sole beneficial title and interest shall be vested in the Issuer. Prior to perfection of the transfer of the legal title to Loans and their Related Security pursuant to this Clause 6, the Seller undertakes (to the extent that any of the following is vested in it) to hold all right, title, interest and benefit (both present and future) in and under (a) the Loans and their Related Security, following the acquisition of such Loans and their Related Security by the Issuer and (b) any sums that are or may become due in respect thereof, on trust for the Issuer (excluding from such trust any Loans which have been repurchased by the Seller).

 

6.3 Perfection of the transfer, assignation and assignment in accordance with Clause 6.1 of:

(a) the English Mortgages in the Portfolio shall be effected by means of a transfer in the form of

the relevant Land Registry Transfer set out in Schedule 2 (Register of Transfers);

(b) an SLR Transfer in the case of Mortgages over Properties title to which is registered in the

Land Register of Scotland (substantially in the form set out in Part 1 of Schedule 3);

© a Sasine Transfer, in the case of Mortgages over Properties title to which is recorded in the

General Register of Sasines (substantially in the form set out in Part 3 of Schedule 3);and

(d) the Loans and relevant Related Security shall be effected through notification to the relevant Borrowers and/or guarantors and/or insurers or other relevant third parties of the sale and transfer or assignment or assignation of the relevant Loans and their Related Security,

and, in each case, notice shall be given to each Borrower or any other relevant person of the sale and transfer of that Borrower's Loan and its Related Security to the Issuer and the charge by the Issuer of the Issuer's interest in that Borrower's Loan and its Related Security to the Security Trustee pursuant to the Deed of Charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And?

you have also read the Master Definitions and Construction Schedule which you will NOT get.

Why have 6.3 if as it reads and I say if it reads PRIOR to perfection of the transfer of the legal title?

Like page page 3 1

page 4 3.1 (a)

3.9 page 6

3.16 page 8

22.1 page 32

23.3 (b) page 40 d and h?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And?

you have also read the Master Definitions and Construction Schedule which you will NOT get.

Why have 6.3 if as it reads and I say if it reads PRIOR to perfection of the transfer of the legal title?

Like page page 3 1

page 4 3.1 (a)

3.9 page 6

3.16 page 8

22.1 page 32

23.3 (b) page 40 d and h?

 

Hello ITM?

 

Do you mean this Master Definitions and Construction Schedule ?

 

http://www.ybs.co.uk/your_society/treasury/documents/transaction-documents/Master-Definitions-a.PDF

Link to post
Share on other sites

the issuer is BRASS PLc

and The SELLER IS ACCORD

 

Brass have no assets or money as usual Directors are all the same again.

 

Exactly, 6.2 of the Mortgage Sale Agreement confirms what the seller (Accord) will own and what the issuer (Brass) will own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The issue I would like to clarify is the separation of the security and the debt obligation. What happens if the final end-user investor in the securitised package which included my personal mortgage goes bankrupt or simply vanishes. How would I know if my lender were continuing to collect (as trustee) on a debt it had already sold and was no longer obliged to service? Due to the reckless investments made and the way these securities were packaged and sold (mixing good debts up with sub-prime) many investors have gone bankrupt. How would the Official Receiver treat a securitised debt obligation? Where does my obligation end? I would really appreciate the highly informed views of this forum on this aspect of the debate. I hold a Northern Rock mortgage issued just before the crash when they were riding the sub-prime securitisation wave and I believe very little due process was followed in the scandalous mis-selling of these products. I think this may be another twist to this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

"The issue I would like to clarify is the separation of the security and the debt obligation. What happens if the final end-user investor in the securitised package which included my personal mortgage goes bankrupt or simply vanishes. How would I know if my lender were continuing to collect (as trustee) on a debt it had already sold and was no longer obliged to service? Due to the reckless investments made and the way these securities were packaged and sold (mixing good debts up with sub-prime) many investors have gone bankrupt. How would the Official Receiver treat a securitised debt obligation? Where does my obligation end? I would really appreciate the highly informed views of this forum on this aspect of the debate. I hold a Northern Rock mortgage issued just before the crash when they were riding the sub-prime securitisation wave and I believe very little due process was followed in the scandalous mis-selling of these products. I think this may be another twist to this thread."

 

Hope you don't mind, but I thought I'd try to add some clarity to assist your line of questioning...(you may need to read what I say more than once, because it took me a while to appreciate what I have found...and couldn't believe it either...given that lenders are rampantly re-possession consumers house without remorse)

 

This is my personal opinion only - when it comes to separation of the security and the debt obligation in relation to a disposition of an interest in land that relates to a mortgage,........... there is no separation within the Law that relates to dispositions of land for the legal interest (the security interest - normally referred to as the 'title to sue' 'cause of action' or right to possession) or the equitable interest (the debt obligation or CMI) for this to happen.

 

For this conclusion I began by considering the Sale of Goods Act - just to better understand the ambit of how a 'sale' occurs and what the underlying factors are that effect a 'sale'...

 

From there, I moved onto 'sales in relation to land' and researched 'trusts' - this threw up pieces of legislation that themselves directly relate and made sense (in my mind) to the finding that it is impossible for a lender to purport to 'sell' its interests in land that relates to a consumers mortgage yet retain a legal interest or a cause of action - one such piece of legislation was the Trustee Delegation Act 1999 - at section 10 - it's wording and my interpretation is that it clearly advises that if a sale agreement is accompanied by a power of attorney - together, these 'instruments' have the effect of divesting the lender of both its legal and equitable interest in the land that relate to the consumers mortgage as party to a securitisation financial collateral arrangement that creates a Mortgage Backed Security. ( I know its a mouthful - but I couldn't think of a simpler way of stating the point).....

 

Please note that I have introduced words here such as 'interests' instead of 'mortgage' - 'disposition' instead of 'sale' and 'interests in land that relate to a mortgage' instead of 'sale of the mortgage' or 'sale of the property' and also 'instruments' instead of 'Mortgage Sale Agreement' or 'Power of Attorney'....

 

Subtle differences, but I believe.....; more than significant in relation to the debate.

 

I do not find that the original lender should or could ever be found to be the 'trustee' in such an arrangement. You may already be aware that any prospectus for a securitisation agreement will insist (UKLA Listing Rules) that the 'Trustee' must be identified in the prospectus - if your Lender is identified within the prospectus - then, sure, your lender can refer to himself as the 'Trustee' - but this is most unlikely to be the case with most sub-prime lenders....

 

It is not a question as to 'what if the end-user investor goes bankrupt' that is of any concern to a consumer (IMO) - the question is....what are your rights as a consumer in the event you become aware that your lender has securitised your mortgage and what legislation is available to you to protect your interests in the land - your home.....

 

In my opinion, your obligation ends when you can prove in a court of law that the Law of the land says your obligation ended at the time and date that the lender disposed of its interests in the land in relation to your mortgage with the effect of disposing to the SPV rights that became extinguished as soon as the SPV paid a valuable consideration and registered its legal interest at Companies House without serving notice under s.1 LPA 1925 upon you.

 

There are of course a number of other considerations to be taken into account - and it is not as simple as stated above - but hopefully you will read into what I have posted to help clarify a few of the concerns you raise..........

 

Again, IMO, an Official Receiver in relation to the Lender and the SPV will be interested in who has the proprietary interest in relation to the land - that is to say, which one of them can prove first in line registration of their interest in the land.

 

Having gained a legal interest in the consumers land, it stands to reason (IMO) that the SPV in the event of its insolvency would look to the consumers property for redress. In Law, the Lenders bankruptcy should not affect the consumer - but as we know - it does and is affecting them on a daily basis (but, this is the legal issue that has yet to be brought and founded before the courts).

 

Long before a consumer can consider challenging a lender, you need to source and identify the 'instruments' that effected the disposition of its interest in relation to your land and mortgage (sale) and then consider what the status of your mortgage account was in at the time and date that the disposition was effected, this being because - if you were in actual default at the time of the disposition, you are likely to have an outcome similar to that found in the horsham case...albeit on different grounds, but essentially a similar outcome....

 

I hope this helps rather than confuses?

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for this. Once again the legal argument appears to fall strongly in favour of the consumer. Indeed every legal argument does as far as I have researched, yet no precedents have been set. Due to the massive implications to the banking industry I feel sure this is not something the courts are going to allow either, however obvious the legal argument put forward. My limited knowledge of the court system leads me to ask if a case such as this could be heard before a jury. If so, perhaps a hugely publicised class action could prevail. I am ready to try it if anyone wants to join me and willing to shoulder my proportion of costs. I believe in the US the "show me the note" campaign is having some success in individual cases, but again no class action has been launched. Whilst I can see the banks fearing and fighting this on every level, they only have the income from debt servicing to protect, having sold and been paid for the debt instrument long ago. This is far less morally defensible as well as legally defensible surely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again many thanks for your interest and insight. I am struggling with the legal complexities here but I am registering that the law is finding it difficult to uphold the principals of "having your cake and eating it". (To anyone interested, on re-reading my previous post I realise I meant to put "I" am ready and willing to shoulder my proportion of costs. This may not have been clear).

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are likely to have an outcome similar to that found in the horsham case...albeit on different grounds, but essentially a similar outcome....

 

Apple

 

Hi Apple, can you tell me what the 'horsham' case was and where I can find that?

 

Ta

 

A1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew1

 

This link will better explain that I may be able to: http://www.legalmortgage.co.uk/#/orders-for-sale-after-horsham/4538803765

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note in my main post above - where I refer to s.1 LPA 1925 in post '91' it should actually state: s.136 LPA 1925 (my keyboard is playing up)

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...