Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
  • 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 
      • 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

calling all Mortgage Express customers


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3767 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

I got the letter... I was delighted as I have been trying to sell my house as my income has dropped by 60% over the last 18mths. With this in mind I dropped the asking price of the property due to the offer by mortgage express.

I got an offer on the house in early june and accepted it would clear the mortgage and pay the estate agent and solicitor and i would walk out with no money but the weight of the mortgage payments would be off my mind.

I have next to nothing left to buy my children things after the mortgage is paid.

Anyway due to the current climate it has taken the purchasers a while to get the funding in place which they have now... The sale is due to complete in 2 weeks.

 

BUT:

 

Mortgage Express wont extend the redemption offer for me. I have offered to get proof the sale was agreed in early June.. I have offered to prove my change in income.. They are not intrested... While I understand it was a limited offer it seems only the rich have been able to take advantage of it..

 

To add insult to it all they will waive it if i can get a mortgage with another company if i am borrowing and extra £2000 or if i buy another house and get a mortgage with a new company...

 

The way i understand it is that the tax payer now owns mortgage express and the company no longer lends money. The aim is to settle the loan book and repay the taxpayers...

 

If I just hand the keys back and leave the house they will no get the full loan paid off, in auction they would probably loose an extra 30k and then they would chase me for the balance... Then i would go bankrupt... would this be better for the taxpayer????

 

So why wont the help me, I can clear the loan it seems so stupid to me that they will waive if i get a mortgage for an extra £2k with a new lender... which i cant due to my drop in income...

 

Its a disgrace

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I got the letter... I was delighted as I have been trying to sell my house as my income has dropped by 60% over the last 18mths. With this in mind I dropped the asking price of the property due to the offer by mortgage express.

I got an offer on the house in early june and accepted it would clear the mortgage and pay the estate agent and solicitor and i would walk out with no money but the weight of the mortgage payments would be off my mind.

I have next to nothing left to buy my children things after the mortgage is paid.

Anyway due to the current climate it has taken the purchasers a while to get the funding in place which they have now... The sale is due to complete in 2 weeks.

 

BUT:

 

Mortgage Express wont extend the redemption offer for me. I have offered to get proof the sale was agreed in early June.. I have offered to prove my change in income.. They are not intrested... While I understand it was a limited offer it seems only the rich have been able to take advantage of it..

 

To add insult to it all they will waive it if i can get a mortgage with another company if i am borrowing and extra £2000 or if i buy another house and get a mortgage with a new company...

 

The way i understand it is that the tax payer now owns mortgage express and the company no longer lends money. The aim is to settle the loan book and repay the taxpayers...

 

If I just hand the keys back and leave the house they will no get the full loan paid off, in auction they would probably loose an extra 30k and then they would chase me for the balance... Then i would go bankrupt... would this be better for the taxpayer????

 

So why wont the help me, I can clear the loan it seems so stupid to me that they will waive if i get a mortgage for an extra £2k with a new lender... which i cant due to my drop in income...

 

Its a disgrace

 

 

Thanks redfish my local mp seems to be in agreement with me and has wrote to the MD of MX/BB. He clearly states thats this approach is not in the taxpayers intrest. I am also speaking to the press and it seems likely it will be in the Sunday Times/Telegraph this weekend. I suppose the MP wants me vote - But the wording in his letter does take my side.

 

Thanks Guys - Keep you posted

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...