Mortgage Express appoint LPA Recievers Walker Singleton to scare tenants off!

[caro]

I was involved in the training department, but I know that they do impose sanctions.

 

Another useful snippet is that members of ARLA and the NAEA have to be signed up to ombudsman scheme so if you don't get a satisfactory response from BJB that could be another avenue to explore.

 

The Property Ombudsman | Home

[caro]

Information Sheets | ARLA

 

Complaints | NAEA

[patrickq1]

a real help caro,also a step in the right direction if the landlords are wanting to come to a compromising situation it can only help matters...

i will look at your post later Bombs and see what you have written and try to help from their ...

patrickq1

gotta go for a walk need excercise part of my rehabilitation ....

[caro]

Nice day for a walk Patrick. Enjoy.

 

Just found this article.

 

Property investments are increasingly falling into LPA receivership ? what can investors expect? - Property Week

 

Seems that LPA Receivers have to belong to NARA who have their own code of practice. I'm not familiar with this organisation but worth looking at the standards they are meant to follow.

 

nara - code of practice and standards for fixed charge receiverships

[caro]

Oh my word!!

 

narator is published by The Asscciation of Property and Fixed Charge Receivers,

Registered Office, Eversheds 115 Colmore Row, Birmingham B3 3AL

 

http://www.nara.org.uk/pdfs/Narator%20Dec%2009.pdf

[chillinlong]

Hello all,

 

Some great points! Thanks Caro and Patrick for the infos again.

 

Bombs away I hope it is helping yous situation this.

 

I was reading through the last link via Caro posts, just struck me. WS are collecting the rents of tenants without VAT. And then paying whatever lefts after their management costs and VAT taken out, now what is to say that they are not claiming VAT on the monies they are recieving. I am not able to get any info out of them so for all we know they could be milking it via this route. In other words a VAT [problem]!

 

There is so much information, I really need to get organised with an action plan, I am going to spend Tuesday on doing this and will update you all once I have got it together and then start chucking some momentum on this.

 

Patrick lol, it is always that time of night when you can think more clear and then starts to dawn more and more how badly managed the MX and WS situations have made it that I need to start making serious headway into it quick before it gets worse.

 

Thanks again all!

 

PS Caro is right, I should have been following up the ARLA etc.

Edited May 16, 2010 by chillinlong

[Meerkat One]

Just catching up - we seem to be moving at a pace! Will need to digest the latest posts!

Thanks to everyone for their help

[patrickq1]

Yes Need Now To Start An Action Plan Will See If Caro Can Contribute Towards Organising This ..i Will Work On One Or Two Things Ive Got Going At The Moment

[caro]

I may be able to help you on the VAT issue.

 

Rent is "Outside the Scope" of VAT so it will never be VATable. They would be able to charge VAT on their management fee as they are "adding value" (allegedly).

 

I would be very surprised if they would dare to diddle the VAT as they have to do quarterly returns and the consequences of a [problem] would make it too risky.

 

I may be wrong but unless you can find something to back up your theory I wouldn't waste too much time pursuing this avenue.

[patrickq1]

YES MY SENTIMENTS CARO no use wasting too much time just let your accountants research this avenue,and then spend time on the important issue's at hand..

patrickq1

[chillinlong]

Well it makes sense, just I thought for example if it were me I would appoint a lettings agent that would not be charging me management fee plus VAT as it is quite an amount once it all adds up.

 

If I could get help off you Caro with creating an action plan and taking steps to implement that would be a huge help, if not I understand how busy you are you have been helping an immense amount of people on here which we all appreaciate. Hopefully I will have something together by Tuesday anyways I am aiming for .

 

Was the walk good Patrick?

[patrickq1]

good walk got to end of cul d sac about 200 yrds lol legs are bit sore cardio vascular systems being strangled...all for a fag huh...

[chillinlong]

One giant step to mankind. Some people cannot walk a yard! Hope it was a combination of fresh air and err the fag lol.

[caro]

Well it makes sense, just I thought for example if it were me I would appoint a lettings agent that would not be charging me management fee plus VAT as it is quite an amount once it all adds up.

 

If I could get help off you Caro with creating an action plan and taking steps to implement that would be a huge help, if not I understand how busy you are you have been helping an immense amount of people on here which we all appreaciate. Hopefully I will have something together by Tuesday anyways I am aiming for .

 

Was the walk good Patrick?

 

I won't make any promises that I can't keep as I work full time and have a family, but I'll certainly keep an eye on what's going on and help if I can.

[patrickq1]

no fags,thats what nearly killed me still chance yet,awaiting heart by pass already had a tripple by pass to both legs and stomach only partial success that operation was 8 hours heart stopped twice,,that is what i meant all that for fags motto is dont smoke

Edited May 16, 2010 by patrickq1

[patrickq1]

ok ive asked for a help on here for producing a cpr guide to start you all off,

then take it from there ok guys...i think Caro can help on this though..

[postggj]

Patrick

 

Got Your Message

 

Cpr 31.16

 

Pre Action Disclosure

[patrickq1]

i thought it was posti cheers if you have nt read this thread its worth doing so see if you can input anything mate

patrickq1

[postggj]

its a long thread (wow)

 

ill read it tomorow in daylight

 

regards

[patrickq1]

Civil Procedure Rules

 

• What's New?
  
• Rules & Practice Directions
  
• Schedule 1 - RSC
  
• Schedule 2 - CCR
  
• Pre-Action Protocols
  
• Glossary
  
• Index
  
• Forms
  
• Court Guides
  
• Updates & Zips
  
• Statutory Instruments
  
• Consultation
  
• Contact
  

Search area: Search

See also Practice Direction 31

Part 31 DISCLOSURE AND INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS

 

Contents of this Part Title Number Scope of this Part Rule 31.1 Meaning of disclosure Rule 31.2 Right of inspection of a disclosed document Rule 31.3 Meaning of document Rule 31.4 Disclosure limited to standard disclosure Rule 31.5 Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed Rule 31.6 Duty of search Rule 31.7 Duty of disclosure limited to documents which are or have been in a party’s control Rule 31.8 Disclosure of copies Rule 31.9 Procedure for standard disclosure Rule 31.10 Duty of disclosure continues during proceedings Rule 31.11 Specific disclosure or inspection Rule 31.12 Disclosure in stages Rule 31.13 Documents referred to in statements of case etc. Rule 31.14 Inspection and copying of documents Rule 31.15 Disclosure before proceedings start Rule 31.16 Orders for disclosure against a person not a party Rule 31.17 Rules not to limit other powers of the court to order disclosure Rule 31.18 Claim to withhold inspection or disclosure of a document Rule 31.19 Restriction on use of a privileged document inspection of which has been inadvertently allowed Rule 31.20 Consequence of failure to disclose documents or permit inspection Rule 31.21 Subsequent use of disclosed documents Rule 31.22 False disclosure statements Rule 31.23

Scope of this Part

 

31.1

 

(1) This Part sets out rules about the disclosure and inspection of documents.

 

(2) This Part applies to all claims except a claim on the small claims track.

 

 

Meaning of disclosure

 

31.2

 

A party discloses a document by stating that the document exists or has existed.

 

 

Right of inspection of a disclosed document

 

31.3

 

(1) A party to whom a document has been disclosed has a right to inspect that document except where –

(a) the document is no longer in the control of the party who disclosed it;

 

(b) the party disclosing the document has a right or a duty to withhold inspection of it; or

 

© paragraph (2) applies.

 

(Rule 31.8 sets out when a document is in the control of a party)

(Rule 31.19 sets out the procedure for claiming a right or duty to withhold inspection)

 

(2) Where a party considers that it would be disproportionate to the issues in the case to permit inspection of documents within a category or class of document disclosed under rule 31.6(b) –

(a) he is not required to permit inspection of documents within that category or class; but

 

(b) he must state in his disclosure statement that inspection of those documents will not be permitted on the grounds that to do so would be disproportionate.

 

(Rule 31.6 provides for standard disclosure)

(Rule 31.10 makes provision for a disclosure statement)

(Rule 31.12 provides for a party to apply for an order for specific inspection of documents)

 

 

Meaning of document

 

31.4

 

In this Part –

‘document’ means anything in which information of any description is recorded; and

‘copy’, in relation to a document, means anything onto which information recorded in the document has been copied, by whatever means and whether directly or indirectly.

 

 

 

Disclosure limited to standard disclosure

 

31.5

 

(1) An order to give disclosure is an order to give standard disclosure unless the court directs otherwise.

 

(2) The court may dispense with or limit standard disclosure.

 

(3) The parties may agree in writing to dispense with or to limit standard disclosure.

 

(The court may make an order requiring standard disclosure under rule 28.3 which deals with directions in relation to cases on the fast track and under rule 29.2 which deals with case management in relation to cases on the multi-track)

 

Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed

 

31.6

 

Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only –

(a) the documents on which he relies; and

 

(b) the documents which –

(i) adversely affect his own case;

 

(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or

 

(iii) support another party’s case; and

 

 

© the documents which he is required to disclose by a relevant practice direction.

 

 

 

Duty of search

 

31.7

 

(1) When giving standard disclosure, a party is required to make a reasonable search for documents falling within rule 31.6(b) or ©.

 

(2) The factors relevant in deciding the reasonableness of a search include the following –

(a) the number of documents involved;

 

(b) the nature and complexity of the proceedings;

 

© the ease and expense of retrieval of any particular document; and

 

(d) the significance of any document which is likely to be located during the search.

 

 

(3) Where a party has not searched for a category or class of document on the grounds that to do so would be unreasonable, he must state this in his disclosure statement and identify the category or class of document.

(Rule 31.10 makes provision for a disclosure statement)

 

 

Duty of disclosure limited to documents which are or have been in a party’s control

 

31.8

 

(1) A party’s duty to disclose documents is limited to documents which are or have been in his control.

 

(2) For this purpose a party has or has had a document in his control if –

(a) it is or was in his physical possession;

 

(b) he has or has had a right to possession of it; or

 

© he has or has had a right to inspect or take copies of it.

 

 

 

Disclosure of copies

 

31.9

 

(1) A party need not disclose more than one copy of a document.

 

(2) A copy of a document that contains a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature –

(a) on which a party intends to rely; or

 

(b) which adversely affects his own case or another party’s case or supports another party’s case;

 

shall be treated as a separate document.

 

(Rule 31.4 sets out the meaning of a copy of a document)

 

Procedure for standard disclosure

 

31.10

 

(1) The procedure for standard disclosure is as follows.

 

(2) Each party must make and serve on every other party, a list of documents in the relevant practice form.

 

(3) The list must identify the documents in a convenient order and manner and as concisely as possible.

 

(4) The list must indicate –

(a) those documents in respect of which the party claims a right or duty to withhold inspection; and

 

(b)

(i) those documents which are no longer in the party’s control; and

 

(ii) what has happened to those documents.

 

 

(Rule 31.19 (3) and (4) require a statement in the list of documents relating to any documents inspection of which a person claims he has a right or duty to withhold)

 

(5) The list must include a disclosure statement.

 

(6) A disclosure statement is a statement made by the party disclosing the documents –

(a) setting out the extent of the search that has been made to locate documents which he is required to disclose;

 

(b) certifying that he understands the duty to disclose documents; and

 

© certifying that to the best of his knowledge he has carried out that duty.

 

 

(7) Where the party making the disclosure statement is a company, firm, association or other organisation, the statement must also –

(a) identify the person making the statement; and

 

(b) explain why he is considered an appropriate person to make the statement.

 

 

(8) The parties may agree in writing –

(a) to disclose documents without making a list; and

 

(b) to disclose documents without the disclosing party making a disclosure statement.

 

 

(9) A disclosure statement may be made by a person who is not a party where this is permitted by a relevant practice direction

 

 

Duty of disclosure continues during proceedings

 

31.11

 

(1) Any duty of disclosure continues until the proceedings are concluded.

 

(2) If documents to which that duty extends come to a party’s notice at any time during the proceedings, he must immediately notify every other party.

 

 

Specific disclosure or inspection

 

31.12

 

(1) The court may make an order for specific disclosure or specific inspection.

 

(2) An order for specific disclosure is an order that a party must do one or more of the following things –

(a) disclose documents or classes of documents specified in the order;

 

(b) carry out a search to the extent stated in the order;

 

© disclose any documents located as a result of that search.

 

 

(3) An order for specific inspection is an order that a party permit inspection of a document referred to in rule 31.3(2).

(Rule 31.3(2) allows a party to state in his disclosure statement that he will not permit inspection of a document on the grounds that it would be disproportionate to do so)

 

 

Disclosure in stages

 

31.13

 

The parties may agree in writing, or the court may direct, that disclosure or inspection or both shall take place in stages.

 

 

Documents referred to in statements of case etc.

 

31.14

 

(1) A party may inspect a document mentioned in –

(a) a statement of case;

 

(b) a witness statement;

 

© a witness summary; or

 

(d) an affidavit(GL).

 

(e) Revoked.

 

 

(2) Subject to rule 35.10(4), a party may apply for an order for inspection of any document mentioned in an expert's report which has not already been disclosed in the proceedings.

 

(Rule 35.10(4) makes provision in relation to instructions referred to in an expert’s report)

 

Inspection and copying of documents

 

31.15

 

Where a party has a right to inspect a document –

(a) that party must give the party who disclosed the document written notice of his wish to inspect it;

 

(b) the party who disclosed the document must permit inspection not more than 7 days after the date on which he received the notice; and

 

© that party may request a copy of the document and, if he also undertakes to pay reasonable copying costs, the party who disclosed the document must supply him with a copy not more than 7 days after the date on which he received the request.

 

(Rule 31.3 and 31.14 deal with the right of a party to inspect a document)

 

 

Disclosure before proceedings start

 

31.16

 

(1) This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure before proceedings have started1.

 

(2) The application must be supported by evidence.

 

(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where –

(a) the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

 

(b) the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

 

© if proceedings had started, the respondent’s duty by way of standard disclosure, set out in rule 31.6, would extend to the documents or classes of documents of which the applicant seeks disclosure; and

 

(d) disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

(i) dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

 

(ii) assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

 

(iii) save costs.

 

 

 

(4) An order under this rule must –

(a) specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

 

(b) require him, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

(i) which are no longer in his control; or

 

(ii) in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

 

 

 

(5) Such an order may –

(a) require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

 

(b) specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

[mungos mum]

Hi Peeps

 

Just a quick response (as it's well past my bedtime) to Bombs Away's earlier post.

With regard to Court cases involving LPA Receivers...

there have been plenty of Court cases against Receivers but very few cases where people have won.

The 'Law of Property Act' goes back (I think) to Victorian times & seems to protect the Receivers totally.

My understanding is that it will take a change of law (not a cheap nor quick answer) to fight these ****** companies.

 

A little snippet that may make you all want to have a re think re future careers!

We have finally received a spreadsheet from the Receiver showing credits & debits for the properties they are 'managing'.

On one of our properties, the management company (appointed by the Receivers) have charged to our mortgage account £42.00 for replacing a couple of kitchen lightbulbs.

I am working in the wrong job!

 

Best wishes

MM

[patrickq1]

go and check those lightbilbs goldplated i guess huh..go to b n q and price up two lightbulbs and get a receipt take this to court...lol

firtsly you want them removed from handling the properties you are doing it yourself or you are appointing a company that you trust..

[patrickq1]

anyone know what happened to blackpool landlady i was nt on here looking at this thread at the time...but if its gone pearshaped for her she might be able to recover with help from here now

[Bombs Away]

MUNGOS MUM

a bleeding cheeck!!!

gnite all

Bombs Away

[caro]

Hi Peeps

 

Just a quick response (as it's well past my bedtime) to Bombs Away's earlier post.

With regard to Court cases involving LPA Receivers...

there have been plenty of Court cases against Receivers but very few cases where people have won.

The 'Law of Property Act' goes back (I think) to Victorian times & seems to protect the Receivers totally.

My understanding is that it will take a change of law (not a cheap nor quick answer) to fight these ****** companies.

 

A little snippet that may make you all want to have a re think re future careers!

We have finally received a spreadsheet from the Receiver showing credits & debits for the properties they are 'managing'.

On one of our properties, the management company (appointed by the Receivers) have charged to our mortgage account £42.00 for replacing a couple of kitchen lightbulbs.

I am working in the wrong job!

 

Best wishes

MM

 

Minimum charge from a builder plus VAT at a guess MM. I see bills like that at work all the time.