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

[patrickq1]

it looks like your mortgage may have been securitised ,so you need to find out who actually owns the Mortgage , is it still irish life or has it been securitised ..

see here

receipt of €4 billion into Permanent TSB which was offered as collateral in respect of these deposits. This

transaction occurred in four tranches.

These transactions matured on the 1st October.

IL&P plc:

As part of IL&Ps ongoing wholesale funding programme, the bank enters into normal secured interbank

transactions of short term duration with a number of participants including the ECB. In accordance with market

norms, these involve the pledging of eligible mortgage assets in exchange for cash with the transactions being

accounted for as interbank deposits.

At 30th June 2008 IL&P had outstanding €7.73 billion of such transactions. Anglo’s participation in these

transactions amounted to €3.33 billion.

These transactions were correctly accounted for as interbank deposits in the interim accounts of IL&P.

There were no material collateralised transactions with Anglo at 31st December 2008.

Contacts:

Barry Walsh

Head of Investor Relations

Ph:

Ray Gordon

MKC Communications

Ph: [office]

Ph: [mobile]

01...

01...

08...

Download Centre Alert Service Legal Disclaimer Privacy Statement

Irish Life & Permanent plc - Irish Life & Permanent Statement Page 2 of 2

http://www.irishlifepermanent.ie/ipm/media/pressreleases/ilpgroup/group2009/2009-0... 14/02/2009

[patrickq1]

the person to contact let him know of your complaint in full and explain all that has gone on and how unfair all this has become ,also you have been in contact with several BTL customers who are all saying the same thing,ask that they explain why is it they are so desperate to get these funds in when it just will not make economic sense now you are back on your feet and have always been willing participant just what is driving this subsidary company to create an economic loss because the housing market is so depressed and you feel that this cannot be what investors in the company are looking for in fact you shall go so far as to report to these companies just how desperate the attitude of the company seem to be, has the mortgage been securitised , can they give you an assurance that they will consider your case and others and cease and desist from the suicidal actions of possibly a few rouge managers who may have an ulteriar motive for personal gain

list the complaints you are willing to make known to these companies ,,, this may set the ball rolling in the south and might have the desired effect,, dont worry about making waves they have wanted to do this without any care or concern and not to mention the distress also address for the attention of the board of directors ..i will give you all the names who you need to address

Peter McCabe

Head of Financial Institutions

Irish Life & Permanent plc

Group Treasury

IFSC

Dublin 1

 

Tel: +353 (0) 1 246 2451

Fax: +353 (0) 1 246 2412

Email: [email protected]

 

e mail all of these see what hppens

Customer Services

 

Irish Life Assurance

Irish Life Centre

Lower Abbey Street

Dublin 1

 

Tel: +353 (0) 1 704 1010

Fax: +353 (0) 1 704 1900

[email protected]

 

permanent tsb

56-59 St Stephens Green

Dublin 2

 

Tel: 1890 500 121

Email: [email protected]

 

Investor Relations

 

Barry Walsh

Head of Investor Relations

Tel: +353 (0) 1 704 2678

 

Orla Brannigan

Investor Relations Manager

Tel: +353 (0) 1 704 1345

Email: [email protected]

 

Public Relations

 

Ray Gordon

Gordon MRM

51-52 Fitzwilliam Square West

Dublin 2

 

Tel: +353 (0) 1 6650 450

Mobile: +353 (0) 87 241 7373

Email: [email protected]

 

Group Treasury

 

Peter McCabe

Head of Financial Institutions

Irish Life & Permanent plc

Group Treasury

IFSC

Dublin 1

 

Tel: +353 (0) 1 246 2451

Fax: +353 (0) 1 246 2412

Email: [email protected]

[chillinlong]

Hi All,

 

I am sorry to hear Marley1, Louisa and M3. the fact remains we have to fight these every inch and let them know they cant just ruin our lives like this and act immorally damaging a lot of lives in the process.

 

Patrick, Thanks again for your crucial bits of infromation.

 

Every day they are doing something to damage further with their laziness and arrogant approach.

 

I suggest every lets me know who wants to meet for a few hours in mid september somewhere around London. We can then sit down and look at what common grounds we have and forumlate an action plan. I already have about 6 people who are on board to do this but we need at least 10 before we can actually have any meat behind us. I am meeting a few solicitors over the next few days to get one on board officially for us and work on our behalfs. If it is a class action it will have a lot more strength.

 

Come on everybody please let me know who else is interested in getting together to join in this action. Please PM me with a brief description of your experience and your contact details, I will then arrnae the dates and email you details. The sooner we do this the less time it gives to the LPAs to work out another problem for us.

 

I am waiting to hear form you all now. Those off you who have already PMed me I will infrom you once we have enough to meet up.

 

Thanks again.

[Meerkat One]

Hi All

Just catching up and I am so sorry to hear all these horror stories. I know CHL securitised and I will try and find out more. I am also working on MEX securitised loans. Marley 1 could you try and pm again?

 

It is interesting to note that MEX are now attempting to shift the blame for instant remortgages to solicitors they claim misled them. In my day the BDM's would push next day remortgages - a major selling point in purchasing BMV properties. I fail to see how the Executive team at MEX claim they knew nothing about the practice when all their employees were perfectly aware. The Executive team were perfectly aware and if they were not then they were clearly not doing their job properly and could be accused of corporate negligence.

The timescales all fit when the mortgage lenders started panicking at the end of 2007 beginning 2008 and mortgage deal interest rates were rapidly increasing. MEX did not withdraw their instant remortgage facility until May 2008 and all brokers were given notice this was being withdrawn - but they didn't know anything about it????

 

In order to help we need your individual situation please pm me.

 

Regards

Meerkat One

[patrickq1]

instant remortgages to solicitors they claim misled them.

the blame game makes no intresting sense to you but what is intresting is they are admitting a mistake, so they should be talking to you instead o emplying receivers, so the ball is squarely in the MX court ,try get the admission in writing this can then be used or even a recording to the shift of the blame is enough to show you were not at fault .. yes its time you all got together in a meeting with a solicitor and got down to brass tacks as this cannot be handled individually ,

patrickq1

[m3car]

HI Patrick

 

Thanks so much for this information. My solicitor is away to tueday so no progress today. Had a tenant on today sayin they were speakin to touchstone and told to leave in a month and under no circumstances even though my arrears are paid would I BE GETTING MY HOUSE BACK.

 

The name peter vaughn does not ring a bell mate. It is mattew hunt and john midgley from touchstone that are pushing it

 

I will email all these people and see what happens. this may sound stupid but what do u mean by mortgage being securitised?

[chillinlong]

Interesting times with MX unfolding.

 

Speaking to a tenant this morning, he explained to me the contractors Walker Singleton have been sending around are making a mess of things and one of them actually confessed "The jobs are not really worth doing that much because Walker Singleton are making thier own money on top of the jobs!" and "Waler Singleton have to get it approved by Mortgage Express". I am told Mortgage Express have got nothing to do with Walker Singleton and do not have any iterference with the any LPA. If I understand this correctly MX is deciding for WS to do the jobs or not? This is the whole point of an LPA being in place and to prevent legal action against MX is is not that to ensure LPA decides all courses of actions?

 

I cant understad what is right or not any more because they keep providing conflicting information and are also refusing to give me copies of the invoices for the works carried out ie MX do not have any copies of them but WS do yet MX are authorising the repirs etc? Flabbergasting repair controls this is, authorising without knowing what the work entails. Does this make sense anyone?

[Meerkat One]

Hi m3car

 

Securitisation is when a lender sells on a bunch of mortgages and then uses the funds raised to lend again. Whoever purchases the mortgages now owns the loans and very often the lender becomes the Administrator. In the case of MEX we are interested to know who owns our loans and thus who is legally able to appoint lpa receivers.

 

In your case, when were lpa receivers instructed? Autumn 2008?

Have you SAR MEX and Touchstone?

On what grounds are Touchstone selling property if it is tenanted?

 

Regards

Meerkat One

[patrickq1]

well they are and have left themselves squarely open to a frontal assault and a lawsuit direct ,the lpa is the sole administrator, this looks like collusion and they are now in the frame, so this will need the solicitor to issue a 31.15 cpr against both companies ie MX and WS you can safely squest you must notably ask for the full audit trail from both companies, they can neither refuse nor obviscate ...

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

and also your tennants have the full protection in law not to be removed without a section 21 ? i think or section 8 first, so they cannot just be thrown out, your solicitor needs to start working fast and dont forget the request for the full audit trail, also if you have not signed a floating charge then they can only go for one property at a time but if during autum 2008 they got you to sign a floating charge then this can be challenged in the high court your solicitor can help with that

patrickq1

[chillinlong]

Thanks again Patrick.

 

Another question is if I issue 12 months tenancy agreement to the tenant, then if the tenants pay their rents on time can the LPA recievers issues notices to get them out during this period? Especially if the tenancy states no notice period allowed to be given until contract expires?

[tarquin999]

I had a chat with Chelsea Litigation Team yesterday, and they came up with a surprising statement - which worries me because I have no idea whether it's true. Also, they reminded me of something else which doesn't sound right.

 

(1) The Litigation person at Chelsea said their instruction to Allsop (the Fixed Charge Receiver) was to sell each of my properties that had gone more than 2 months into arrears as quickly as possible. My understanding was that the lender/receiver could not blindly sell the properties - they had a duty of care and that if the tenant was paying reliably they had to maintain the status quo rather than sell the property.

 

Does anyone know for sure whether my understanding is correct, or whether it's the Chelsea's prerogative to sell the property blindly regardless of whether the property is nicely tenanated? (which will cause me a loss, because the property *will* sell with a shortfall at auction)

 

(2) The Litigation person also confimred to me that before I reached the 2 months arrears stage, I had begged for a payment plan to spread the catching up of arrears over a few months, and that they (Chelsea) has replied "we do not allow payment plans". Is that legal? Is it their prerogative (bear in mind - they are not yet covered by and parts of the FSA's juristiction)? It certainly is a one of a kind - even Mortgage Express allow a payment plan!

 

Ideas, anyone? Are they acting unlawfully, or simply unethically (if the latter, then I will struggle).

[chillinlong]

Hi Tarquin,

 

That does sound wrong that! First thing you need to do is a SAR. Then write a complaints letter to them. Once they respond as to why they would not accept payment plans etc, then complain to FSA and FOS. Even though BTL are not regulated, I am sure they still have to abide by the fair repoessions procedure as advised by teh government themselves during the recession.

 

From the LPA point of view they should be considering all aspects before they decide to sell ie if the rent is covering the mortgage and will clear the arrears and the fact it will make a loss if sold in this market, then they should legally take this into account. Sounds very unfair this, again I would instantly write a complaints letter to them.

[caro]

I'd be inclined to contact your MP too Tarquin.

[tarquin999]

Thanks chillinlong and caro.

 

Before I accuse the lenders of foul play in writing (I've accused them verbally - and recorded the conversation!), I need to know for sure whether the lender is permitted to instruct the receiver to sell instead of managing my happily tenanted properties, and whether they are permitted not to offer a "payment plan" for arrears.

 

I've read through as much of the LPA 1925 and info about LPA Receivers as I can, and I simply cannot find definitive answers to my questions/concerns.

 

Does anyone know the answers for sure?

[caro]

Well if you can't find the answers, ask them to provide the necessary documentation to prove that they have the right to take this action.

[patrickq1]

they probably have the right Caro after 1 month but under the present climate ,and recomendations from the FSA they really should have an obligation to treat customers fairly ,you need to bring an action imeadiately and put a time order on your claim, then you can procceed under CPR 31.15 asking for a full AUDIT TRAIL of all documents they possess and bring this to the judges attention ,if as you indicate you have a recording make a copy send this to the society and also the receiver warning them that you have been left with no choice but to begin possible action against them for any losses incurred, so the judge can direct them to comply with a time order and also to cease and desist with the judge giving also directions to comply fully with your CPR REQUEST, i think if the FSA have this recording also any statements made by the otherside send those tapes to FSA as it will be very intresting to see the FSA stance against this hard nosed rush to create losses by chelsea and others as it makes no economic sense for them to continue

patrickq1

[Meerkat One]

Hi tarquin999

 

Are Chelsea acting as Mortgagee in Possession? It sounds as though they are instructing the Receiver is this correct?

[tarquin999]

Hi Meerkat One. Yes, I believe that is the case.

 

A letter from Chelsea says "...Chelsea is proceeding with the appointment of a Receiver. The total monies owed under the mortgage are now payable...".

 

Then a letter from Allsop saying "...I am writing to advise that xxx was on the xxth July 2010 appointed as fixed charge Receivers in respect of the Freehold interest..."

 

Is that the same as "Mortgagee in Possession"? Neither Chelsea nor Allsop have used the word "possession" in any of their documents.

[diddled]

These links may assist-

 

Industry guidance on buy-to-let arrears and possessions

PDF 102kb

 

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/policy/issues/5002

[tarquin999]

Thanks diddled. It makes interesting reading, and I can see there are several areas where Chelsea are not employing the guidelines.

 

Having said that, the CML guidelines are just that... "guidelines". So I will probably be fobbed off.

 

I'm planning to send a mega-pack to Chelsea today... a SAR, CPR 35.15, letter of complaint, covering letter stating that if they take the property out of receivership at their expense, and accept a payment plan to recover the arrears over the next 10 months, then I will not pursue the complaint and they can disregard the SAR and CPR 35.15. Not sure what the outcome is going to be though!

[Meerkat One]

I am not entirely sure but I understood that if a lender was acting as mortgagee in possession they would have to apply to the Court to gain possession to then sell. The lenders use lpa receivers to avoid this as you can go to court to delay, offer payment arrangements etc etc. However, it is then up to the lpa receiver to make the judgement on whether a property must be sold if it does not pay it's way or is too costly. A lender should not interfere with the lpa receivers's decision. By influencing them they are by passing the court process and is not the legal way to proceed in a repossession.

[patrickq1]

just been on another thread and it came up repudiatory breach of contract, susch as the chelsea interferance is a repudiatory breach of contract, you can accept this breach and rescind all contracts you have with them hand over all the keys and then litigate for losses, i will look further into this but this is an eare worth looking into, merkat is correct gross interferance of the contract will also leave chelsea liable for damages including loss of profitts

patrickq1

[chillinlong]

I am also sure about the interference is not legal aswell, but like Tarquin says is there anywhere that states that? Maybe the LPA Act of 1925 may confirm this?

 

I know it is confirmed in the Mortgage complaints replies I recieve but not seen anywhere else.

[tarquin999]

Hi patrickq1. That sounds really interesting.

 

Which specific aspects do you believe might constitute "gross interference"?