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

[patrickq1]

if all of the mex and other send complaints into the select financial committee members each MP explaining your case in ful as the see HECTOR SANTS (THE CREEP) AND LORD TURNER OF ECCHINSWELL THEY RUN THE FSA make your complaints known to each individual member of the finacial committee that turner and sants are turning a blind eye to your problems due to unregulated part of this market ..treasury select committee memebers ,ask for a reveiw towards emergency regulation or consultation with each of yourselves ..

patrickq

1http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/andrew-tyrie/25231

Member Party Mr Andrew Tyrie (Chairman) Conservative John Cryer Labour Michael Fallon Conservative Mark Garnier Conservative Stewart Hosie Scottish National Party Andrea Leadsom Conservative Mr Andy Love Labour Co-Operative John Mann Labour Mr George Mudie Labour Jesse Norman Conservative David Rutley Conservative John Thurso Liberal Democrat Mr Chuka Umunna Labour

[caro]

Vince Cable can be very outspoken. I would be inclined to copy him in on letters too.

[chillinlong]

Hi All,

 

I got no further responses from MX, have now actually stopped bothering to reply to me now.

 

ICO replied and said even though Drydens hold information on me but because Walker Singleton instructed them, they are now not taking this further that they will not provide my SAR.

 

ICO replied with MX and WS to ask them did they comply and why do they think they complied. Doesnt sound like it is going to go any further as the recivers and MX are experts in making it look like they have covered the rules book.

 

Only next option is MP, but again what can they do?

 

thanks again all, we have to keep plodding on.

[caro]

So Drydens can hold information on you but don't have to tell you what it is? Why does it matter who instructed them? If it's about you I don't understand why they don't have to reveal what they have. They may have told them all sorts of guff about you which may or may not be accurate.

 

Sorry chillin, but if that was me I wouldn't accept that and would be taking it further. I know the ICO have no teeth, but if you've exhausted all possibilities with the ICO then I suggest you take them to court to get the information.

[diddled]

Ive come across this before, and it looks like as Drydens are acting under WS instructions they are simply classed as a data processer, and it is WS who is the data controller.

[chillinlong]

Hi Caro/Diddled,

 

You are right I do need to take them to court but technically I think because WS are the data controller requesting I have to get info from WS. I think it looks like court action against WS if no action from ICO.

 

Thanks again

[patrickq1]

neither Cable nor Clegg or even grant shapp has replied to my requests concerning these breaches mentioned above , it is unbeleivable that they are being allowed to do this ,that is why i put the links to the treasury select commottee as they can publicly ask questions of both the fsa and ico and also ask for these companies to come forward and give evidence ,the MP who is asking for the ten minite rule ive mentioned him on here so a complaint for him to bring it to the select committee may help push things forward , also make written questions on the whatdotheyknow website as this goes through official channells ,i will do this to all the MPs of the select committee so you do not have to expose yourselves ok

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

letters gone off to the individual members of the treasury select committee , so they may asked for witnesses i do expect you all to come forward if it happens.

[patrickq1]

you alll need to write of to your MP's and demand from them a commitment that they will aproach the treasury select commitee for finance ok

patrickq1

[caro]

Ive come across this before, and it looks like as Drydens are acting under WS instructions they are simply classed as a data processer, and it is WS who is the data controller.

 

Thanks. Not come across this before. Sounds a bit of a cop out, but if that's the way it works.....

 

Hi Caro/Diddled,

 

You are right I do need to take them to court but technically I think because WS are the data controller requesting I have to get info from WS. I think it looks like court action against WS if no action from ICO.

 

Thanks again

 

Go for it chillin. Keep the pressure up.

 

neither Cable nor Clegg or even grant shapp has replied to my requests concerning these breaches mentioned above , it is unbeleivable that they are being allowed to do this ,that is why i put the links to the treasury select commottee as they can publicly ask questions of both the fsa and ico and also ask for these companies to come forward and give evidence ,the MP who is asking for the ten minite rule ive mentioned him on here so a complaint for him to bring it to the select committee may help push things forward , also make written questions on the whatdotheyknow website as this goes through official channells ,i will do this to all the MPs of the select committee so you do not have to expose yourselves ok

patrickq1

 

Well done Patrick.

[chillinlong]

Guys

 

I am meeting an MP tomorrow and dont really have a clue what to take with me .

 

Oh well, wish me luck everyone and hope we get an MP to start campaigning for us.

 

Thanks

[charlesGGG]

Guys

 

I am meeting an MP tomorrow and dont really have a clue what to take with me .

 

Oh well, wish me luck everyone and hope we get an MP to start campaigning for us.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

Good luck...Indeed.!

We all hope it is really fruitlful and they are willing to join the side of justice.

[tonyhuws]

Thank you for the information, I will act on what you have sugested. just found out today that M/X are braking the mortgage conditions as well. This is an ex GMAC buy to let fixed for three years, finished in April 2008 and onto SVR, however M/x are collecting LIBOR at 5.6% not the SVR of 2.25%, This is what placed the mortgage in arrears. Also they have been writing to an old address (they were notified of the change but ignored the info). I have copy letters sent to them, is this legal, I have the original mortgage offer from GMAC in 2005.

Edited November 30, 2010 by tonyhuws

[tonyhuws]

write a full pracee of what has occured since it all started, one to give him and one for you to refer too.

Write a list of bullet points that you want to raise, you will forget some when u are there.

make written complaints against all the bodies you want to complain against for his info and be ready with an answer to the question "what do you want me to do to help" You will only have half an hour and it will go very quickly. also keep him updated with every letter you write and every reply you do not get or if you do get any with those as well.

[patrickq1]

response from UKFI THEY ARE CONCERNED THAT YOU HAVE NOT BEEN SUPLIED WITH INFORMATION REQUESTED SO YOU ARE REQUIRED TO WRITE TO THEM IN PERSON ALSO EXPLAIN YOUR SITUATION ALL mp'S ON THE TREASURY COMMITTE HAVE PROMISED TO LOOK FURTHER INTO THIS PROBLEM

PATRICKQ1

Mandeep Dhillon

Correspondence Officer

 

UK Financial Investments Ltd

2nd Floor, Oceanic House, 1a Cockspur Street, London SW1Y 5BG

[patrickq1]

Good advice th

patrickq1

[chillinlong]

Thanks guys for all the offers of help etc.

 

OK Had meeting, MP is aware of it but need to co-ordinate support to flag this up with treasury. Problem is it will take some time to start doing this.

 

Back to drawing board to see what can actually be done about it.

 

Court? Need a solicitor who is clued up and will take on these cases.

[patrickq1]

Everyone must remember make all letters recorded delivery

[patrickq1]

[

The Insolvency Act 1986 provides that a company enters into a transaction with a person at an undervalue if:

 

• The company makes a gift to that person or otherwise enters into a transaction with that person on terms that the company will receive no consideration or
  

• The company enters into a transaction with that person for a consideration which is significantly less than the value of the consideration provided by the company.
  

Transactions at an undervalue undertaken 2 years prior to the liquidation come under review as part of a liquidators duties. The detailed statute law on undervalue transactions may be found at Sections 238, 240 and 241 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

 

The liquidator may apply to the Court for a determination whether or not a particular transaction was at an undervalue. The Court then "shall make such order as it thinks fit for restoring the position to what it would have been if the company had not entered into that transaction".

 

Transactions at an undervalue are reported by a liquidator to the Department of Trade and Industry in relation to the conduct of directors for Directors Disqualification purposes.

 

In other words, if, pre-liquidation, you sell an asset for less than its true value (in other words you enter into a transaction at an undervalue) , the liquidator can take court action to recover the difference and the DTI might seek to disqualify you from acting as a director for some future period.

[patrickq1]

The Law of Property Act 1925 provides that if the mortgagor (ie your company) is in liquidation then the courts permission is not required before a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver can be appointed.

 

By contrast If your company is in Administration, then no steps can then be taken to enforce any security over the company's property (such as the appointment of a Law of Property Act Receiver) except with the leave (permission) of the court or with the consent of the Administrator. (Source of law - Paragraph 43 of Schedule B1 of The Insolvency Act 1986)

 

Existing receivers may remain in office but may not realise security without court permission.

[patrickq1]

When Would a Law of Property (LPA) Act Receiver be Appointed

 

 

 

A Law of Property Act Receiver (LPA Receiver) is appointed by a lender who has a fixed charge over property under the statutory power given to that lender in section 109 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

Such an appointment of a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver may only take place if:-

 

1. the mortgage money has become due, and

 

2. the mortgagee has become entitled to exercise the statutory power of sale, where:-

 

2.1 there has been default in repayment of a loan for 3 months after a notice requiring it, or

 

2.2 Interest remains unpaid for 2 months after becoming due, or

 

2.3 there is another breach of the Act.

 

A Law of Property Act (LPA) Receivers powers are limited to collecting rents and income, however the Law of Property Act Receiver does have a duty to keep property in good repair and to insure the property.

 

There is an interesting case on the above which is known as Chatsworth Properties Ltd v Effiom. If you would like to read this case, please click here.

 

Obtain a copy of the Law of Property Act 1925 to fully understand when a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver may be appointed

[tonyhuws]

The law of property act 1925 requires that the receivers appointed by the mortgage company as your agents have to act in your and the mortgage companies interests, They are supposed to consult with you and to find the best way forward to repaying the arrears and to restoring the property to you. However this is what Templetons do not do they seem to ignore you and charge below market value rent, clock up the arrears and then place the property on the market to sell at below market value without telling you. This act needs repealing. It is good advise to read the act. Go onto the internet type in Law of Property act 1925 and it will come up, lots of reading but s109 is the main one you will need to read. You will all find it enlighting (if you have not done so already).

[patrickq1]

third party ,

http://www.lawofcontract.co.uk/consideration/rights-of-third-parties.php

[chillinlong]

Hi Guys,

 

It is interesting how you say the act "A Law of Property Act (LPA) Receivers powers are limited to collecting rents and income, however the Law of Property Act Receiver does have a duty to keep property in good repair and to insure the property."

 

But do they have the rights to sell the property? I have seen another property went into LPA Recievership sometime ago with another lender, the property then become vacant. the lender then written to say they are removing the LPA to sell the property and if they want to keep then to contact and discuss a payment plan. Why are they removing LPA to sell the property I wonder? MX are selling through the LPA but other lenders are selling themselves. the whole point of appointing LPA is so that they can prevent any legal action from tenants but once vacant they then remove LPA is the standard practice with some lenders. Unusual this.

 

Patrick the link doesnt work to the corporate and insolvency.

 

Thanks again all

[caro]

Conflict of interests maybe chillin?