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

[diddled]

Chillin, in a legal charge/mortgage that Im looking at right now, one of the clauses says-

 

Owner not to grant leases

The Owner shall not except with the written consent of any person duly authorised by the Bank exercise the powers of leasing or agreeing to lease or of accepting or agreeing to accept surrenders conferred by sections 99 and 100 LPA 1925 on a mortgage of land while in possession.

 

Now considering that your mortgages are BTL I imagine this sort of clause wont be included in your contracts, as the intention behind your mortgages in the 1st place is to provide tenanted accomodation.

[patrickq1]

now this will be fun because one or the other would have to take you to court to have the lease revoked hehe go for it dude ,

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

on that basis them taking you to court would then have to comply with the CPR rules of engagement , now it becomes intresting considering that they have always refused to answer any queries i cant see them issuing a court summons , the only thing they can and may try to do is sell your property ,but with a lease tenant they will find this very difficult in today's climate

patrickq1

[Nightmare4banks]

My limited understanding is that within the confines of the mortgage contract, when lenders appoint receivers all powers are transfered to them including the right to issue tenants with contracts.

I don't imagine that you are breaking the law by issuing tenants with AST's but you are probably in breach of contract and you are definately guilty of 'winding up' the poor, hard working, honest receivers !...oh dear, what a shame, good on you chiilin

 

I totally agree here.Also,including the last comment!lol!

[Nightmare4banks]

Chillin, in a legal charge/mortgage that Im looking at right now, one of the clauses says-

 

Owner not to grant leases

The Owner shall not except with the written consent of any person duly authorised by the Bank exercise the powers of leasing or agreeing to lease or of accepting or agreeing to accept surrenders conferred by sections 99 and 100 LPA 1925 on a mortgage of land while in possession.

 

Now considering that your mortgages are BTL I imagine this sort of clause wont be included in your contracts, as the intention behind your mortgages in the 1st place is to provide tenanted accomodation.

 

I disgree here because a lease is the lawful right to occupy land for a fixed term over several years whereas an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement is for a less period of time.A very good example would be for a private landlord/landlady to grant a lease to a Local Authority or Housing Association and this case the Leaseholder/Tenant is that particular housing body and not the tenant(s) that reside in the property itself but be merely sub-tenants to the landlord/landlady.So any mortgage clause written as such means that the landlord/landlady would have to get the permission to either lease/agree to lease.I hope that this helps but if you have any other questions,please feel free to ask.

Cheers,Nightmare4banks

Edited March 10, 2011 by Nightmare4banks

[mungos mum]

In MX's contracts it does specify that we are only to let on an AST for maximum of 12 months and that letting to housing associations etc is strictly forbidden without prior consent from the lender

[chillinlong]

Hi all,

 

Interesting thing is they keep threatening court action etc along with getting a restaint order on me to stay away from my own properties which I don't really know is possible or not?

 

The more I seem to do it though the more they seem to be scratching their heads, is there anything they can bloody do about it? Now they have threatened me with possible prison sentence which is getting fun. They now do not want to let properties even if I have moved tenants in and signed a tenancy. They just say it is unauthorised and I am breaking the law uh oh and are they not?

 

I am protecting the properties from going into further arrears and preventing them being damaged and sold for short price. Worst thing about it is the portfolio manager is just as bad and is not a full shilling and just blames everything on me. Sometimes I think did he work for ws before just visiting to look for weaknesses...

 

Strange bunch these guys

 

But their argument is I amnot allowed to go near nor rent the properties without their permission. How am I supposed to rely on an incompetent bunch then?

 

Since they have now decided to try and sell properties that are in perfect condition to rent and this is the best strategy they now reckon. Wondering on their profits basis or on common sense which I don't think they have.

Edited March 11, 2011 by chillinlong

[mungos mum]

chillin, there's nothing rarer than common sense!

[patrickq1]

hi chilli ,i really hope you have got all these threats on tape ,as you may not be aware by threatening prison is an criminal offense, i hope you report this to the OFT and FSA , i found out that the FOS would like you to make your complaints to them in person only to discover that this would mean a two year wait for a result ? no wonder they were going on to me about you making complaints it means you would no longer have a business if you listened to them, so FSA and make your complaint also ask for a review of your complaint to a seniour official if they have not acted within 1 month ,in fact i would go so far as making my complaint to a more senior level

patrickq1

[mungos mum]

We are in the middle of a long drawn out fight with Lloyds at the moment, the bare basics are as follows;-

We went through all the correct complaints channels,

We complained to our business manager, an area manager, Lloyds complaints department and then FOS.

The FOS said that Lloyds were in the wrong but as business people we should have known better than to have accepted verbally what a Lloyds BDM told us, & then offered us £250 compensation providing we retrospectively signed Lloyds paperwork.

We rejected this offer & told FOS that we didn't agree with their findings.

Lloyds are now taking us to court.

 

We went to see our solicitor for advice on how to present our case in court.

He explained what we should do for our defence & we then looked at the possibility of counter claiming.

Our solicitor explained that it was very difficult to counter claim in court when you have been through the FOS.

 

If this is the case then the last thing any of us want to do is go to the FOS about MX or the receivers and then find that later on it prevents us from issuing a counter claim against them.

 

Do any of you legal minded people out there in CAG land have any knowledge of this?

 

Many thanks

 

Mungos mum

[Nightmare4banks]

Hi all,

 

Interesting thing is they keep threatening court action etc along with getting a restaint order on me to stay away from my own properties which I don't really know is possible or not?

 

The more I seem to do it though the more they seem to be scratching their heads, is there anything they can bloody do about it? Now they have threatened me with possible prison sentence which is getting fun. They now do not want to let properties even if I have moved tenants in and signed a tenancy. They just say it is unauthorised and I am breaking the law uh oh and are they not?

 

I am protecting the properties from going into further arrears and preventing them being damaged and sold for short price. Worst thing about it is the portfolio manager is just as bad and is not a full shilling and just blames everything on me. Sometimes I think did he work for ws before just visiting to look for weaknesses...

 

Strange bunch these guys

 

But their argument is I amnot allowed to go near nor rent the properties without their permission. How am I supposed to rely on an incompetent bunch then?

 

Since they have now decided to try and sell properties that are in perfect condition to rent and this is the best strategy they now reckon. Wondering on their profits basis or on common sense which I don't think they have.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi All!

 

Chillinlong,

 

I was very sorry to read about your problems.

 

However,I feel this is the most appropriate way forward:

 

1.You need to obtain an injunction against the LPA(as this is what the LPA is threatening you),please go to the following link:

 

http://www.contactlaw.co.uk/injunction-court.html

 

Which explains more about injunctions.You can even find a lawyer through this site too.

 

2.Please remember that to breach an injunction is contempt of court and which could render the offender a prison sentence.

 

3.You will able to receive damages too - in your case they should equal your losses i.e. damage to your properties and loss of rental income.

 

4.So you should be able to force the LPA to,refrain from damaging the properties any further, repair the properties and pay the rent less the LPA commission in a timely fashion to the mortgage lender and stop the LPA from selling your properties too.

 

5.Finally,DO NOT rent the properties out without obtaining a clear written consent to do so.

 

I hope you find this information useful.If you have any questions,please feel free to ask.

 

Keep us posted.

 

All the best!

 

Cheers,Nightmare4banks

Edited March 12, 2011 by Nightmare4banks

[caro]

Our solicitor explained that it was very difficult to counter claim in court when you have been through the FOS.

 

If this is the case then the last thing any of us want to do is go to the FOS about MX or the receivers and then find that later on it prevents us from issuing a counter claim against them.

 

The judge would almost certainly take into account the findings of the FOS, but should also consider why you don't agree with the findings and have taken them to court.

 

I have to say I think that FOS are likely to be a complete and utter waste of time, not least because in the year or 2 it takes them to deal with complaints, people may have lost their properties. I probably wouldn't waste time with them tbh.

[mungos mum]

Thanks Caro

 

Does that mean that legally we can still counter claim (against Lloyds) in court even though we have been through FOS?

 

We most certainly will NOT be going to FOS regarding our problems with MX, past experience has taught us that FOS are biased towards the lenders and are generally a total and utter waste of time.

 

Maybe I'm being a bit unfair, perhaps they are better geared to the smaller problems people have with small over charges on current accounts etc, although this is 'clutching at straws' as I have not met one person that has been satisfied with FOS's response.

[Dunnin]

Hi Chillinlong

 

I have tried to reply to your private message but unfortunately I am unable to due to the fact that I only have 2 postings on the Forum. Don't know how to contact you otherwise.

 

Regards

 

Dunnin

[patrickq1]

send an e mail Dun send it me i will forward it to Chilli,

patrickq1

dont worry i owe nout to anyone ...

[email protected]

[caro]

Thanks Caro

 

Does that mean that legally we can still counter claim (against Lloyds) in court even though we have been through FOS?

 

We most certainly will NOT be going to FOS regarding our problems with MX, past experience has taught us that FOS are biased towards the lenders and are generally a total and utter waste of time.

 

Maybe I'm being a bit unfair, perhaps they are better geared to the smaller problems people have with small over charges on current accounts etc, although this is 'clutching at straws' as I have not met one person that has been satisfied with FOS's response.

 

Yes you can as this link shows. http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/final_decision.pdf

[diddled]

A recent interesting article here-

 

http://www.jgrweb.com/downloads/buy_to_let_property_law.pdf

[mungos mum]

Hi diddled

 

I've just read the above article & have printed it to show others that may have not had a chance to read it.

 

There is some really interesting stuff in here & hopefully some of the bits will be a real help to us all.

On page 12, there is reference to the consequences of receivers acting as the lenders agent and examples of trials that followed and were held up in court....this is great.

We have copies of e-mail traffic between lender and receiver (obtained via Subject Access Requests) I know that other people also have hard evidence of the lenders directing the receivers.

 

Thank you

 

Mungos mum

[chillinlong]

Hi Diddled, thanks for the post very interesting article indeed.

 

Dunnin, have replied with my contact details. Thanks for passing on message Patrick...

 

Anymore people want to attend on the 17th? Let me know...

 

Thanks

[mungos mum]

Hi chillin

 

I know that 'the usual suspects' will be attending the meeting on the 17th, it's such a shame that we cannot make contact with all the other people who have,over the last few years, posted on this site but understandably now seem to have given up the fight.

From what I understand, this Barrister we are all going to meet, is going to look at all our cases, find out who has the 'worst case scenario' and then put it forward as a test case in the courts....it will be interesting to see where this goes.

 

Best wishes

 

Mungos mum

[caro]

It'll be very interesting. I wish everyone good luck with this.

[mungos mum]

Thanks Caro.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained and we have very little left to lose now.

We'll keep you posted regarding the outcome.

 

All the best

Mungos mum

[caro]

That'd be great.

[mungos mum]

Yes you can as this link shows. http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/final_decision.pdf

 

This article seems to explain how you should proceed when taking a company to court when the company have not adheared to paying the compensation directed by the FOS.

Our solicitor told us that by rejecting the findings of the FOS then it could bar us from counter claiming in court against a company.

This was in relation to a problem we are having with Lloyds and is nothing to do with MX but I presume if this is true then it is the same which ever company is invoved.

We haven't (thank goodness) put in a complaint to the FOS about MX's conduct.

[caro]

Well that's solicitors for you.

But if the ombudsman’s final decision doesn’t find in favour of the consumer, the consumer doesn’t have to accept it – and it doesn’t become binding. The consumer is free to go to court instead (depending on any court requirements or restrictions – for example, on time limits).