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

[patrickq1]

ps. or whover has got the farthest i would suggest chilli he can be contacted via pm. a donation between most will make it easier for him and also it will save everyone from worrying far too much, easy for me to say as i am not affected as i am not a landlord ,but it really shows that you all have strengh of character in fighting this as one ,

get off me soapbox now

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

for some strange reason i keep getting pop ups everytime i come on this site ,WHAT HAVE THE CONSUMER ACTION GROUP DONE ? have they changed the terms and conditions fo allow pop up (without my opinion) or am i being paranoid

[keates]

I have sent the ruling to the FOS on the advice of my barrister. I think the ruling by the ICO has set a pecedent that could prove significant.

[patrickq1]

the ruling will be challenged and an apeal in this case you wish for legal representation to ask throught the courts that this ruling be challenged , so the need for speed is required and the right to a lawful hearing ,it would open a can of worms so you need to document all that happens on a daily basis thei date and time needs to be witnessed as to ant form of harrassment be it financial and mental ,you have them then on alll counts also enter the human rights act section 8 i think nway nuff said

patrickq1

[chillinlong]

Hello again everyone!

 

Wow! what a great response from everyone sorry I have been away for some time and internet access was almost impossible.

 

I thank everyone for their input again! It really makes a difference to us all the help from you all.

 

Yes mungos mum is right that we are liable to council tax whilst the property is in LPA recievership. I have council tax bailiffs knocking on my door every day for empty properties, I am trying to keep them filled but WS as efficient as they are under a agressive procedure to evict all of my tenants and market the properties ASAP. Now they are sending me threats to bankrupt me unless I pay the arrears which I dont see any sense to pay because of WS incompetence to let properties out. In the space of nearly 3 years now, WS have never managed to let a property out! So maybe I can use the negligence angle on this also.

 

Now the actions I have started we are getting somewhere a little and they WS and MX have sat up a little by agreeing no further action until resolved by further discussions. BUT who else WS have now breached that condition as usual by continuing to shutter empty properties needlessly and removing tenants who are up to date in other words going back on their agreements once again in other words restricting me to let any further properties to make further losses. The best one is they have been hassling a tenant of mine by threatening all sorts of action against them unless they move out ASAP via telephone, but I reiterated to tenant to tell them send the paperwork. Guest what WS have never sent any papaerwork confirming this yet they phoned the tenants every day for about 2 weeks when they found out new tenants have moved in.

 

Steve Molloy and Fraser Hallam of Walker Singleton are the main culprits behind this, they have tried everything possible to destroy my and everybody elses chances of recovering fom this mess they have caused for their profit. And they have no shame about this, I really do hope they get their turn served very soon and let them feel the heat which no doubt will soon happen because I will not let him get away with this theft.

 

At the moment I am continuing to place injunctions on the properties which is obvously serious amounts of monies for the legal actions and advice etc but I am determined not to let these people get away with this, just imagine how they must be treating vulnerable landlords every day. Daylight robbery and they have no concious at all. I am prepared to take this all the way on the basis of principle that this is a unfair practice and needs to be addressed properly and start working with us the customers rather than blaming us for their bailout they needed because they made so much of a loss and have to pay the government back with less money because they sold the properties undervalue because of bad management from their recievers.

 

But then the Mortgage Express portfolio manager from bradford and bingly practically accusses me of putting obstacles in their way and disurpting the process of letting them manage this, they are allowing WS to continue this practice and are in this together. This was the last straw for me as he really was being arrogant and taking the micheal by claiming that he knows about the cases as he was appointed half way through, yet he has never read any history on the case and gone on the basis of WS feedback. I am trying to explain to the man in reality if he was doing his job properly he would research all history related to any case he is working on to fully understand the situation, he then tried to say he does not do this because it impairs his judgement. I then changed the description to say if it was a legal case and solicitor changed halfway woouldnt you want to check the background of the case, he then stumbled and tried to track back by accusing me of causing trouble and not allowing WS to continue to manage the properties.

 

Such stupid people we have to deal with!

 

Fight to the death! Ready for it ...

[Ed999]

This chap, George Eustice MP, I saw on television a couple of weeks ago.

 

He made several appearances on Newsnight on BBC2 over the course of a few evenings, interviewed by Jeremy Paxman. So he's obviously not faint hearted.

 

Seemed a real go-getter, destined for greater things than the back-benches.

 

He wasn't discussing leaseholds, so his Bill didn't get any publicity. He came across as quite sensible, and seemed to know what he was talking about. Not something I'd say of many MPs.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

True I saw this he came over very well.

[keates]

Hi Chillinlong, I have been speaking to a guy from Leeds who is having big problems with Bradford and Bingley.

Thanks

Edited August 4, 2011 by caro
Removing personal info

[keates]

Is there anyone else affected by the appointment of LPA Receivers by Mortgage Express/Bradford and Bingley who lives in the Leeds area? If so, please can you contact xxxx urgently

 

Thank you

Edited August 4, 2011 by caro

[caro]

Please don't post personal details on the site. You could send a PM, but please be cautious about revealing too much personal information to strangers on the internet.

[tarquin999]

I posted back in September and October 2010 with a similar story regarding my mortgages with Chelsea and receivership of some of my properties by their LPA Receiver, Allsop.

 

As a quick summary... Chelsea put 5 of my properties with an LPA Receiver (Allsop). I found a buyer myself who would take all properties as a job lot and complete purchase within 28 days. That buyer was an FSA Authorised Home Finance company - so you can't get a much more robust buyer than that (even better credentials than Chelsea BTL themselves!). The FSA-Authorised buyer offered close to the redemption figures of the mortgages (there would be a shortfall, but in my experience of the property market I was 110% sure the offer would be substantially higher than could ever be achieved in auction when most properties were being sold with sitting tenants).

 

Despite continual reasoning then written complaints to Allsop Chelsea and the FSA, Allsop in their infinite wisdom decided to continue their sale at auction in October 2010 rather than accept the highly robust offer. They didn't even set the auction reserve to the levels of those offers.

 

Allsop's auction sales resulted in a combined LOSS of nearly £150k. However Allsop sent me a letter for each property saying "the mortgage had been redeemed" (no mention of my liability for any mortgage shortfall), and months later I had heard nothing from Chelsea so I assumed they had considered my complaints and decided to settle my accounts writing off the shortfall.

 

This week, ten months later, I received a letter from Chelsea saying I owed them nearly £150k as a result of the Allsop sales and I had 14 days to provide full details of my financial affairs and propose a payment plan - else they will take me to court.

 

Bearing in mind the court case (Bell v Long & Others [Court of Appeal, June 16th 2008]) where the court ruled in favour of the LPA Receiver being able to sell whenever they want at whatever price they want, I guess I should roll over and take it up the tailpipe. Really, I have no choice anyway, as I have zero funds to pay for legals. If I were to allow the court case to proceed and I lost, they could bankrupt me and I would lose my other 100-ish properties - so taking it up the tailpipe and agreeing a payment plan seems the sane option.

 

Thoughts? (ain't life unjust for those who try to work on the right side of the law and do the right thing!)

[keates]

The courts and everyone else in general consider us to be money grabbing scoundrels who are rolling in money. The fact is that the majority of landlords are hardworking people who look after their properties and their tenants and just manage to make ends meet. We have been treated like criminals by our mortgage lenders using an antiquated law to take us out. I am not sure how the lenders have benefited form what they have done, because it seems that in most cases, the LPA Receiver increases the debt as opposed to paying it off as the law requires of them. It must be that the lenders have insurances and are able to claim for the shortfall. The only beneficaries in all of this are the receivers and the agents and contractors they employ to work on our properties. They are having a great time with an open cheque book. Our lender has even increased our debt by writing cheques in favour of the LPA receiver whenever they say they need more funds to carry out unnecessary work. We have had some success with the ICO and the receivers have been told to give us details of rent collected and expenditure but so far they have failed to do so. Our accountant needs this to do our returns. Even he doubted us when we gave him statements showing our debt had incresaed but could not produce paperwork to back up the expenditure. We are awaiting a decision from the Financial Ombudsman on our complaint that the building society treated us unfairly and we are working with a public access barrister so if all else fails we will have to try our luck in court.

 

The Secured Lending Reforum Bill is due for a second reading in parliament on 9th September but I don't know if it will be too late to help us even if it gets through.

 

Earlier in the year, we tried to rally support for a campaign to help all landlords affected by the appointment of LPA Receivers but it didn't get off the ground. Too many have rolled over and given up and the press are totally disinterested in our plight.

 

PLEASE CAN I MAKE AN APPEAL TO ALL THE LANDLORDS WHO HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE APPOINTMENT OF LPA RECEIVERS, EVEN THOSE WHO HAVE 'ROLLED OVER', TO COME TOGETHER AND FIGHT THIS WITH A UNITED FRONT. IT IS THE ONLY WAY WE WILL HAVE ANY CHANCE OF CHANGING THINGS!

 

We are with the Kent Reliance Building Society and the LPA Receiver is Michael Parkes Surveyors and I would love to hear from anyone who is with either of these.

[chillinlong]

I am sorry to hear about this both again. It is sickening to the heart especially when we know how to manage our properties and these so called property professionals recievers dont.

 

Like what Keates says we have to keep fighting, I suppose we are waiting to see if any of us makes a breakthrough through the legal actions being undertaken then the rest can unleash against these LPA recievers rioters. I am still undergoing a barrage of legal action at the moment, so will update everyone soon as I hear some news.

[jutolo]

Hi, Anybody have the Mortgage Express Conditions 2004 booklet

 

Many Thanks

[caro]

Hi jutolo and welcome to CAG.

 

Perhaps you could explain a bit about yourself and your circumstances so people understand exactly what you're looking for and why.

 

Are you having problems with MEx and/or LPA receivers yourself?

[Ed999]

As a quick summary... Chelsea put 5 of my properties with an LPA Receiver (Allsop). I found a buyer myself who would take all properties as a job lot and complete purchase within 28 days. That buyer was an FSA Authorised Home Finance company - so you can't get a much more robust buyer than that (even better credentials than Chelsea BTL themselves!). The FSA-Authorised buyer offered close to the redemption figures of the mortgages (there would be a shortfall, but in my experience of the property market I was 110% sure the offer would be substantially higher than could ever be achieved in auction when most properties were being sold with sitting tenants).

 

Despite continual reasoning then written complaints to Allsop Chelsea and the FSA, Allsop in their infinite wisdom decided to continue their sale at auction in October 2010 rather than accept the highly robust offer. They didn't even set the auction reserve to the levels of those offers.

 

Allsop's auction sales resulted in a combined LOSS of nearly £150k.

 

 

I suggest that you defend any legal proceedings, without a Solicitor if need be, on the basis that the claimant's loss arose solely as a result of the claimant's negligence or breach of contract or breach of fiduciary duty, in failing to accept the highest offer made for the property, namely the written offer of £_____ made by XYZ Ltd on the __ day of _________ 2010.

 

You do seem to have an arguable case in negligence, alternatively for breach of contract, if you can prove that they refused a better offer, and that they failed to set a reserve of that amount at the auction. It is for you to PROVE that a better offer was made: you will need actual documentary evidence, or else you won't be believed.

 

I am surprised that the offeror didn't buy the property at the lower price at the auction: you will need to properly explain that discrepancy.

 

The LPA Receiver can be liable to you in negligence even if there is found to be no contract between you and him, e.g. if the mortgage contract is found to be solely between you and the bank or building society. So even if the Receiver is found by the court to be the contractual agent of the lender only, the Receiver can still be liable to the borrower - in tort instead of contract - if the Receiver is neligent.

 

You have nothing to lose in fighting this, because if you don't fight it you'll be made bankrupt for the £150,000 anyway, so it makes no difference that you might lose and have costs awarded against you, because all your debts will be wiped out by the bankruptcy, and that will get you anyway if you do nothing.

 

If you can really prove the existence of a better offer, and can prove that the LPA Receiver was aware of that offer before the auction, a defence of negligence on the Receiver's part has a fighting chance of succeeding.

 

The outcome of a court case is never certain. But the outcome of a judgement for £150,000 against you is likely to be your bankruptcy. So you appear to have little to lose by contesting their claim for the £150,000 shortfall, which they have six years - possibly 12 years - to sue for.

[keates]

It seems that LPA Receivers, despite the fact that they are supposed to be the borrower's agent, have total disregard for the affect their actions have. Our receivers have recently sold one of our properties under market value and left us with a £25k shortfall. If they repeat it with the other properties we will be bankrupt for sure. They had no need to sell at this time as the house was in good order and there is a shortage of rentable property in the area and the rent would more than cover the mortgage.

 

Has anyone else had the situation where the LPA Receivers send invoices to the lender for work done on the properties and the lender sends them a cheque? This has happened to us several times and some of the work wasn't even necessary. The receiver is supposed to be reducing the debt but by the lender sending them cheques our debt has increased. Not to mention the properties that are left untenanted which I could rent out immediately. It's madness! Can this really be happening or is it just a nightmare?

[tarquin999]

You do seem to have an arguable case in negligence, alternatively for breach of contract, if you can prove that they refused a better offer, and that they failed to set a reserve of that amount at the auction. It is for you to PROVE that a better offer was made: you will need actual documentary evidence, or else you won't be believed.

 

I am surprised that the offeror didn't buy the property at the lower price at the auction: you will need to properly explain that discrepancy.

The offer was very real - made in writing by the FSA Authorised Home Finance firm directly to the LPA Receiver and to the Lender.

 

I even wrote a letter to the LPA Receiver (copied to Lender) begging that, if they declined the offer, they at least set a reserve price in auction. The LPA Receiver replied simply that they would not put a reserve on the auction price because our buyer could attend the auction and buy the properties.

 

The fact was that the buyer was an FSA Authorised Home Finance company and not a private individual. The company does not attend auctions. Would you expect The Chelsea to attend auction to buy a property?! This indeed may be difficult to get across to a judge, and could be the reason why a court case might fail.

 

You have nothing to lose in fighting this, because if you don't fight it you'll be made bankrupt for the £150,000 anyway, so it makes no difference that you might lose and have costs awarded against you, because all your debts will be wiped out by the bankruptcy, and that will get you anyway if you do nothing.

 

The outcome of a court case is never certain. But the outcome of a judgement for £150,000 against you is likely to be your bankruptcy. So you appear to have little to lose by contesting their claim for the £150,000 shortfall, which they have six years - possibly 12 years - to sue for.

I own around 80 other properties so I cannot afford to risk a ruling against me in court. I have two options with 4 possible outcomes...

 

(1) Fight the case in court. (a) I lose and made bankrupt in which case I would lose my 80 properties too. (b) I win and can feel good.

 

(2) Submit a payment plan to the Lender to clear the £150k shortfall over a few years. (a) they agree: I will have taken it up the tailpipe but saved my 80 properties. (b) they refuse (e.g. because they deem me to have insuffiicent financial means) and petition for my bankruptcy... in which case I can then revert to option #1.

 

I don't wish to take it up the tailpipe, but in damage limitation terms option #2 has to be the safer bet. I am a businessman, and I want to continue in business!

[jutolo]

Hi Caro,

 

My situation is that MX paid a number of service charges on my behalf last year, they then advised that the have added the paid amount to my mortgages and said in the same letter that the amount will be due when mortgage is redeemed and that my monthly interest payment will change to reflect the new balance. I agreed and have been making payments as required by my mortgage on a monthly basis. I am not in arrears, but early this year, I was contacted by a relationship manager who wanted my to sign a new revised 2010 terms and conditions, which has still not been sent to me or which i have still not seem, and which i believe according to her reduces the tenor of the mortgage to 10 yrs, I refused to sign it and since then I have been hounded in various ways, the latest being that they the services charges paid on my behalf is a breach of my terms and hence, i must be paid back immediately, otherwise i have to agree to the new terms and if not the receivers will be appointed.

Has anyone experienced this, any suggestion would be helpful

 

Thanks

[diddled]

Keates

Re: your question - "Has anyone else had the situation where the LPA Receivers send invoices to the lender for work done on the properties and the lender sends them a cheque?" I need to check on that, however I do have a copy of a letter from the Receivers to the Bank that basically says in order to avoid payment of VAT by the Bank xxxx will be asked to invoice the Bank direct.

[caro]

Hi Caro,

 

My situation is that MX paid a number of service charges on my behalf last year, they then advised that the have added the paid amount to my mortgages and said in the same letter that the amount will be due when mortgage is redeemed and that my monthly interest payment will change to reflect the new balance. I agreed and have been making payments as required by my mortgage on a monthly basis.

 

So you have their agreement in writing and are up to date with the agreed new payments?

 

I am not in arrears, but early this year, Probably not technically true in MX view, because if they hadn't paid the service charge your balance would now be lower, but I do see that you're uptodate on the revised payments.

I was contacted by a relationship manager who wanted my to sign a new revised 2010 terms and conditions, which has still not been sent to me or which i have still not seem, I would suggest that you ask in writing to see this. If it ever came to court you then have evidence that you were willing to consider this, but obviously couldn't do so without seeing it.

 

and which i believe according to her reduces the tenor of the mortgage to 10 yrs, How long is left on the existing loan?

 

I refused to sign it and sincets then I have been hounded in various ways, the latest being that they the services charges paid on my behalf is a breach of my terms and hence, i must be paid back immediately, Is there anyway that you can raise the money to pay back the service charges to them and get back to the position you would have been in had they not paid them.

 

otherwise i have to agree to the new terms and if not the receivers will be appointed. As said earlier - you need to see them. You need to be seen as working to resolve the problem. Is this threat in writing or verbal?

Has anyone experienced this, any suggestion would be helpful

 

Thanks

 

Just looking for a fuller picture and inspiration on how you can protect your properties.

[Ed999]

I have two options with 4 possible outcomes...

 

(1) Fight the case in court. (a) I lose and made bankrupt in which case I would lose my 80 properties too. (b) I win and can feel good.

 

(2) Submit a payment plan to the Lender to clear the £150k shortfall over a few years. (a) they agree: I will have taken it up the tailpipe but saved my 80 properties. (b) they refuse (e.g. because they deem me to have insuffiicent financial means) and petition for my bankruptcy... in which case I can then revert to option #1.

 

I don't wish to take it up the tailpipe, but in damage limitation terms option #2 has to be the safer bet. I am a businessman, and I want to continue in business!

 

 

Very amusing suggestion, but entirely unrealistic.

 

It is probably impossible for a Bankruptcy order to be made in such a case, if contested, since your capital assets appear to exceed the amount of the debt, in which event you cannot be said to be insolvent. The Bankruptcy Court may decline to make a bankruptcy order, conditional upon your selling the necessary assets to immediately repay the debt.

 

Alternatively, the trustee in bankruptcy can sell the assets, repay the debt, and give you an early discharge from the bankruptcy.

 

Your choice.

[Ed999]

My situation is that MX paid a number of service charges on my behalf last year

 

You might usefully explain to us how you, as a borrower, were able to persuade your lender to pay the service charge - i.e. your debt - for you, without taking out a new mortgage.

 

Did you obtain a further advance from the lender, in the normal way?

 

 

I am not in arrears

 

If you borrowed additional funds from the same lender under a deed of Further Advance, this statement is certainly true.

 

 

wanted my to sign a new revised 2010 terms and conditions ... which ... reduces the tenor of the mortgage to 10 yrs

 

If you are not in arrears, the lender can do nothing, probably cannot even appoint a Receiver. Most mortgages only provide for a receiver to be appointed if the borrower is in default, i.e. in arrears. You need to read your mortgage agreement, or check the point with your Solicitor.

 

If your mortgage term is reduced, your monthly payments will certainly increase. You are paying off the debt in a shorter time, and this can ONLY be achieved by increasing the amount paid every month.

[caro]

You might usefully explain to us how you, as a borrower, were able to persuade your lender to pay the service charge - i.e. your debt - for you, without taking out a new mortgage.

 

I might be able to explain that one Ed. I work for a HA, and some of the properties are shared ownership. Sometimes the owners get into arrears with service charges and the mortgage provider will pay it to protect their investment. They would rather no-one else had a claim on the property, especially if they appear to be in financial difficulty and the property might need to be sold. It gives them more leverage.

 

I suspect that this is a similar situation.

[keates]

Diddled. I cannot understand this situation at all. The LPA receiver is appointed to act as the borrowers agent and to collect the rent to pay off the debt. The receiver takes on the role of the landlord, they do not have control of our mortgages, so how can they be permitted to add amounts to our mortgages by sending invoices to the lender for payment? Before the receiver was appointed, if we wanted extra money we had to apply for a further advance and the application would involve valuations etc., so how can the receiver, who is acting on our behalf, simply send invoices to the lender for payment. The mortgages are nothing to do with the receivers, they are appointed to manage the properties. If it isnt viable to hold on to a property, I would conclude that they should sell it. I can find nothing in my mortgage deed or the Law of Property Act that permits the lender or the receiver to increase my mortgages in this way nor can my lender give me a satisfactory explanation. Can anyone else help with this please?