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

[patrickq1]

Hi

 

Mortgage Express did not act in good faith in my opinion, to start with they are not sending me my post due to me having no fixed abode but have requested many time for them to send to my parents housewho have lived rent free for more than two years due to Walker Singleton not collecting the rent. Walker Singleton tried to sell but found no buyers so they handed the property back to Mortgage Express on the 4th November 2009. Mortgage Express did not tell me until the 4th January 2010 which was a conversation on the phone with my portfolio manager who informed me that they had a court date for the 26th February for the repossession of the building.

please remove your address for your own sake and for safety....

[patrickq1]

they are in the deep stuff the bonds will unload before you can sa jesus mary an joseph what happened the....they aint gonna hang in their cause the goverment guarentee has run out heavy stuff dude ..bbbooiinngggg...

[patrickq1]

purchase from auction i guess unless a class action takes place to ask for a goverment guarantee to safeguard the mortgagee ime guessing but looks like you all need a single voice to raise the ministers of this ?

[patrickq1]

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Oct 2001 (pt 5)

[patrickq1]

simmallar actions simmallar probs work it out

[patrickq1]

might be worth a way round by to stop them at the moment i would be looking at those laws of proerty i would think get them to prove title first and that means the dwelling not just the mortgage a prove title and any others with a second claim etc

[patrickq1]

brown needs votes very very soon he does not need bad bad news through national newspapers robert preston i pressume this is an exclusive lol should pay commision and give recognition towards CAG

[patrickq1]

just trying to look at the positive they cannot be allowed to en route throw people out by use of unfair means and it is felt that you are being unjustly punnished because of a possible mass corruption and this has become a penalty unfairly on mortgage holders,all parties FSA OFT HMCE FOS THE CITY INSURANCE COMPANIES ALL ARE IN SOME LITTLE WAY NOW CONNECTED MY OPINION ONLY

[patrickq1]

I think we are talking about securitisation? Mortgages have been sold on and although letters etc come from original lender they are only acting as administrators. New owner of loan has to register charge?

 

even when they are about to post there interest you must ask for proof of ownership to the mortgage title has it been securitised,

if so who is posting the iterest all sorts of probs can arise for the mortgage companies the mortgage might be in ten slices ie securitisation...so these are questons that ceralb can answer or shadow and others ..will bump the thread see who is best on this and how to get the data?

[patrickq1]

Mortgage Express is a wholly owned subsidiary company of the Bradford & Bingley

[patrickq1]

Our Buy to Let mortgages are not regulated by the Financial Services Authority

[patrickq1]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/120775-dealing-mortgage-secured-loan.html

 

read here then get your thinkin cap on lol

[patrickq1]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/210243-mortgage-securitisation-equitable-legal.html

[patrickq1]

urget repairs probably knock the ceilings out ta make uninhabitable for you/but if signed to that termit is already unfair a they would have to be specific with details and costings otherwise you demand your own rights as to being able to carry out any neccessary repairs as you see need doing,it is after all your property/dwelling ...you need to see these terms and conditions and if they are there they need to show clarity in the meaning.....meanstoanend ought to be able to decipher this for you

[patrickq1]

, in which it became clear that parties who had no right to repossess a home were doing so. That is the situation with regard to much of the sub-prime market. The Land Registry should record a charge against a property, as under the Companies Act—section 395, which is about the first charge form—only where the parties seeking to record such an interest have proved that they are creditors with all the rights, responsibilities and duties pursuant under the definition of a creditor under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

[patrickq1]

Section 395 no more? New legislation in the Companies Act 2006 on company charges

[patrickq1]

Obligation to register

The obligation to register charges appears in section 860 (Charges created by a company) which requires a

company to deliver prescribed particulars1 together with the instrument by which the charge is created or

evidenced to the registrar2 before "the end of the period allowed for registration".

The 21 day period still remains however, the debates held about when the period begins and ends, should be

silenced by the new section. Section 870 (The period allowed for registration), clarifies "21 days beginning with

the day after the day on which the charge is created". Similar wording applies to provisions concerning

(charges created outside the United Kingdom) and (property acquired by the company).

Section 860(2) allows a person interested to apply for registration of a charge instead of the company.

Secured creditors therefore can submit the application to the registrar of companies as now under

section 399(1).

3.

What is a registrable charge?

The same assets will be registrable as now under section 396. The list, however, appears in a different order

in section 860(7) (Charges created by a company). The only change here being the deletion of "(wherever

situated)" from s396(1)(a) in relation to land. However, the concept is stated in section 861(2). "It is immaterial

… where land subject to a charge is situated."

The interpretative provisions of section 396 have been slightly amended and appear in section 861 (Charges

which have to be registered: supplementary). Note, "charge" will still include "mortgage" but "Company" will

mean a company registered in England and Wales or Northern Ireland

[patrickq1]

Hi good boy gone mad,

 

I am sorry to hear about your situation. If you know they are taking so long to let, then maybe approach the lender and LPA and complain why are they causing further arrears and delaying tactics being used etc. Personally I would let the properties again via individual lettings agent and then send the rent onto the Mortgage Express bank accounts, this way you are ensuring less arrears accruing on your accounts, and then meanwhile try and work a solution together ie getting them back off the LPA via a payment plan or via clearing the arrears whichever you can do.

 

Dont get me wrong you do have a lot of options and it is not easy but you have to do what you feel is best for you to prevent further damages to your property and also send them letters stating that you hold them liable for all losses incurred by their actions...

send the rent onto them via your charges for doing there work even if you think your charges are worth the same FEE/SALARY AS MEx DIRECTORS then so be it then hit them a writ for non payment of costs,it can work both ways if they are being mis managed then you must also be allowed to manage the properties but also charge a fee wether it be double the mortgage the problem is now with them to dispute use the same tactics if this is possible...they were not nice to you so why be nice to them, remember evry utterence from their twisted mouths is twisted so far from truth ,,,do not trust them 1"

[patrickq1]

Hi Good boy gone mad,

I agree with Meerkat, if you can give us some background info it will be easier for those of us who are maybe one or two steps further ahead in our fights, to tell you how we handled various situations.

As you've probably already seen, there are quite a few of us at various stages of fighting these 'slime balls'.

Hopefully you will get enough replies that you will be able to then decide the best way forward for you.

If you post up any letters,deeds, docs etc don't forget to remove all personal information, 'slime balls often trawl these sites looking to see if they can find out who we are and what steps we intend to take next.

 

We WILL win against these mindless, faceless bullies, there are too many of us now fighting to give up without one hell of a battle.

 

Best wishes

Mungos mum

 

This thread exists exclusively to assist YOU This thread exists exclusively to assist YOU in preparing A litigation against COMPANY NAMED . As such it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute. Communications between a solicitor or the client and a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominant purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting, litigation reasonably in prospect: Re Highgate Traders Limited [1984] BCLC 151.

[patrickq1]

you can also bank the rentals,in a private account and save the rentals until such time as they comply with your requests,you must state that due to their unsatisfactory replies and no responsive communications for ALL DATA ASKED FOR you have now decided that due to their non compliance with letter s ref xxxxxxx you shall withold all payment due until a satisfactory conclusion has been reached furthermore you shall retain all monies due until you receive all terms and conditions as to the responsibilities of each party concerned and also the names of each director personably responsible for the management of the funds

or words to that effect,,,but i would nt be paying them a penny until you find out who is responsible and who you can personally take to court this will frighten the livin daylights out of the directors for GROSS MIS MANAGEMENT and a lifelong stain on their character who on earth would employ someone who has been charged with GROSS MIS-MANAGEMENT

[patrickq1]

Hi Blackpool Landlord Regard the meeting as your opportunity to closely question WS and MEX. What were their reasons for selling? Where has all the rental income gone that presumably they had been collecting? Have you been receiving regular financial statements? Do not provide any additional information at all. The receiver has a number of legal obligations and my guess is that WS has neglected a large proportion of them. If WS are receivers why is portfolio manager attending - rather acting like mortgagee in possession? Despite all their assurances they want to clear arrears and return properties to you neither party have any intention of doing that. By starting to sell your properties they have made their position clear.

 

Regards

 

Meerkat One

hits the nail on the head what has happened to the portfoilio income where has it gone and to whome do these mortgages belong to is any other party involved with you over the sales annd receipts of these sales are any bankers claiming in funds from the appointed bailliffs of these properties...

you need answers and only through your local MPs to get these qusetions asked and their is not a lot of time before this bubble bursts....take a croup action for an injunction in the high court untill you get all the data concerning the three mamed companies

[patrickq1]

yes spelling mistake ,normal for me,,GROUP ACTION can be taken by several forming an alliance..

New pre-action protocol for mortgage possession claims | The Law Gazette

[patrickq1]

we are trying to get one of the receivers to show us proof that he has insured a property as this is being sold at a very low price due to water damage, receiver will not claim under their insurance (if they do actually have it insured) prefering to sell it cheaply instead.

 

the receiver is not i am presuming under any orders or terms to deal with you the ex mortgagee..you need to see what instructions the receiver is under and who gave the mandate for the receiver to more or less cause a blight on your mortgage ,

as i have said it can only take a high court writ to stop everything in its tracks...a group may be able to approach the likes of WHICH magazine and ask if they have come up against this problem it may already be that which are looking at this so contact them...you need help and a passage in the law gazzette explains away some of the protections and what you need to defend any case by using the pre action protocals,like 2.1 as mentioned here

Advice to borrowers and lenders

In cases where a borrower has made reasonable attempts to seek settlement and the lender has failed in their obligations, a court can impose sanctions on the lender. Most mortgage deeds or loan agreements enable the lender to add their legal costs to the amount of the loan so the court order must specify what costs are not added to borrowers’ debt. Judges must take a robust approach if borrowers are to receive protection. If such sanctions receive press coverage, it may influence lenders’ actions.

Lenders should prepare a brief chronology of actions taken under the protocol in a witness statement in support of the claim exhibiting copies of correspondence with the borrower. This should overcome any difficulty in most cases. Where reasons have to be given for a decision, the lender should be prepared for the reasons given rejecting a borrower’s proposal to be scrutinised by the court.

The court is required to consider if the protocol has been followed. It is not the court’s role to substitute its views for that of the lender. Legally the lender, in giving reasons for a decision to the borrower, will have complied with the protocol, even if the court might disagree with the lender’s reasons. In reality, if the lender’s reasons show a lack of understanding of the borrower’s position, a district judge will exercise his discretion to the borrower’s advantage.

[patrickq1]

i think it might have been a damm booksale address i just gave apoligise everyone ,, Edited March 28, 2010 by patrickq1

[patrickq1]

Compensation for solicitor's mortgage fraud refused - People, News - The Independent

 

see what u can learn from this ?