Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone, I am new to this forum. I am HOPING you can give me some advice that can help me. I am 68 years old and I currently own a leasehold property for which I have to pay (extortionate) monthly fees for Ground rent and Maintenance to a management company. During 2020, I managed to pay only for 6 months and then ended up in financial difficulty due to Covid. I was barely able to make ends meet. I stopped paying the maintenance fees around June 2020. My plan was to pay them a lump sum at the end of the year, when things go back to normal and my financial situation improved. Government advised things would go back to normal but unfortunately this didn't happen and I ended up in a lot of debt. I even had to sell my car to pay back money I had borrowed from family members. I live alone and this whole pandemic situation has really affected me mentally. To make matters worse, because I wasn't able to pay the lump sum as I originally had planned, the management company consulted a solicitor (Realty Law) to help them recover this outstanding debt. The initial debt was £596.00 + £36.15 for interest (no idea where this interest came from). The solicitors have now added on legal fees of £721.50 increasing the total debt to £1353.65. I contacted them via email and offered to pay £50 a month for the time being until I can improve my financial situation, at which point I would pay them more. Their response was the following: 'Our client has advised that they cannot honour a payment plan for that duration and therefore we have been instructed to continue our recovery process and request judgment if payment has not been made by 2pm on 29th October 2021. As such, we request that you please make full payment of £1353.65 as per the attached arrears schedule by 2pm on 29th October 2021. If payment or correspondence has not been received by then, then we shall be continuing with further recovery action and issuing a county court judgement (CCJ) which will incur additional fees. You are entitled to seek your own legal advice.'   The whole idea of court proceedings and CCJs and ADDITIONAL FEES has really elevated my anxiety levels to the point I am struggling to get to sleep at night. I borrowed money from family members and used some money that I had saved to pay off the initial £596.00, but its not possible for me to come up with the £700+ for the solicitor fees by 29th October. How is it even acceptable to charge someone £700+ in legal fees for a few letters?    Can someone please give me some advise on what on earth to do or who on earth I can speak to. I am desperate here.  Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance  
    • Please also take photos of the sign at the entrance as well as any signs inside the car park especially any that are different. Please take them from a distance where we can read them and if there is a payment machine, the sign on the machine or very close to it that explains their T&Cs for the machine.
    • Thanks for getting the signage posted up so quickly. The sign on entry should explain their T&Cs. As they don't it means that  what they have given you is  an offer to treat, not a contract. For there to be a contract they would have had to put their offer at the entrance.  You cannot put a notice saying that their T&Cs are inside the car park and expect motorists to be subject to those T&Cs when they are unaware what the terms are.. They have to be able to read them and understand them before they can accept them. My feeling is that the sign that includes the charge of £100 is too small to be acceptable On top of that the sign at the entrance is for Parking Control Solutions while the signs inside are from HX Management-a completely different animal. To strengthen your case for not paying them is the fact that their PCN is not compliant.  Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there are certain wordings in  the NTK  that by Law must comply with the Act. They don't  have to quote that part of the Act in their PCN but the relevant wording has to be included. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9 [2]   the notice must  [f]   warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;   Your  NTK does not include  [if all the applicable conditions  under the Schedule have been met ]thus rendering the NTK non compliant.  
    • I agree its about time but why has it taken for the National Crime Agency to flag this up for then to take action and not Ofcom.   Yet again a Government Agency that is meant to deal with this hasn't Ofcom but flagged by another Agency NCA.   If the telephone companies have this facility in place already to do this then why hasn't Ofcom been pushing them to stop all these scam calls and giving them massive fines for not doing so.    
    • Hi   Send this to them:   Dear Sir/Madam   Formal Complaint   Reference:            (insert their complaint reference number here)   Thank you for your response letter dated XX/XX/2021 which I received by email on XX/XX/2021 that contained your Original Email sent that showed due to your Maladministration that you had sent the Original Email containing my Personal Data to an incorrect email address due to spelling errors in the email address.   a)      Due to this Maladministration of this email being sent to the incorrect email address this email contained my Personal Data which is a Data Protection Breach therefore I require clarification from yourselves that this Breach has been reported to your Data Protection Officer and what action is being taken to ensure that my Personal Data contained in that Original Email has not been read by the recipient that you sent that email to with the incorrect email address.   As the email was sent by yourselves to my correct email address containing the original email showing the incorrect email address was due to spelling errors (maladministration) your IT Department will be able to obtain those emails sent.   If I do not get a satisfactory response that this has been dealt with by your Data Protection Officer, I will report this Data Breach to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/   b)      Due to this Maladministration I failed to receive your Stage 1 complaint response within the allocated time limit for a Stage 1 response therefore this complaint should be dealt with as a Stage 2 Complaint and if you refuse to treat this as a Stage 2 Complaint, I require Full Clarification for your refusal.   I was placed in this Tenancy via the Rough Sleepers Initiative and I find your response about damaged/destroyed items that you would not be able to look into this as this happened 2 years ago but all tenants regardless of private or social housing are responsible for arranging their own contents insurance totally unacceptable as again, I was never notified nor informed of this requirement on taking up this tenancy.   I require clarification from yourself that when a New Tenant takes up a Tenancy Agreement with yourselves why are the not informed of this requirement of Contents Insurance which you should be duty bound to inform all tenants on taking up a tenancy agreement if such a requirement and it should also be noted within that tenants Housing File which you have full access to as dealing with complaint so I require clarification as well if this is noted in my Housing File.   You state multiple properties throughout the area were affected by sewage flood on the same day and the issue will have stemmed from the mains which is not your responsibility.   a)      You have failed to take into that the above statement from yourself blaming the Mains is without any actual evidence from yourselves to back up this claim therefore I require clarification as to what actual evidence you have and to be provided with copies.   b)      You also failed to take into account that in my initial complaint letter that on 12th July 2021 basement flats 1 & 2 were flooded by sewage exacerbated by blockage in the property’s drainage. The blockage has been confirmed by two contractors after the flooding including CCR who were subcontracted by Pyramid Plus that it was the properties drainage that was blocked. Also, while I was decanted from this property, I was contacted by CCR who confirmed that the drain was blocked but they could not access manhole as it was inaccessible as it is located in a utility cupboard underneath carpet, floorboards so how could this be the Main and not your responsibility when it is within the properties boundaries.   Your response about how complaints have been made by residents in relation to this issue is that your system does not allow you to find that information is completely unacceptable as your Housing Association should be able to produce these as part of ongoing repairs and maintenance/procurement processes to present these to your Board for there yearly Budget meeting if not why not.   Then you state you are under no obligation to share that information; therefore, your organisation is not being Open and Accountable to your Service Users and under which Article of the General Data Protection Act (GDPR) are you using for this refusal.   You have also failed to mention that I can make that above request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) and what is your process for such a request again not being Open and Accountable.   I await your response.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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


chillinlong
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3138 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I was in our local council office yesterday discussing council tax and asked about repossessed properties in the hands of a receiver, local answer (London Borough of Sutton) is if you are NOT the legal owner of the property and do not live there you are NOT liable for council tax on it, the Receivers are liable... seems to be a bit of an issue anyway but the guy I spoke to was very helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The other question was if a property was repossessed, has no personal items of yours in it and no gas, electric and water due to being turned off at time of repossession is it classed as 'habitable and liable for council tax'. The answer was a categorical no - apparently you are only liable for council tax on a repossessed property up to the point your personal possessions are removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Council tax exemption seems to rely on the individual councils.

In my experience some councils accept that once a receiver is appointed there is no point in chasing the owner for the council tax, others have been far harder about this and despite meeting with council staff and proving that the properties are in the hands of the receivers they (correctly) insist that the law states unless a property has actually been repossessed (which ours haven't) then we are liable for all council tax payments until such time as the receiver decides to sell.

We now have CCJ's against us for non payment of council tax on the properties 'managed' by the receivers which could result in us being sent to prison.

Just another nail in the coffin of buy to let landlords.

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a question that has been asked and i am presuming that you are still responsible for the council tax, due to your name being still on the register at the land registry , but it is arguable that the receiver is responsible and he should make every endeavour to make sure the bill is paid , if not why not so the responsibility would need clarification with MX

patrickq1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because your name is still on the Land Registry it does not mean you are the legal owner/occupier of the property, it is the OCCUPIER in many cases who is responsible for Council Tax, not for the legal owner (although some councils persist in persuing the legal owner for the tax).

 

The property I had reposessed some years ago was sold about 8 months later, and my name was still on the Land Registry, as I was able to prove that by the repossession terms I had no liability for the property and had no access to the property the council gave in.

 

Again it is another little nail in OUR coffins....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SG , had some spare time today and tried to find a definitive

answer to this but there is nothing concrete, seems it must

vary council to council and receivers.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble is, our properties have not been repossessed, they are only managed (laughable I know) on our behalf by the receivers and because of this we are still legally responsible for the council tax.

MX themselves have investigated this for us (bless'em) along with our solicitor and as the legal owners we are allowed the 6 months exemption, if the property is empty, but after that the bill does come due to us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the receivers made any efforts to mitigate the costs by letting the

properties so revenue is incoming, if not there is I believe some wrong doing here,

I am not an expert in any way in this area, but I think the realisation of income

and assets to discharge the bankruptcy in good faith.

 

I hope someone with more expertise than I will be able to help more.

Brig.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a repossession order is granted to the mortgage company, the owner is not liable for council tax once he has moved out in compliance with the order.

 

But if an LPA Receiver is appointed, no repossession order is made. The owner therefore remains liable for the council tax.

 

An owner is allowed 6 months exemption if a property is unoccupied; but after that the council tax is payable by him.

 

Where a property is let to tenants by the LPA Receiver, the tenants - as occupier - will be liable for the tax.

Note

 

This is a self-help forum in which users share their experiences. Assistance is offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgement; obtain advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

This posting gives general guidance only. It is not an authoritative statement of the law. Consult a Solicitor for specific advice before deciding on any course of action.

 

 

Further information:

 

Assured and Shorthold tenancies - A guide for tenants

 

Renting and Leasehold - Advice from Shelter

 

 

All posts are opinion only

 

 

If you've found my suggestions useful, please click on my star and add a comment

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the LPA has taken over management of the property Ed, might there be an argument that they should ensure that all the landlords bills are dealt with - including council tax if applicable?

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I just found the same answer it a priority debt and should be administered

by the receiver or trustee.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the LPA has taken over management of the property Ed, might there be an argument that they should ensure that all the landlords bills are dealt with - including council tax if applicable?

 

 

This presumably has a bearing on the central theme of this thread, which is - at its simplest - the fact that we don't know what the powers and duties of an LPA Receiver are.

 

Certainly, the Receiver is appointed to manage the property.

 

But it is too sweeping to say that the Receiver owes a duty to the freehold owner. It seems to be the case that the Receiver is acting solely in the interests of the mortgage lender, and thus appears to have no duty to the borrower/owner.

 

It is also too sweeping to say that the Receiver owes a duty to pay council tax, merely by reason of it being an outgoing. If the property is let to tenants by the Receiver, for example, the council tax liability appears to fall on the shorthold tenant, as occupier.

 

And whatever else the Receiver is, he never becomes an occupier.

 

So there does not appear to be an absolute liability, but at best only a conditional one, and the Receiver doesn't meet the conditions, on the face of it: he never becomes either the owner or the occupier.

 

So it simply isn't clear that the Receiver has any liability.

Note

 

This is a self-help forum in which users share their experiences. Assistance is offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgement; obtain advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

This posting gives general guidance only. It is not an authoritative statement of the law. Consult a Solicitor for specific advice before deciding on any course of action.

 

 

Further information:

 

Assured and Shorthold tenancies - A guide for tenants

 

Renting and Leasehold - Advice from Shelter

 

 

All posts are opinion only

 

 

If you've found my suggestions useful, please click on my star and add a comment

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point, thus if the bankrupt has no funds to

pay the tax their situation can be made worse with

a liability order and consequent costs.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point, thus if the bankrupt has no funds to pay the tax their situation can be made worse with a liability order and consequent costs.

 

 

Well, that's not quite what I meant by 'receiver'.

 

A receiver can be appointed under the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925), simply to receive rent income on behalf of a mortgage lender, as a means of by-passing the freehold owner - to whom the tenants would otherwise be paying the rent.

 

This is not the same as a receiver in bankruptcy. An LPA receiver can be appointed under a mortgage to manage a residential property if the mortgage lender sees fit, even though the property owner is not insolvent/bankrupt.

Note

 

This is a self-help forum in which users share their experiences. Assistance is offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgement; obtain advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

This posting gives general guidance only. It is not an authoritative statement of the law. Consult a Solicitor for specific advice before deciding on any course of action.

 

 

Further information:

 

Assured and Shorthold tenancies - A guide for tenants

 

Renting and Leasehold - Advice from Shelter

 

 

All posts are opinion only

 

 

If you've found my suggestions useful, please click on my star and add a comment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you it is not my area of expertise:madgrin:

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that most of us on this site (ourselves included) have not been made bankrupt, the lender has employed the services of LPA receivers to 'manage' the properties on our behalf, we are in law still the legal owners with all the responsibility that goes with ownership including resposibility to pay council tax if property is vacant.

We are entitled to a 6 month exemption period but seeing that some of our properties have now been under the control of the receiver and empty of tenants for nearly 3 years, the council have been chasing us and have obtained CCJ's against us for non payment of council tax.

And yes, I have had meetings with the council and have been to the court hearings only to be told that 'the law is the law and we are legally required to pay the bills'.

What sticks most in my throat regarding the conduct of the receivers and MX is that we have written evidence that there is colusion between the receiver and the lender.

The receiver has employed companies from Scotland to do work on our properties in the South of England, the costs added for travel arrangements were huge.

We have been billed for replacing guttering on a bay window that has never had guttering and doesn't need guttering.

We have been billed £600 for a new washer/dryer but a second hand appliance was installed instead, there are many other examples of 'creative' accounting.

We know of investors coming in to buy our properties and 'bunging' the estate agents to make sure they can be bought for the right price.

Some of the initial paperwork issued by the receivers was dated before the lender instructed them and some of it even has the wrong names on. We sought the advice of a public access barrister regarding this but was told that it didn't really matter as the receiver could say it was just a mistake and then rectify the paperwork later.

I can understand the councils trying to get money out of us as it is legally our responsibility but it does seem a tad unfair that the receivers and the companies they employ can get away with this kind of behaviour.

Maybe they are all owned by 'News International'

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is an awful story,you have my sympathy.

There must be a regulatory body that you can

complain to, the LPA appear to be milking your situation

by fraud all the work and travel expenses + the CT.

 

Some one must be responsible.

 

I'll bump the thread to see if anyone has ideas on this.

 

BUMP

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mungos Mum for clarifying regarding the council tax. That's what I thought.

 

Ed999, I thought that somebody on this thread would be better positioned to have the answer as most of us are in the hands of the LPA's.

 

Back to the subject of the LPA's - any news from anybody?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
We are entitled to a 6 month exemption period but seeing that some of our properties have now been under the control of the receiver and empty of tenants for nearly 3 years, the council have been chasing us and have obtained CCJ's against us for non payment of council tax.

 

 

As I have pointed out earlier in this thread, an LPA Receiver is in law potentially liable to the owner in negligence.

 

It seems to me that a failure to let the property at all would potentially amount to negligence, even if that neglect continued for a far shorter duration than 3 years!

 

You ought to be investigating the possibility of suing in negligence.

 

I have explained what facts a Barrister would need from you, earlier in this thread; and you will need to collate far fewer facts than anyone else, if your property has never been let at all, since there will be no details of rent payments by the shorthold tenant.

 

 

Apologies if I have overlooked some detail of your circumstances: it was not possible for me to thoroughly review the previous 70 pages of this thread in the available time today.

Note

 

This is a self-help forum in which users share their experiences. Assistance is offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgement; obtain advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

This posting gives general guidance only. It is not an authoritative statement of the law. Consult a Solicitor for specific advice before deciding on any course of action.

 

 

Further information:

 

Assured and Shorthold tenancies - A guide for tenants

 

Renting and Leasehold - Advice from Shelter

 

 

All posts are opinion only

 

 

If you've found my suggestions useful, please click on my star and add a comment

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had the experience of LPA Receivers increasing my debt by instructing others to carry out work to my properties that didn't need doing. This includes such things as a new kitchen in one property and a new roof on another and many other examples. To try to get to grips with this as our debt increases everytime work is done, we did a Subject Access Request on the receiver. They supplied some documents but refused to release invoices and other financial details. I made a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office and have heard today that they have upheld our complaint and have informed the receivers that they are in breach of the Data Protection Act and that as they are legally our agents and that as we are ultimately responsible for any expenditure they incurr when doing work on our properties, that they must provide us with the financial details that we have requested. They have forty days to release the information. I hope this might help others in the same situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keates, could you clarify one point.

 

Are you posting about LPA Receivers in general, or is your experience specifically with Mortgage Express and Walker Singleton?

 

It perhaps makes no difference. But a small victory over ME or WS would doubtless boost morale on the thread. :)

Note

 

This is a self-help forum in which users share their experiences. Assistance is offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgement; obtain advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

This posting gives general guidance only. It is not an authoritative statement of the law. Consult a Solicitor for specific advice before deciding on any course of action.

 

 

Further information:

 

Assured and Shorthold tenancies - A guide for tenants

 

Renting and Leasehold - Advice from Shelter

 

 

All posts are opinion only

 

 

If you've found my suggestions useful, please click on my star and add a comment

Link to post
Share on other sites

My LPA Recievers are two individuals who are employed by Michael Parkes Surveyors, a small local firm but I am confident that the decision made by the Commissioners Office is a decision on principal and would be applied to any LPA receiver. The actual wording of the Commissioners decision reads, The ICO considers that the witheld information is likely to relate to you as the receivers are legally acting on your beahlf as your 'agents' and that the invoices appear to detail items that you are personally, financially and legally responsible for'.

Since receiving the Commisioners decision this week, I have telephoned his office and had it confirmed that the decision relates to ALL financial details that the receiver holds on my properties eg rents collected and all costs that are being added to my accounts.

 

I hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hence the reason i stated many months ago Photographic/Video Evidence is what you need the minit they are appointed , you then have recourse for damges and deliberate and possible fraudulent and unlawful acts ,

well done keates , isnt it strange i asked the ICo last year about this and they could not make a decision , i geuss it is because of the new structure of the FSA and also all our persistent badgering for some clarity about the LPAs

patrickq1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi patrickq1, Did I meet you at the meeting in London in March with George Eustice MP? On the subject of the ICO's decision. It took the adjudicator a long time to make his decision as he had to refer it to the legal team. I guess I was fortunate to have some one who was determined to come up with a definitive decision. I have forwarded the ICO letter to George Eustice MP and he thanked me and said the ICO ruling was very interesting and would help his case. Proof that all we can do is keep on going until we crack it. We are hoping to have a decision very soon on the complaint we made to the Financial Ombudsman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have a copy of the ruling that you have had then also send a copy to the FO this will ensure that they will more favour on its strengh and determination that the decision made is not a light statement it is an authoritive decision and that is in your favour and intrests, it also strenghens the legal arguement that this document and decision has merit in your rights to justice ,so like ED says you have enough condensed information and proof upto and including witness's that you will put forward...so start your clock and speed up your determinationin going for broke as the more time they have the more they can use your bad financial situation and the more you will be discredited as a bad debtor ? that is one of their aims you got to pull out all the stops in finding a good barristor

patrickq1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3138 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...