Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well it adds up which is an Apollo 11 achievement!   Does simeon need reminding again that it is HIS responsibilty to make sure that all the Exhibits are correctly labelled, ordered and numbered etc, and that they are all correctly cross-referenced in the particulars?  Because we can't check that remotely.   The only remaining thing (which I think would be helpful to have added but is not a necessity) is a list or schedule of exhibits.  It just helps to introduce the exhibits.  But simeon will have to produce that himself - so it may be advisable not to bother...   But I don't want to rock the boat any further and am happy with #165 - unless there are any glaring errors I've not noticed.   [EDIT:  cross posted with 166 and 167.  I will check 165 over as well]
    • No this is (£387.12 for Rubble) not (£8387.12 ) Repairs is £8000.00 and £5190.00 for unfinished work
    • The figures now match, so as far as I'm concerned that's that.   If there is duplication then that's the OP's look out, there has been nearly a year to make simple lists of costs.   I think "the three of us" should have a last read through.   It's up to Simeon to make sure the references to the exhibits are accurate, they certainly weren't accurate in the version I've just edited, in fact they were contradictory, but that's up to him.   If the "three of us" don't see any obvious errors then the document is good to go tomorrow morning (not as the last minute).
    • We might, finally, be there -   Particulars of Counterclaim   1.     The original Claimant agreed to undertake building work (Project 1) at the original Defendant/now Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property in relation to 3 specific areas of work for an agreed price of £4300.  The work was:   a. To underpin the bay window at the property, b. To replace and repair a previously-removed chimney breast and, c. To install a new beam to the patio door.   2.      It was agreed that Project 1 was to be carried out under the instructions of a structural engineer engaged by the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant and that the Claimant’s work would be as a result of instructions received following the structural engineer's assessment of the property.   3.      Between June and July in 2020 the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant provided the Claimant with a full copy of the structural engineer's report which detailed instructions to the Claimant for the works to be carried out.   4.      It was agreed between the parties that the works would commence on 13 August 2020.   5.      It was agreed between the parties that payments for Project 1 would be made in three instalments. The first payment would be made at the start of the Claimant's work. The second payment would be paid at the halfway point of the Claimant's work. The final payment would be made on completion of the total works.   6.      The Claimant commenced work on 13 August 2020 and the first instalment due was paid.     7.      On 24 August 2020 the Claimant asked the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to arrange an inspection of his work by the Building Control Inspector.  The Claimant also stated that Project 1 was approaching mid-way and the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant paid the second instalment due.   8.      The Building Inspector arrived to inspect the Claimant’s work but the Claimant was absent.  The Inspector was obviously very displeased by the standard of the Claimant's work.  The Inspector spoke to the Claimant by telephone, asking him why he was absent and interrogating him about the work he had done.  The Inspector then gave him some instructions over the telephone and also left a list of instructions with the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to be passed on to the builder.  The Building Inspector then said he would be getting in touch with the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s structural engineer with his findings and the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant should hear from the engineer soon.   9.      The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant passed on the Building Inspector’s instructions to the Claimant who agreed to follow them.   10.    The structural engineer visited and recommended piling to complete the underpinning for Project 1.  The Claimant explained that he could not undertake this work. The structural engineer then suggested an alternative company to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to do the necessary work and this company was engaged by the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to complete the necessary piling at an additional cost to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant of £3000 (see receipt, Exhibit 1).   11.    The Claimant asked if the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant needed any more work to be done and, despite the problems encountered on Project 1, the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant agreed on 7 September 2020 to have more work done (Project 2) at an agreed price of £2580 and on similar payment terms to Project 1.   12.    As work commenced on Project 2 and was continuing on the remaining work for Project 1, the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant had occasion to make several complaints to the Claimant regarding the standard of his work.   13.   Barely a week after starting on Project 2, the Claimant demanded payment for that work.  After a period of negotiation the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant paid the Claimant £1500 in cash.  Both parties agreed that this left a balance outstanding on Project 2 of £1080.   14.    It later came to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s attention that the Claimant had removed material (including a steel beam) from the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property that the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant suspected either belonged to him or had been paid for by him in connection with Project 1.  When the Claimant challenged the Defendant he admitted he had done this.  The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant has included the value of this material in his counterclaim detailed below.   15.    On 21 September 2020 the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant highlighted and sent a snagging list to the Claimant (Exhibit 2).  Over a month later the Claimant sent an employee to attend to this work.  It was not carried out satisfactorily and resulted in an updated snagging list being sent to the claimant (Exhibit 3).  All of this snagging work remains undone by the Claimant.   16.   Apart from the outstanding snagging work referred to in para 16 above, the Claimant also left other work from Projects 1 and 2 uncompleted.  That work which was not completed is listed in Exhibit 4.   17.   During the course of carrying out work on Projects 1 and 2 the Claimant also negligently caused substantial damage to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property (as itemised in Exhibit 5) by not executing the work with the skill expected of a reasonable tradesman.   18.   The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant seeks an order from the court directing the Claimant to pay to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant the sum of £16,577.12 in respect of:   (a)   the cost of the piling referred to in para 10 above which the Claimant could not undertake and another contractor had to be paid to complete, £3,000.00, Exhibit 1; (b)   the cost of completing work the Claimant had left undone from Projects 1 and 2 referred to in paras 15 & 16 above, £5,190.00, Exhibits 2 & 3 & 4; (c)   the cost of remedial work to put right the damage negligently caused by the Claimant and referred to in para 17 above, £8387.12, Exhibit 5; (d)  the cost of the steel beam referred to in para 14 above.  This has not yet been costed.   19.   In addition to the amount in paragraph 18 above, the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant also claims 8% interest under the County Courts Act 1984 from 26 October 2020 which was the last day the builder or one of his colleagues worked at the property     STATEMENT OF TRUTH   I believe that the facts stated in this particulars of counterclaim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Firstplus repossession hearing 15th December - advice/help please.


pubman1
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4147 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'll speak to the ombudsman on Monday - the case has been allocated to an adjudicator now so the facts are now being looked at. If they are not going to decide either way before the hearing then I'll have to pay up - they were only ever going to get one payment before the hearing. If the ombudsman can decide before the hearing... well I guess that depends on who they find for in the complaint.

Also I came across something online about the Mortgage Rescue Scheme. Perhaps they would be able to help????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Having looked through our finanaces over the last month it has become clear that even if the ombudsman finds in our favour it will still be a massive struggle to keep paying FP £650 per month. The ombudsman have said that while they have prioritised our complaint it is unlikely to be resolved prior to the next hearing on 12 March. Therefore we have decided to apply to the Mortgage Rescue Scheme and try to get a housing association to purchase either just the FP part of the mortgage, or the whole thing, and then rent the house back from them.

 

If anyone has any experience of this please let us know??

 

We have an appointment with MRS tonight to clarify exactly hiow it will go ahead. They have also said that they will attend court to confirm to the judge what is going to happen.

 

Pubman1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been one or two posters who have applied for the mortgage rescue scheme and if the judge is informed of this then eviction is suspended while the process takes place. Glad to hear they will attend court to support you :)

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still hopeful of the case being adjourned due to the FOS complaint - they are still in breach of the protocol after all! As we are eligable for the Mortgage Rescue Scheme, is it worth making any further payments to FP?

Edited by pubman1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A rep from the housing assocation called around and explaind the whole thing. If we can successfully apply and get them to buy the house we will be so much better off! We would be able to make a start on repaying unsecured debts as well. My only concerns are that 1) We might get refused and 2) the judge at the hearing on Friday might award them possession as the FOS have not decided on the complaint yet and we have now changed our proposal slightly. Fingers crossed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the rep from the housing association leave you any paperwork or offer to come to court with you? you could do with having some proof of your applying for the scheme.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, you need to chase them up and get them to confirm who is attending and make sure they have the time of the hearing etc. if they can come to court and support you at the hearing it will help enormously.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Busy week!! Yesterday we had calls from the valuation man and the council. They did the valuation yetserday afternoon and I had to go to the council this morning prior to the court hearing. While I was there the valuation came through. The council looked at all the details and are happy to support the application for the mortgage rescue scheme, they printed 3 letters off to confirm this which I then took straight to the court. The solicitor for FP called them to discuss what to do and they told him to seek a 28 day possession order. Once the judge heard that we had been proactive and already started the MRS process the hearing was adjourned for 56 days tho allow the application to be processed. Their solicitor did not argue the matter and on the way out said that he knew that the case would be adjourned but had to follow his clients instructions!! So now we wait for the MRS application to be processed. There will be a shortfall for Firstplus once the main lender is paid but they'll get more than they would if they repossessed and the house was sold at auction. Will let you know how thisng progress.

 

Pubman1:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent, glad to hear the council worked so quickly for you. Keep us updated :)

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Good news - the mortgage rescue has been approved by the council, the housing association and funding has been granted by the assembly government. They have an offer to buy the house on the way, we then will become their tenants and stay in the house. There is a housing officer coming over tomorrow to have another look at the house and then it will be all systems go. I had a call from Clarity Credit management who said that once they have written confirmation of this they will tell their solicitors to stop proceedings.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great news - it must be such a relief to you, well done for sticking it out with the lender :)

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Update - we were back in court on the 10th May as this was the next scheduled court date. FP had instructed their solicitor to apply for a full possession order despite the offer to buy the house by mortgage rescue having been funded and accepted. This would (up until today) have left a shortfall of around £50K once the first charge is paid. The judge could not understand their standpoint and said "your client's position is hopeless". They could not understand what FP have to gain by managing the sale themselves - it would take longer and they would get a lower lump sum as the house - as a repossession - would sell for less. Their solicitors only arguement was that "they might get more" than the market value. Case adjourned for 28 days to allow further negociation - the council had been having problems getting through to the right person to negociate the shortfall but they have now got this sorted.

 

Cut to today - letter from the ombudsman to say that they have upheld the complaint for the PPI and the business (ie FP) will be writing to us with an offer based on the mis-selling of PPI. Not had the letter yet but if it's what I asked for there will be no arrears left. I just hope this doesn't mean that we cannot continue with the mortgage rescue as the loan would be prety much up to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi all, another update - we have been back and forth to the court over the last few months with the hearing being adjourned pending mortgage rescue. FP re wrote the loan following the ombudsman decision and refunded me about £1800 which was the interest @ 8%. There are still arrears on the loan - not really sure how they have worked it out and they havn't sent a statement yet. Anyway, the mortgage rescue is going through and we have a completion date of 13 September so as of then no more threat of repossession!! FP solicitors wrote to us to say that they had requested for the most recent hearing to be adjourned and that I did not need to attend. However, when I got the next date through (15 Sept) it said that their application to adjourn had been refused and that they are to attend the next hearing to explain why they did not turn up at the last one - I think I'll go along to hear that!! So, thnks to all on here that have provided help and support - I notice that this thread alone has been running nearly 10 months and there were other threads before this. Without the support and advice I've had from here I don't think we'd still be in the same house. Will let you know once completion is done.

 

Pubman

Link to post
Share on other sites

All done - Mortgage Rescue has saved our home.:whoo: Instead of trying to pay £200 to the 1st charge (interest only) and £599 to FP we now have a weekly rent of £83. Sale has completed and 1st charge paid off, £23k to FP towards the balance. My understanding is that the remainder of the FP loan will now be frozen with no further interest or charges and we'll negociate a monthly payment to them that we can afford. The remaider of what we owe them now becomes unsecured and will be treated the same as other unsecured debts. Next challenge is going to be to prove that they should never have let us have the loan in the first place and challenge it's validity, but that's for another day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fantastic news Pubman - well done for persevering with this - I sincerely hope you can now enjoy your home and have some well deserved celebrations.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...