Webb Resolutions - LPA receiver - When Can house be repossessed without going through a court?

[Valhalla]

I have a buy to let mortgage on a second house (I appreciate that my case is not as severe as those of people who risk being evicted from their only home, but I'd still like some advice from anyone who can help please)

 

Lender has appointed LPA receiver due to arrears. I had been paying mortgae plus £100 /month towards arrears but missed a payment a couple of months ago ( Unable to get a tenant for several months, so no rental income)

 

Have now found a tenant whose rent would pay monthly payment plus £100 to arrears but the LPA receiver won't allow me to rent the house until an agreement has been reached on the arrears repayment.

 

I have offered a repayment schedule over 15 months on the basis they allow me to put in a tenant and pay all the rent to the lender plus I've included some lump sums next year, but this was not accepted by the lender because they have no guarantee the lump sums wil be paid.

I have offered to find a guarantor for the lump sums, but lender says this is too time consuming

Have asked for time to sell the property myself. Still not acceptable unless I have someone in mind immediately

 

The receiver now says that on Friday the lender will send contractors to change the locks. He says Pre-Repossession Protocol doesn't apply to BTL property.

So far no court hearing, no repossesion order of any sort.

Can the lender go directly to repossesion like this without going through the courts?

In 6 - 8 weeks I will be able to make a fairly large payment towards arrears but need to delay proceedings as much as possible.

What should I do please?

[upsndowns]

Who is the lender?

They still need to follow protocol

Do they have a repossesion order?

[Valhalla]

Hi The lender is Webb Resolutions

There is no repossession order but they have repossesssed the ouse anyway - this morning

I spoke to a solicitor yesterday who said that they are entitled to do this.

If any one sees it differently I'd love to know, but at the moment short of repaying the arrears in fill now, things don't look great

[Glasto Girl]

Hi Valhalla,

 

From what I remember from my limited legal studies and have confirmed with some hasty research, a mortgagee is able to repossess a property without a possession order if possession of the property can be taken peacefully. The position was clarified in the Court of Appeal case of Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc, in that instance the property was empty and subject to renovation so the mortgage company could take it peaceably without the need to obtain a possession order and then enforce it.

 

It sounds as though the property was vacant in your case so based on what you have said the advice that you have been given sounds correct in legal terms. There is no consumer protection when it comes to buy to let mortgages as they are completely unregulated and the pre-action protocol doesn't apply as it only relates to residential loans (it's full title being: Pre-Action Protocol for Possession Claims based on Mortgage or Home Purchase Plan Arrears in Respect of Residential Property). Unfortunately none of this is very helpful for you, maybe someone else will come along with an alternative view or some alternative case law.

 

Kind Regards,

 

GG

[upsndowns]

BTL are regulated!! I had this confoirmed by a judge in an application against me by mars capital which I defended and won!! thsy didnt follow spr and the judge gave thema right telling off

At the time I had a tenant so slightly different than this case if you avhe an arrangemenet in place they should not be taking possesion

 

send a PM to ellen she is a real wiz in this area

upsn downs

[Glasto Girl]

Perhaps we are not talking about the same type of regulation, I meant not regulated under CCA or FSMA ie by OFT or FSA. I don't know what SPR means (but would love to be enlightened!) but stand by what I said about the pre-action protocol it's there to protect homeowners at risk of eviction not landlords who might lose their investment property.

 

I've just realised you might mean the Civil Procedure Rules or CPR, which would (as far as I know) apply in all possession cases that go through the courts but as I said earlier vacant properties are an exception to the need to get a court order.

[ettubrute]

Hi Valhalla

 

They can repossess the property, and have the power to do so through appointing a receiver under the Law of Property Act 1925. The LPA receiver can manage the property and does so on your behalf and can sell the property with or without tenants in situ, it is one method by which lenders recover their security on Buy to Let properties. The Pre-action protocol does not apply in this instance, as they have not taken any proceedings to appoint the receiver. The LPA gives the right to appoint a receiver if 2 payments are missed, who can then collect rent, place tenants, and dispose of the property if he/she sees fit.

 

So the solicitor you saw is correct. Hope that helps.

[jimbo45]

Hi there

does this also apply to "Second Homes" which aren't specifically BTL but might be rented out for a few months when the property would otherwise be empty.

 

For example say you are away working in Devon and you have a second home there which you use while on that job while your primary residence might be for example iin Manchester.

 

What is the LEGAL definition of a BTL where repossession like this could take place and a SECOND HOME which although not occupied all year you do use part of the time.

 

Technically I can't actually see any difference in a BTL and a second property but the wording of LAW is of course the important thing in this.

 

Thanks

 

Jimbo