Urgent advice needed please on outright possession and eviction. Thanks.

[debtdoubter09]

Hi, I would be grateful for some help please.

 

I had a possession hearing in November and informed the court that I had become unemployed and was awaiting confirmation of income based JSA and would likely be entitled to Support for Mortgage Interest.

 

The Judge was very helpful and stated that because the entitlement to benefits had not been confirmed he could not consider them at that time, however, he would grant an outright possession order of 56 days and was very clear that, should my circumstance change within that time and the proof of SMI be available, I should return to court where he would be very happy to consider suspending the possession order because there was in his words, 'plenty of time left on the mortgage to clear the arrears'.

 

I submitted an N244 to court requesting a hearing to suspend the possession order as I am now in receipt of SMI and my father in law has agreed to make up the shortfall each month to make the monthly payment plus the minimum required to the arrears. The N244 was submitted in early January within the 56 days and the hearing date is early next week.

 

I have spoken to NRAM about this and have attempted to come to an arrangement prior to the hearing and they point blank refuse and have stated that the repayment figure presented to the court no longer applies because that was interest only and now they want interest plus capital... can they do that even though the figures at the possession hearing and in all subsequent letters have been the same as the figure in court?

 

More urgently, I was advised at court when I submitted the N244 that because it was within the 56 days it would prevent NRAM from applying for an eviction warrant prior to the new hearing. This appears not to be the case because today I received an eviction notice from NRAM's solicitors giving a date when the bailiffs will attend to remove us.... Can someone please advise me on the law here, should the N244 not have prevented NRAM from applying for an eviction warrant?

 

I hope that this all makes sense and I will be very grateful for your advice.

 

Many thanks.

[Lea_HTH]

More urgently, I was advised at court when I submitted the N244 that because it was within the 56 days it would prevent NRAM from applying for an eviction warrant prior to the new hearing. This appears not to be the case because today I received an eviction notice from NRAM's solicitors giving a date when the bailiffs will attend to remove us.... Can someone please advise me on the law here, should the N244 not have prevented NRAM from applying for an eviction warrant?

 

I hope that this all makes sense and I will be very grateful for your advice.

 

Many thanks.

 

Court staff should not give legal advice - they usually get it wrong, largely because they are not lawyers.

 

Is your hearing date listed before the date indicated on the Notice of Eviction? If so, then you have nothing to worry about - your hearing will take place and it is likely the eviction will be stayed.

 

It is usual for the NoE to come from the bailiffs office and not via a solicitor, so check whether the letter you received is actually from the bailiffs (you can call them to double check and to inform them that you have a hearing listed to vary the original PO).

 

With regards to the interest only aspect - whether they can change this depends on whether your original loan was a capital repayment mortgage or interest only. If it was interest only, they cannot now change it to capital repayment - but if it was CR and they gave you a grace period of IO, then they are entitled to withdraw that if the period of time they offered it for has expired.

[debtdoubter09]

Hi Lea_HTH

 

Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my post, the eviction date is after the hearing date, hopefully the DJ will be the same one and will vary the order.

 

The original agreement was CR however I've been on IO for years and that is the figure that NRAM took to court to inflate the number of months in arrears because most of the arrears were accrued a few years ago when I was still on CR so technically I was about half as many months in arrears on the CR figure than the IO figure!

 

I may well be snookered now because I cannot afford the CR payment, not until I'm back in work at least! I wish the lender had taken the CR figures to court and been transparent about what they were doing rather than change the rules a few days before the hearing!

 

Thanks again for your help.

[Lea_HTH]

Do you have a repayment vehicle for the mortgage if you remain on IO?

 

Is the property worth more than the outstanding mortgage?

 

If there is equity in the property, then there may be no prejudice to the mortgagee in leaving you on IO for a while longer - but they may argue that there is no repayment vehicle for an IO mortgage and therefore their investment is at risk.

[debtdoubter09]

Hi Lea_HTH

 

I have no vehicle for the mortgage if I remain on IO, the property currently has around 50K of equity so there is unlikely to be any prejudice to the mortgagee if I remain on IO.

 

I have the property on the market and have a reasonable prospect of it selling in the spring as I am in a sought after location which has just this week had a chance of sale increased after the local authority removed the land adjacent to the property from pockets of land being considered as potential locations for Gypsy and Traveller sites. This was the reason the estate agent gave for the property not having sold already and now the threat of development has been lifted the agent expects a fairly quick sale.

 

Thanks again.

[Lea_HTH]

With the equity in the property, you are in a reasonably strong position to argue in court that you should be given a further period of IO - though the court may not have much discretion about this. However, the court were informed you were on IO, so changing it at this late stage causes some prejudice to you.

 

If you're selling, that is an even stronger point to put forward.

[debtdoubter09]

Thanks, I hope that it works in my favour.

[Lea_HTH]

I am sure it will be all right - just ensure you explain everything thoroughly to the judge, and take any proof of what you are saying with you. E.g proof that your father in law is prepared to assist you, that you have the property on the market, and that there is a realistic prospect of selling (get the estate agent to write a letter informing what other similar properties have sold for).

[TraciePodger]

Although not as far down the line as you, I have a repossession order waiting to go to court as well and am only two months in arrears. Like you I have applied for help for the interest but have to wait 13 weeks as I have only just starting claiming JSA. I am off the firm belief that NRAM want to get as many people out as soon as possible. They cannot close down NRAM until everyone has gone! I am speaking with Watchdog and others about it. Good luck and will be interested in hearing how you get on.

[reallymadwoman]

my father in law has agreed to make up the shortfall each month

 

I may be entirely wrong, but you might want to check with a benefit expert (we have a few on the forum) as I believe DWP may count any regular payment from a relative as income and deduct it from your benefits, entirely defeating the object of the payment! There may be some exemptions for paying the mortgage or similar, but please check before accepting money from anyone else. The last thing you need is to be done for benefit fraud as well.