Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  Irrespective he'd asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.  Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since. I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
    • Ok many thanks. Just wanted to check that nothing else for us to do / send for the moment. Will update again once we receive a copy of their N181 and proposed directions for review. Our post is a bit hit and miss at the moment. Appreciate the help through this process.
    • Yes and will ask you if you are in agreement and or wish to add /remove any direction.
    • Torys seem to think its worth while - cheap muckspreading while they get away with ACTUALLY doing it? More the aspect of ensuring that when these tactics are used without justification - make sure your people aren't doing it more and worse or their crap spread on the waters ... - mind you, the Tories would have to maybe even ease off on their using taxpayer and donor money to fund their preferred lifestyles wouldn't they? Maybe even do the jobs they are paid for?  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

UK debts - living in Canada


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4156 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

Like many others we (a professional couple in our 50s) have fled our debts in the UK.

 

Background:

We had a house with a $180,000 mortgage, and a personal loan of $14,000 both with NatWest.

We each had 2 credit cards -NatWest and MBNA. When both of us lost our jobs in February and March 2008 we tried to go self-employed, tried renting our house, tried pretty much everything.

 

To cut the story short, it was a disaster. We could not generate enough income; the property management company were useless. we ended up financing the mortgage and loan using credit cards and it all spiralled out of control. We asked NatWest several times but they just would not halt interest charges on the loan and we could not pay that too, so in the end had to default. We put the house on the market and made arrangements with NatWest and MBNA CCs to make token £1 payments (with no additional interest)while we were making enough to pay the essentials plus the mortgage (£666 how ironic is that).

 

It was getting unbearable with letters arriving every day and phone calls too; we were starting to become ill from the stress and it was having a knock-on effect as we both have elderly mothers who were getting very upset by the whole situation. Of course we had missed the bubble. Now we could not sell the property and even if we did, the market had crashed and we would be in negative equity. So we finally made the difficult decision to give it up. I came to Canada and my spouse stayed behind to wind things up. I could n't face it. We gave the keys back to NatWest last Christmas. The house is still on the market. They have frozen the mortgage and the loan until such time as it sells, at which point we will still owe then the difference -assuming we're still alive. Que sera sera as far as that goes.

 

My question for the forum is about the credit card debt. We made the mistake -if only I'd read the forum pages back in 2009/10 -of speaking to the CC companies on the phone. They persuded us that we could inrease our payments (MBNA £70pm NatWest £15pm). So for the last 3 years we have been paying £200. We have kept it up pretty well but there have been some missed payments while we changed banks, changed cities, changed jobs etc. We have kept in touch with our local NatWest branch -who were fabulous by the way -via fax and have always informed them in writing of any change of address. We thought long and hard about not telling the CC companies and now I wish we hadn't, but back then (2010) we still believed we should 'do the right thing'.

 

So.... today we got a letter from Arden Credit Management (Co. no. 3303780 alias Moorgate Loan Servicing Limited). The letter, addressed incorrectly (town name misspelled) makes reference to an account number which does not correspond to any of our credit card accounts. However, from the sum mentioned I am assuming it is one of the MBNA cards. They state, "you have failed to make the agreed payment in relation to the repayment programme you agreed with us." They further state , "Failure to address this situation could result in us taking further action including passing your account to a third part or commencing legal action." We have never agreed anything with them; this is the first I have ever heard of them, and they are already a third party aren't they?

 

Questions:

1. Should we respond to these people?

2. Should we write to MBNA? There is no reference to MBNA at all in the Arden letter, so I cannot be 100% certain this is the debt in question.

3. What is the situation regatding legal action? We have no assets in the UK other than our household effects which are in storage because we can't afford to have them shipped to Canada. We are living in rented accommodation here.

 

We intend continuing our arranged payments. If and when the UK property is sold, I fully expect we will declare bankruptcy as the shortfall will be beyond our means.

 

Sorry this was a mammouth post, but then, life's complicated!

 

Any advice gratefully received.

 

Liz_8991

Link to post
Share on other sites

We intend continuing our arranged payments. If and when the UK property is sold, I fully expect we will declare bankruptcy as the shortfall will be beyond our means.
You don't have to wait for it to be sold in order to apply for bankruptcy, in fact I would seriously consider looking into it now because you have two years to do so from leaving the UK otherwise you would have to use the Canadian system.

 

The OR will look into your present circumstances, income etc & would decide what if anything you should pay into the receivership & for how long. Which in the majority of cases isn't anything. This would get everyone off your back & you would be able to start afresh.

 

As for Arden, they do indeed deal with MBNA debts & they are probably using their own reference number rather than MBNA's. Personally I would ignore them, if you contact them they'll think they've got a bite & pester you continuously.

 

3. What is the situation regarding legal action? We have no assets in the UK other than our household effects which are in storage because we can't afford to have them shipped to Canada. We are living in rented accommodation here.
Technically because you still have an interest in the UK (the property) they could attempt to obtain a CCJ here and apply for a charging order on the property or even try to have it enforced in Canada or even possibly send you a Statutory Demand & apply for your bankruptcy, although if they did the latter they would in fact be doing you a favour as they would have to pay for the privilege. ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are strict rules in Canada with regards to debt collection & even tho' they are UK companies chasing at the moment they still have to adhere to them. Have a read of; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?307714-Prohibited-Collection-Practices-In-Canada-(Harassment)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for your property you still have in storage & the fact that you cannot afford to have it shipped over to Canada, have you considered reducing all your present repayments to a nominal amount (even if it's only £1 per month) & using the remainder towards the shipping costs & any bankruptcy application?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all that. Quite a bit to take in.

1. Will take your advice and ignore Arden. They can't even get the address right nor did they supplying any reference we recognised.

2. Although we only handed over the keys to the property last December (2011) I actually left for Canada in August 2010. I have dual citizenship. I sponsored my spouse who is now here as a permanent resident -not yet a citizen. So I have physically been out of the country longer than 2 years already. Will that make any difference? When does the period for bankruptcy start, when we left or when we no longer held the keys to the residence?

3. What happens if we have to file under Canadian law? Does it make any difference in terms of assests? We don't own any property here.

Thank you for your assistance on this.

liz_8991

Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically the period starts from when you leave the UK but I would suppose that because you still had the property until dec '11 it could count from then. Although there is nothing to stop you applying for bankruptcy in Canada. I would suggest doing a little research & see which of the two countries is the least strict & cheapest to apply for bankruptcy. In the UK it would cost around £750 but because you are out of the country you would need a solicitor to deal with it so would bump the costs up.

3. What happens if we have to file under Canadian law? Does it make any difference in terms of assests? We don't own any property here.

 

liz_8991

No there's no difference.

 

These are the basic details for bankruptcy in the UK http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/debt_e/debt_help_with_debt_e/debt_dealing_with_urgent_debts_e/bankruptcy.htm

 

In Canada details can be found here; http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/goc/bankruptcy_assistance.shtml

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...