Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes typed it, how would I input it any other way, probably timed out took over half hour. H
    • You typed it in? actually typed it all out? if so, maybe you took too long or something, like session timed out. Does the status show defence filed or no change?
    • Hi just typed all defence clicked next and it's deleted all. Any help
    • I forgot to say, there is one last possibility and that is that they will receive your letter of rejection and simply fold, accept the rejection and refund you. Don't wait too long for this. Seven days maximum – but in that seven days you could send your letter of claim anyway and when that you don't hear from them or when they start mucking around at least you are seven days closer to beginning the legal action – and they will know it (which is the important thing).
    • Okay that is excellent that you have an email between the garage and the warranty company confirming that there is a serious problem with the gearbox. That is very powerful evidence. I think the situation is this: you have sent them a letter of rejection but the reputation of big motoring world is that they won't take a lot of notice and they will try to prevaricate and maybe even blame you. Clearly you don't want the car any more and anyway it sounds as if the cost of repairs is going to be enormous. You don't know if the warranty company is going to step up to the mark but the whole thing is going to take a long time and I understand that you have lost confidence in big motoring world because of this event and also their reputation which you are now discovering on Facebook and on this forum and no doubt elsewhere. On the basis that you don't want the car any more and you want your money back, you need to hurry things along. I think the first thing is that you need to decide if you are prepared to bring a claim in the County Court. Even without the warranty money, the claim is worth more than £10,000. For actions less than £10,000, you bring a "small claim" and this means that even if you lose the case you won't be liable for the other side's costs. If you win the case then not only will you get your money plus interest but also you will recover all of the costs of the action. For actions more than £10,000, you go to something called the "fast track" and in the event that you lose the case, then you could be liable to reimburse the winner some of the costs. This means that in addition to not recovering your own money, you would lose your own court fees and also you would have to to bear the costs of the other side probably something less than £5000 – but as a rough guess. If you bring your court claim then your chances of success are almost 100%. Frankly if you brought a court claim then I can imagine that big motoring world will put their hands up and pay you out rather than face go to court and losing and getting a judgement against them. However, it you need to consider that this is a risk factor – although my view it is a negligible risk factor. If you did bring a court case, it wouldn't be instant. If they put their hands up then it would probably happen very quickly. If they didn't put their hands up then you could take anything up to a year for the matter to be resolved and during that time you would be without your car and without your money and in the middle of litigation. I'm explaining this to you say that you understand how it works. Bring a court case would be really the last resort when everything else has failed. However, I'm quite certain that you would win and it would be stupid of big motoring world to try to resist. In order to bring a court case you would have to send a letter of claim giving them 14 days to accept rejection and organise the refund otherwise you would begin the claim. Don't imagine that you could bluff this. If you did send a letter of claim then you would have to go through with it otherwise you lose all credibility and you might as well pack up and go home. So with this in mind, here are possible courses of action you could take. You can simply wait and see what their reaction to your letter of rejection will be. However they may not reply or else they may find some other reason to delay and of course during that time you will be without your car and without your money blah blah blah, not knowing if big motoring world were going eventually to start acting sensibly and respectfully towards you. The second thing you can do – and I think this has been suggested on Facebook – is that you can go along there and simply make yourself present and talk to other customers and generally speaking make a nuisance of yourself and embarrass them to the point where you would be explaining to other potential customers to be careful, to look on Facebook, and to do some careful research before they put their business to big motoring world. This has a reasonable chance of success although you would have to be careful. You should go accompanied by a friend and there should be no anger, no arguments, nothing that could be considered as being overly aggressive so that big motoring world would have no justification in kicking you out or even worse, calling the police. If you did this, then I would suggest that you record everything on the telephone carried in a pocket. A fully charged battery will probably keep a voice recorder and a telephone going for more than 20 hours or 30 hours. The other person can video any incidents so that everything is clear and you can inform big motoring world then it will be going up on the Internet. If you did this, my favourite option would be to issue the letter of claim giving them 14 days, and then going along to big motoring world with a copy of your letter of rejection and a copy of the exchange between the mechanic and the warranty company and a copy of your letter of claim – all settled together – and probably about 20 or 30 copies in all and I would start handing them out to any customers who came in. Big motoring world will soon get the picture and they will either move your the premises in which case you stand outside and carry on doing it or they will finally give in. Of course there is a chance that they won't give in and they will simply call your bluff – but in that case I think you have no choice other than to follow through with your 14 day threat in the letter of claim and to begin the legal action. At the same time you should be putting up reviews on Google and also trust pilot explaining exactly what has happened and also explaining that the mechanic has confirmed to the warranty company that there is the serious problem, that you have asserted the right to reject and that this is been ignored by big motoring world and that you have now sent a letter of claim and that you will be starting a legal action in 14 days. Once again, don't bluff about the legal action. If you threaten it – then you must mean it – and on day 15 you click of the claim. You don't need a solicitor for any of this. It's all fairly straightforward and of course we will help you all the way that it the decision is yours to make and I think you need to make it fairly quickly. I think the cost of starting an action for about £13,000 is 5% and then also if it goes to trial which I would say is almost impossible – there would be an additional fee. You would claim interest at 8%. A judge might award a lower figure but frankly if you can show that big motoring world is attempting to ride roughshod over your very clear statutory consumer rights, I can imagine that the judge will want to show displeasure by awarding the full 8% which is a pretty good rate – even though it's not compensation for the hassle and the distress you are going through. If you decide to get solicitor, then if you win the case, because it is over £10,000 you will recover some of your costs but you won't recover all of them. If the solicitor begins by having exchanges of letters then I doubt whether you will be up to recover the cost of those and you could easily find that you're chalking up 500 quid or even a thousand simply on initial exchanges of correspondence. Also you need to bear in mind that if after having exchanges with a solicitor, big motoring world cave in – then you definitely won't get those costs back because you won't have gone to court and therefore a judge will not have made the order for payment of those costs. I suggest very strongly that you avoid paying any money for a solicitor and that you do it yourself. It's not a big deal – although you will have to you react quickly to the help we offer on this forum. Also, an additional benefit is that you will learn a lot and you will gain confidence and eventually you will feel good about suing anybody else who gets in your way. Nothing not to like! If you do decide to instruct a solicitor then you must take control of the solicitor. Most of them prefer to sit in an office writing letters on the clock. If you do decide to instruct a solicitor then you must instruct the solicitor very firmly that they should send one letter of complaint giving seven days. A second letter – a letter of claim giving 14 days and that they must then begin the action. If you don't do this. If you don't take control then it will simply cost you money, you will be without your car even longer and of course without your money. The whole thing is a nightmare. I think I've laid out the options but please do ask questions. I hope you can see that this is the kind of advice that you won't be getting on Facebook. Nothing against Facebook. It's good as a meeting place and to make people realise that they aren't on their own – but after that the advice given is weak and confusing.  
  • 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

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3758 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

  • Replies 6.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

good to see you back Apple I really hope it was not me mentioning my other issue that caused the problem,I have been worried about your absence I would still appreciate your help with the void deed too

 

Hi Marika...no, not you....don't think that for a moment.....ok?

 

I am of the opinion that you are on our wavelength......We are here to assist those who are ; )

 

Did you manage to get your DEFENCE sent off to the local county court in time?

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome back apple...and there was me thinking you were a fella! I like the quotes too...thank goodness for common sense....now on with the serious stuff..

 

A1

 

Thank you A1

 

Will do ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the Council of Mortgage Lenders think the Deed is the loan agreement also?

 

Here's more of their advice on what needs to be done for fresh meat borrowers

 

Your conveyancer will do the following

 

 

Register or record the change of title to the property, and the mortgage deed (loan agreement) in favour of the lender, with the Land Registry.**

 

'Change of title'?.......do remember ..... they are the Council of 'Mortgage' Lenders.......and ask and consider - What's in a name??

 

The CML wholly condone 'mortgages'....a 'mortgage' is a disposition of the borrowers whole estate......Owners of registered estates have no power to grant any lender a 'mortgage'....

 

However...there is legislation to support an argument that a 'mortgage' can be entered on a borrowers title on a 'first' registration of an estate/property/land - the FR1 form is required for those......there is still a fair bit of housing development going on....the FR1 form can be used for those........

 

Most Borrowers were then encouraged to 're-'mortgage'.....any such 're-mortgage' would not require the FR1 form.....the Lender would be dealing with Registered Land at that point....

 

I do agree with the CML when they kindly advise that both the Borrower must sign...and the Lender must execute the deed prior to registration ......there is statutory provision to ensure that this is so ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any more news about apple coming back?

As i have questions because I have had great news back which will more than stop the lenders dead in their tacks before this goes to the property chamber

 

Hi Is It Me......

 

Could you be talking about the FACT that the Chamber are finding that a large number of Lenders are not actually receiving applications......because any application sent to a lenders address as shown on the deed .....are being returned by the Post Office..........as 'gone away'.................???

 

That finding might have the same effect to 'stop the lenders dead in their tracks'......

 

Might be an idea that ALL applications refer to and are made to be sent to the lenders address shown on the Deed moving forward......just to make sure.... they get the post....

 

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I assist Is It Me and others to assert that the DEED is VOID....There remains NO DEFENCE!!!....

 

Applecart ; )

 

Morning!

 

Have you found any binding authority in relation to residential mortgages which asserts this position yet? Welcome back, by the way :)

 

Seq.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning!

 

Have you found any binding authority in relation to residential mortgages which asserts this position yet? Welcome back, by the way :)

 

Seq.

 

Thank you Sequenci.

 

I mean you no offence, but I'm looking to move this thread forward working with those who are on the same wave length.....

 

Just to explain further, ....there will be no one on our wave length that should be concerned with 'binding authority in relation to residential mortgages' .....We can rely wholly on Statutory provision....the case law that we have submitted and reliance on Halsbury's Law is/are good authority to get the ball rolling.........

 

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Others have already rebutted your case law suggestions, and none of what I saw was specific to residential mortgages - hence me asking. I find it all incredibly fascinating.

 

Also, should you not succeed - would you be happy to cover any costs that there folks you are helping may incurr?

 

For the record, I hope your ideas *do* succeed. I just cannot personally see a court agreeing with you, but I'm no expert. I just cannot understand why this hasn't been attempted historically. Afterall, look how many residential mortgages there are.

 

....there will be no one on our wave length that should be concerned with 'binding authority in relation to residential mortgages'

 

Perhaps they should be. Just my 2c though :)

 

Best wishes,

 

Seq.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see you posting again apple, the thread just wasn't the same without you. Hopefully there will be more good news as this campaign progresses.

 

Cheers ; )

 

We still have loads to do ....

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Others have already rebutted your case law suggestions, and none of what I saw was specific to residential mortgages - hence me asking. I find it all incredibly fascinating.

 

Also, should you not succeed - would you be happy to cover any costs that there folks you are helping may incurr?

 

For the record, I hope your ideas *do* succeed. I just cannot personally see a court agreeing with you, but I'm no expert. I just cannot understand why this hasn't been attempted historically. Afterall, look how many residential mortgages there are.

 

 

 

Perhaps they should be. Just my 2c though :)

 

Best wishes,

 

Seq.

 

 

Thanks Sequenci...

 

We appreciate your points made and your good wishes. ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apple,

 

Me to, welcome back, now there is a sense of balance restored to the thread.

 

Onward and Upward

 

GiveHimaMask

 

Thanks GiveHimaMask ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to my post #2655...... this is a significant issue......

 

Say you send off your application to the Chamber, the application includes the Lenders address as shown on the Official Copy of the 'mortgage' Deed.....

 

Your application is accepted by the Chamber......you are instructed to send the application on to the Lender for a response......

 

You wait and you wait for a response.......only to find your response comes back from the Post Office.....telling you that the Lender has 'gone away'.........

 

This means that the Lender is not aware that you have made an application to the Chamber..... Neither you Nor HMLR are obliged to track down the Lender or his whereabouts.......

 

I can see a situation where the Chamber will have no choice but to find against the Lender where so ever the Lender fails to 'respond' to an application made to an address held on the public record at HMLR.....and his only defence is that he has 'gone away'.....

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to my post #2655...... this is a significant issue......

 

Say you send off your application to the Chamber, the application includes the Lenders address as shown on the Official Copy of the 'mortgage' Deed.....

 

 

 

Your application is accepted by the Chamber......you are instructed to send the application on to the Lender for a response......

 

You wait and you wait for a response.......only to find your response comes back from the Post Office.....telling you that the Lender has 'gone away'.........

 

This means that the Lender is not aware that you have made an application to the Chamber..... Neither you Nor HMLR are obliged to track down the Lender or his whereabouts.......

 

I can see a situation where the Chamber will have no choice but to find against the Lender where so ever the Lender fails to 'respond' to an application made to an address held on the public record at HMLR.....and his only defence is that he has 'gone away'.....

 

Apple

 

I think you maybe right apple i did look on the post office website and it says delivered to both addresses i sent the chamber application to the lender but can't see no signature?

 

i do know preferred have have two addresses one in london which they have no offices its just a registered address the one at high wycombe is both preferred and acendens plus acenden use a po box which i have been told to send payments to which is suspicious why didn't they give me a proper address?

 

the po box is also the address they gave to court?

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Sequenci.

 

I mean you no offence, but I'm looking to move this thread forward working with those who are on the same wave length.....

 

Just to explain further, ....there will be no one on our wave length that should be concerned with 'binding authority in relation to residential mortgages' .....We can rely wholly on Statutory provision....the case law that we have submitted and reliance on Halsbury's Law is/are good authority to get the ball rolling.........

 

Apple

Apple,

With all due respect to Sequenci if (s)he has not read the thread content and the supporting statutory references then I don't think at this stage anyone should be trying to convince anyone of the "proof" for fear of going round in circles. This is not a one line answer... To avoid clogging the thread (as I have done in the past with my questions questions questions) is it best to avoid repeating the evidence and refer to historical information in the thread?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read the majority of the thread, my questions remain unanswered. I'm pretty up-to-speed with land law and mortgages given that I do a fair amount of work with mortgages for a living. I'm pretty well versed with the various pieces of statute - I use some of it in work and some I remember well from my days of studying Land Law. I think it's important for anyone to remain objective when dealing with any situation, which many people on this thread seem to have an absolute inability to do. Think, for a minute, about outcomes. What outcome do you realistically think the courts will make? Do you think they are likely to render the majority of modern mortgage contracts potentially void? It is my personal opinion that they are unlikely to do that - and that they'll be able to look to ways, potentially via equity, to overcome some of the issues that have been raised. Which is why I always look to historicial dealings to try and ascertain what a probable outcome might be. I'm not skilled enough in this particular area to add much weight behind an opinion, though - I'm happy to consider the opions of those who work closer to the key issues at hand - such as Leah. I guess what I'm getting at is that all arguments need to be considered holistically and objectively. Hope that makes sense!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Marika...no, not you....don't think that for a moment.....ok?

 

I am of the opinion that you are on our wavelength......We are here to assist those who are ; )

 

Did you manage to get your DEFENCE sent off to the local county court in time?

 

Apple

 

Oh thank goodness for that I have been very worried, I have intil next tuesday for my defence, it will now be going in this thursday or friday for definite

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you maybe right apple i did look on the post office website and it says delivered to both addresses i sent the chamber application to the lender but can't see no signature?

 

i do know preferred have have two addresses one in london which they have no offices its just a registered address the one at high wycombe is both preferred and acendens plus acenden use a po box which i have been told to send payments to which is suspicious why didn't they give me a proper address?

 

the po box is also the address they gave to court?

 

According to FCA http://www.... Preferred Mortgages Limited do not have an Approved Representative.....see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmAppRepsCurr.do?sid=112446

 

Yet...complaints are to be made to a chap going by the name of 'Brent Jackson'......who works for Accenden.....please see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmContact.do?sid=112446

 

Yet...on an 'individual search'.....Brent Jackson is 'in-active'.......please see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/indivBasicDetails.do?sid=285669

 

Accenden are showing to be 'authorised' by the FCA - yet they do not have any permission to hold client money??.... see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmBasicDetails.do?sid=157897

 

Yet......Accenden have No Principal.... i.e.....they are not working on behalf of Preferred.....as an approved representative....

 

I have a suspicion that Accenden have acquired FSA regulation to provide that they act on behalf of Eurosail......even though the mortgages were originated by say 'preferred'....'SPML' and the like......

 

That seems a bit odd to me......

 

Accenden did not originate any of the mortgages that it has managed to achieve regulatory status to administer......there is nothing to show that they are working as an approved representative of the Principal Mortgage Lender ......ummmmm???

 

Accenden are not named on any deed other than as an address for notices to be served.........ummmmm??

 

I think that seems odd.....what are your thoughts P.J?

 

I can't say I fully understand all that the FCA stands for ..... However.....it is odd....that a company that is not named as the beneficiary to the deed is enforcing it in a court of Law...

 

If Accenden were the Approved Representative for Preferred.... then the fact that they are found to be administering the loans would make a lot more sense....

 

If Accenden were named in the application as the owner of the loan...then it would make a lot of sense to see them as acting as an 'Approved Representative' (possibly) responding to the application made to the Chamber.....

 

I need to give this some more thought of course....but.... on the service..... it is not adding up at all...... no, not at all....

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apple,

With all due respect to Sequenci if (s)he has not read the thread content and the supporting statutory references then I don't think at this stage anyone should be trying to convince anyone of the "proof" for fear of going round in circles. This is not a one line answer... To avoid clogging the thread (as I have done in the past with my questions questions questions) is it best to avoid repeating the evidence and refer to historical information in the thread?

 

Hi UNRAM

 

There will be alternative views, we respect them as much as we hope they will respect ours.....we simply agree to differ at this point.....without looking to cause any offence or invoke any offence as we move this matter forward.. ; )

 

Hopefully, this approach will avoid any CaG feeling the need to go back and forth over issues raised and addressed in full previously.

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi every one, fisrtlt let me welcome apple back and I am sure that the lenders have now said ' oh god' that did not work.

 

But I will not be able to post for awhile as my father-in-law died last night and I have to go to Devon.

But will try and keep in touch.

Sequenci,

Thank you for your comments but as you say you do not know this field nor have any knowledge of it in this area and believe me I have considered what will happen and what the courts could do, which by there actions so far is not a lot.

I do believe that my questions to IMS21 with regard to Andrew1 post is correct has not been asked.

 

I would like to see this though to the end one way or the other win or lose Both sides have a lot to lose may be some one should be saying that to the lenders??

 

So every one stay d and keep going.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sequenci,

 

You say that you are familiar with mortgage contracts, if this is the case then perhaps you could advise as to what constitutes a mortgage contract in my particular case.

 

I have been to court several times defending repossession claims by a number of different lenders, the basis of the claim has always been that I have failed to maintain (or make) my contractual monthly payment. As such, there are now arrears on the account to such an extent that outright possession is now sought.

 

So, contractual monthly payment however, do I have a contract? I have several documents (mortgage application, re-mortgage declaration, mortgage confirmation form and finally the now famous mortgage deed) all signed by me and yet nothing by the lender.

 

I may be stupid but I would have thought that if there was to be any contract or agreement, then surely there would be a document signed by both parties confirming that, yes indeed, a contract/agreement with terms and conditions applicable to the contract/agreement existed.

 

What, in the documents that I have highlighted above, would constitute a legal contract or agreement?

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to FCA http://www.... Preferred Mortgages Limited do not have an Approved Representative.....see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmAppRepsCurr.do?sid=112446

 

Yet...complaints are to be made to a chap going by the name of 'Brent Jackson'......who works for Accenden.....please see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmContact.do?sid=112446

 

Yet...on an 'individual search'.....Brent Jackson is 'in-active'.......please see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/indivBasicDetails.do?sid=285669

 

Accenden are showing to be 'authorised' by the FCA - yet they do not have any permission to hold client money??.... see here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmBasicDetails.do?sid=157897

 

Yet......Accenden have No Principal.... i.e.....they are not working on behalf of Preferred.....as an approved representative....

 

I have a suspicion that Accenden have acquired FSA regulation to provide that they act on behalf of Eurosail......even though the mortgages were originated by say 'preferred'....'SPML' and the like......

 

That seems a bit odd to me......

 

Accenden did not originate any of the mortgages that it has managed to achieve regulatory status to administer......there is nothing to show that they are working as an approved representative of the Principal Mortgage Lender ......ummmmm???

 

Accenden are not named on any deed other than as an address for notices to be served.........ummmmm??

 

I think that seems odd.....what are your thoughts P.J?

 

I can't say I fully understand all that the FCA stands for ..... However.....it is odd....that a company that is not named as the beneficiary to the deed is enforcing it in a court of Law...

 

If Accenden were the Approved Representative for Preferred.... then the fact that they are found to be administering the loans would make a lot more sense....

 

If Accenden were named in the application as the owner of the loan...then it would make a lot of sense to see them as acting as an 'Approved Representative' (possibly) responding to the application made to the Chamber.....

 

I need to give this some more thought of course....but.... on the service..... it is not adding up at all...... no, not at all....

 

Apple

 

humm that is very odd so who was the agent acting on behalf of then this is strange indeed i did raise this question with the district judge this is when he asked the the agent who i have to make payments too? I have had a reply from court it says to pay acenden ltd po box high wycombe heard absolutely nothing from preferred/acenden or LTL with any bank details or setup any standing order nothing they are usually on the ball with letters..looking at those links it doesn't add up at all Apple...

 

pj

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

What, in the documents that I have highlighted above, would constitute a legal contract or agreement?

 

Hi there,

 

Just so I've got it clear (sorry to ask!). Did you not get a copy of the document showing all the general contractual terms including the amount borrowed, interest rate and monthly contractual instalment? That's pretty incredible if you've not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sequenci,

Thank you for your comments but as you say you do not know this field nor have any knowledge of it in this area and believe me I have considered what will happen and what the courts could do, which by there actions so far is not a lot.

What legal qualifications/experience do you have, if you don't mind me asking?

I do believe that my questions to IMS21 with regard to Andrew1 post is correct has not been asked.

Have you e-mailed him?

I would like to see this though to the end one way or the other win or lose Both sides have a lot to lose may be some one should be saying that to the lenders??

I don't really care about the lenders to be honest. I care about Caggers. I want to see a resolution too!

 

Incredibly sorry to learn of your loss. My thoughts are with you and your family.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3758 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.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...