Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[sequenci]

I don't think anyone that has been party to this thread has any inside information.

I don't understand the point on bailiffs still, I'm sorry about that.

People generally lose their homes if they can no longer meet their mortgage commitments. I can't see how that's fraudulent.

[gt4god2ulot]

are you implying that our site is owned/run by bailiffs ? You couldn't be further from the truth. We are "owned" by no one from the Financial industry at all. Neither can we obtain or use members private details ?

 

We have absolutely no idea what the outcome of this will be. Obviously we hope that isitme's friend comes out of this with no financial damage or the loss of his home.

 

You only have to look at the wider picture and how the industry has fought back if it felt under attack - we are merely pointing out that the mortgage industry will not go quietly and will certainly not allow borrowers to walk away from their commitments.

 

CitizenB are you tryiing to insult my intelligence I hope that is not the case here.as marc gander from marstons group run this site.

A quick google search will show you.

[sequenci]

Marc doesn't work for Marstons. He is on their advisory group. He provides advice to them about any issues that need to be addressed as regards their conduct.

 

A quick Google search will show you.

[gt4god2ulot]

Marc doesn't work for Marstons. He is on their advisory group. He provides advice to them about any issues that need to be addressed as regards their conduct.

 

A quick Google search will show you.

 

Marc gander is the founder of CAG and is an adminstrator also advisor and is connected to marston group.

which ever way you look at it.

[sequenci]

He has no direct involvement with their business. Hope that clarifies the position. If it doesn't perhaps you may wish to spend some time researching what having an advisory role means. Please now either return to the subject matter of this thread or refrain from posting furthermore. If you wish to create a thread to discuss Marstons you are more than welcome to do so.

[citizenB]

CitizenB are you tryiing to insult my intelligence I hope that is not the case here.as marc gander from marstons group run this site.

A quick google search will show you.

 

Not at all. But I seriously question your motives for making such a statement. Please, as already requested. Either return to the topic of this thread or cease posting. If you do not take heed of this message, then I am afraid your account will be moderated if not banned.

[gt4god2ulot]

CitizeB there is no motives is there not such a thing as freedom of speech or is it not allowed on CAG I am shocked to see how you mods operate

Threatening to to stop me posting? What have I said that isn't already public knowledge.

I am sticking to the thread I was just pointing out so that people do not get miss guided or misled thats all.my intentions was not to rattle anyones cage but clearly I have..

[sequenci]

You've not rattled any cages. We try and keep threads on topic.

We, as mods, operate within the remit of the site rules - You can read those HERE

What you've said is incorrect, I'm guessing that's probably down to you being a little naive as to the role of an adviser, but hopefully you're now more aware of the true position. If I was regarded as an employee of all of the firms, bodies and organisations I have advised (and still do) I would probably be in the Guiness Book of Records as the world's greatest moonlighter!

 

Best wishes,

 

Seq.

[GiveHimaMask]

are you implying that our site is owned/run by bailiffs ? You couldn't be further from the truth. We are "owned" by no one from the Financial industry at all. Neither can we obtain or use members private details ?

 

We have absolutely no idea what the outcome of this will be. Obviously we hope that isitme's friend comes out of this with no financial damage or the loss of his home.

 

You only have to look at the wider picture and how the industry has fought back if it felt under attack - we are merely pointing out that the mortgage industry will not go quietly and will certainly not allow borrowers to walk away from their commitments.

 

Hi CitizenB,

Are you having a laugh here, 'how the industry has fought back', have you forgotten recent history, HBOS, LLOYDS, RBS in the UK, Lehman Bros, Bear Sterns, Morgan Stanley, AIG, JP Morgan Golden Sachs, Citibank the list goes on and on in the US. There is no fight in these people at all, when the writing is on the wall, they cash in their chips and head the problem onto someone else, namely, governments and tax payers.

 

Now when these governments have sorted these problems out what do you think they do next? Yes that's right, a few of these good old boys get together, raise a few billion and get back into the game again, buying up debt at a discount and they're back in business again

 

So no, there is no fight in these people, they're to smart for that, they'll leave the fighting to someone else cause there is no profit in that, they'll devote their energy to the fallout from their architecture.

[GiveHimaMask]

Not hearing. Eyesight. You know, the stuff they've sent out to people. Why do you think they are doing that?

 

I disagree with much of what you've written, I've posted it earlier in the thread - so I'm sure you can revisit it should you wish to

 

Hi Sequenci,

 

We know your views in relation to this matter and that follows the Law in relation to debt recovery. This is a safe position and will cause no harm.

 

You should consider Winged Piglet's post which clearly lays out the position of the parties prior to any Chamber hearing, for the Chamber hearing will not alter that position. Now given these realities and add in a successful application to the Chamber bearing in mind that the vast majority of mortgages in the UK will mirror the successful applicants application, how would the courts handle around 10 million debt recovery applications never mind the the effect on the wider economy as those 10 million repriortise their debts as you suggested earlier as they await a few decades whle the courts gets to them. Do you think that will work for the Lender?

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Winged Piglet,

 

I forgot to say, good summation of the current position.

[sequenci]

Hi Sequenci,

 

We know your views in relation to this matter and that follows the Law in relation to debt recovery.

 

Hiya.

 

I'm pretty well versed in property law too.

 

Ta,

 

Seq.

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Sequenci,

To add further to this mix, you could factor in the ability of the Borrower now unencumbered with a charge on his home being able to mortgage the property in the proper format. So, when approached by the Lender through the courts he could show in his income/expenditure form his current ability to meet the repayment of debt to his original lender, say £100/mth thus avoiding ccj, charging orders and bankruptcy, do you think a court might disagree with that, or he might just use some of that new mortgage money to make a full and final settlement offer of £12k that representing twelve years of monthly repayments. What do you think the Lender would think of that.

You seem to think that once the Deed is declared void that the Lender is still in the driving seat. You argue all different types of equity clauses implied terms, part performance etc, and assume that these will kick in as a matter of course. You fail to recognise that the Borrower's application has not asked for a decision in relation to the loan and I doubt that the Chamber would be empowered to make any decision in that regard, for that would be a decision for a court of Law, and that would represent another layer of court applications.

So, given the realities of the Lenders behaviour, the ability of the Borrower to apply the Law to their individual circumstances, no decision being asked for relating to money at the Chamber, do you think that that stuff you talk about would actually apply?

[sequenci]

I think the outcome will be that the court will not declare the deed void at all.

 

Just my opinion though. You don't have the accept it.

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Sequenci,

 

Every one is entitled to their opinion and I respect that but, there is only one opinion that counts in this instance.

 

I prefer to explore the 'What If' senario of circumstances that may arise, you could say thats part of risk management.

 

The essence of this thread is the signing of the Deed and that has nothing to do with Property Law. But you will know through Property Law and Company Law that agreeing companies are required to sign the Deed and that is a senario that will come into play here. You need to dig deep into the Law and find out what a corporate sole is.

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Crapstone,

 

You should consider that the Deed is the all encompassing document in relation to your mortgage. If it is found to be void, then all documents relatng to it are void also. There is no one coming along to reinstate it. Your repayment terms also are void as these are contained within you Deeds. All you are left with is indebtness to your Lender, without terms or conditions. You become the man in the driving seat. You are the absolute owner as described in th title register and will only cease to become that person when you sell it.

 

As Mandela says ' You should live by your hopes and not your fears'.

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi IS IT ME,

 

Are you allowed out to play??

[Winged Piglet]

Not hearing. Eyesight. You know, the stuff they've sent out to people. Why do you think they are doing that?

 

I disagree with much of what you've written, I've posted it earlier in the thread - so I'm sure you can revisit it should you wish to

 

Sequenci - parties send out lots of stuff, so much it's in a huge bundle in applications and claims, if the mere sending out of a particular case signalled game over the courts would be closed for lack of use! Get a grip.. Just because it's been sent out means diddly! and unreported cases...... Well enough said.

 

You like to come on this thread and give your opinion but every time someone asks you a question or replies to your comments you decline to comment further and direct us back over.This is a discussion thread. Discuss. If you have nothing new or nothing to add then why are you bothering? I don't think you have posted certainly replies/ discussion to what I posted at all because I hadn't written it yet. There you go with that crystal ball you clairvoyant you ;-)

 

WP

[Winged Piglet]

are you implying that our site is owned/run by bailiffs ? You couldn't be further from the truth. We are "owned" by no one from the Financial industry at all. Neither can we obtain or use members private details ?

 

We have absolutely no idea what the outcome of this will be. Obviously we hope that isitme's friend comes out of this with no financial damage or the loss of his home.

 

You only have to look at the wider picture and how the industry has fought back if it felt under attack - we are merely pointing out that the mortgage industry will not go quietly and will certainly not allow borrowers to walk away from their commitments.

 

'and will certainly not allow borrowers to walk away from their commitments? '

 

Really Citizen B? You are forgetting it's not up to them is it. Even you seem accepting of the way the Lender has manourved themselves into fooling us Borrowers that they are all powerful and can do whatever they please.This language of them not allowing or letting. Well they may well be forced to under the weight of the law if the courts declare it!

Commitments? How did the Borrower become committed exactly? Remove the void Deed and reveal no loan agreement, so where/ when did the commitment evolve?

[Winged Piglet]

Hi IS IT ME,

 

Are you allowed out to play??

 

Yes Apple and Is It Me do come and play.......it's just not cricket without you

[Crapstone]

Haven't the courts already recognized that vexatious litigation en masse to avoid a mortgage contract is not going to be accepted and the only outstanding part is a question of the deed? All the court will seek to do is rectify and remedy flaws to put both parties back to the intended footing. Securitization is also accepted as a mortgage practice which again was pretty much covered by the fact it was stated in the mortgage offer, terms and conditions. They didn't hold a gun to your head to sign it and were free to seek legal advice.

[sequenci]

Sequenci - parties send out lots of stuff, so much it's in a huge bundle in applications and claims, if the mere sending out of a particular case signalled game over the courts would be closed for lack of use! Get a grip.. Just because it's been sent out means diddly! and unreported cases...... Well enough said.

 

You like to come on this thread and give your opinion but every time someone asks you a question or replies to your comments you decline to comment further and direct us back over.This is a discussion thread. Discuss. If you have nothing new or nothing to add then why are you bothering? I don't think you have posted certainly replies/ discussion to what I posted at all because I hadn't written it yet. There you go with that crystal ball you clairvoyant you ;-)

 

WP

 

That's the problem, isn't it? No one has anything further to say. All points have been regurgitated time and time again by all parties within the thread. It has got to the stage where nothing else can be said. I think it's all be covered, and I dare say the best thing to do know is to await the outcome in January. I find it quite staggering, though, just how illogical and blinkered some people appear to be.

[IS IT ME?]

Hi Apple,

If you are reading this thread or if you can reply I have heard from the 4th solicitors who are informing me that they are relying on the Halsburys law the 2007 and a little stuck with how to respond as they are now saying that they wish for the chamber to amend the deed without a hearing??

As I can not agree to this.

[andrew1]

Hi Apple,

 

As I can not agree to this.

 

You disappoint me IS IT ME - why ever not?

 

A1

[IS IT ME?]

Ha Ha andrew1

yes very funny would you believe it after all this work