Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[applecart]

Hi Mollypockets

 

'human'...'not conforming'......'hidden agenda?'......who me??

 

I'm not rightly sure what you mean...... ; )

 

However.....let me say ......Yes, I'm very much 'human'......further, it would be wrong of me to assert that I am a 'conformist' .....but that's not because I do not do my best to conform....I just find that the kind of conforming that lenders want borrowers to conform to correlates with their own common practices, engineered and fine tuned to evade the law.....and as I understand it....as citizens of the world.....we are all deemed to know and abide by the law and of course ....to conform to the Law.....I rather struggle with having two masters.....so, I thought best to side with the Law.......them there common practices could get you sent to jail you know.......so, it was a simple decision for me........thought best to stay within the Law...

 

......and as to any hidden agenda.....nope....not at all.....there is nothing 'hidden' ..... I have posted the law to remind one and all that we are all supposed to abide by it.......last time I looked....the law of the land applies to borrowers as well as lenders........ ; )

 

Apple

[mollypockets]

hey Apple,

thanks for the reply(it`s kinda funny that only one or two people actually bother to reply with a bit of advise on this forum) I thought that sharing advise or ideas and the like,was the whole ethos of such forums,but maybe that`s just me.

 

Sorry Apple but my last post was not directed at you,it was in support of you.After reading through the entirety of this whole discussion,one can only come to the conclusion that there is two opposing sides here,when there should be at least three.That is,,,,Apple,Isitme,givehim a mask and a couple of others,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,then on the other side,everyone else,and unfortuneatley it seems the lenders(banksters),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,whereas it should be the case that we have a mature discussion with both sides exchanging views as consumers and both sides open to suggestion instead of continually flat out rejecting any argument that Apple puts forward,,,,,,,,,,,which is just what the banksters would do!.....Apple,I`m sure you must feel like you are pushing water up a hill sometimes.

[applecart]

Hi Ya Mollypockets

 

It may appear that there are opposing sides on the CaG....but to be fair to those who appear 'opposed'....this is not strictly true imo......

 

They are being 'cautionary'.....

 

There are two sides......the 'opposing' viewpoints are similar to those that a borrower is likely to have to deal with... as and when their applications get to a hearing.......the 'opposing' view has assisted the thread move forward in ways that were not and could not have been contemplated without them.....

 

Uphill??........... ooooohhhh yesss!

 

'opposing' views defeated?........ oooooohhhh yessss!!!.......that's to say....

 

....I, along with other contributors have Defeated the lender on the CaG......but then, that's my opinion....not the oppositions.....(even though there is NO Defence)

 

It will be up to individual borrowers to take the information from this thread.....and use it to their own best advantage..... ; )

 

Lenders know that most borrowers will still not understand the difference between the formalities in relation to 'granting' a charge (meeting HMLR form of charge) different from "creating" an interest'(which must be by deed).......and of course those that cannot articulate this fact....will be picked off one by one.... ; (

 

But, we will, like I say...keep tweaking and pushing until borrowers get to grips with the difference.... ; )

 

Apple

[applecart]

Hi Ya Mollypockets

 

The thread sets out the kind of opposition that borrowers will face when taking an application forward.......it's no different on the thread than it will be at a hearing.......

 

If a borrower does not understand the difference between the 'granting' of a 'charge' (HMLR form of deed) different from 'creating' an 'interest'(statutory requirement for a deed).....then it will be very difficult to argue the point at a hearing.....

 

We can defeat opposing views on this thread all day long.....however.....the cookie crumbles at Tribunal......not here.....opposing posters will know that....and will no doubt look to tarnish one borrowers inability to take the argument forward as a means of putting others off.....understandable.....

 

....but the important message on this thread is that .....any adverse decision does not remove the statutory fact that..... a Deed that is intended to 'create an interest' to secure indebtedness must be executed by the lender........and HLMR's form of charge is not 'generally' executed by lenders.....

 

Apple

[andrew1]

Anything which bucks the system which complacency has set in place is likely to be pushing water uphill....I don't confess to understanding this concept fully by any stretch of the imagination, but I am involved in both my own struggles and alongside a number of others who have struggles too....as a point of discussion, this thread makes the dynamics of considering all options in these struggles significant and for that it must be congratulated from all sides of the argument.

 

Only a few stick their heads above the parapet to test these complacent set-in-stone concepts and I wish all well in their plight to get the clarification the laws are put in place to achieve.

 

The Debt Collection Industry used the CCA against people willy nilly as if the CCA only worked for them. We put them to the test and made them abide by it against a flood of opposition - we won!

 

Keep at it apple.

 

A1

Edited January 13, 2014 by andrew1

[applecart]

Another cautionary issue that borrowers need to know is that there is no statutory provision by which a lender can secure a 'first legal charge' against a registered estate....... yet, many borrowers have yet to understand the difference between a 'registered estate' different from an un-registered estate......

 

In Is It Me's case......one of the lenders first 'objections' to the application was an assertion that 'we have a first legal charge'........the connotations of those few words are deep......it says....we have a right to go into possession...and we did....and we are entitled to be in possession of the estate until we get our money back.....that's common practice ...regardless of whether the estate was registered or not.......

 

.....but, what they don't tell the court or the borrower is.....we had no right to do that...the borrower had no power to grant us any such right either...because the estate was already registered with HMLR before we came along......

 

Think about it......you'd be surprised what an uphill struggle they put before you.....simple words like...'full title guarantee'....as we know say ..... "look your honor, they gave me it all"...."they can't deny they signed it....look he even admits to signing it".......and as lenders - we had no obligations other than to wave the money in front of the borrowers face...we did that...he took our money......he is bound to give me the house, the money, the kids, the dog, the fish bowl and the garden shed!!!..............

 

...but what they don't tell you or the court is.....ah, well actually the borrower had no statutory power to grant me by way of charge any legal interests in a registered estate.....and because I did not sign the deed ..... i had no right to take the house, the kids, the fish bowl or the garden shed.....in fact, I didn't even secure my money......oooopppps!

 

Apple

[applecart]

Cheers A1....

 

I totally agree......we are at the first hurdle......so long as we keep pushing and bucking the trend (common practice) in favor of the Law.....we will definitely get there this time ; )

 

The Securitisation threads assisted us get to this point.....we needed to understand and get to the bottom of what was truly going on there......we now know how they do it, which is by virtue of the origination of 'mortgages'......and ensuring the deed is left in 'escrow'....i.e un-delivered..... they have been draconian to the point that they have paid no regard as to whether the land was already registered or not..... we have them on the back foot......they cannot circumvent the law for much longer......

 

We have found the law to protect borrowers against these "certain activities".......the 'templates' if you will are being created as we move forward to make it easier for those borrowers who would struggle 'framing' their own grounds.....and doing our best to present the arguments from both sides....for each and every borrower to view and get to grips with....and take their own time to deal with their individual lender.......there should be no rush......

 

It's much better to truly understand what you are talking about....understand what 'objections' the lender is likely to come at you with.....and be able to deal with it......

 

Apple

[sequenci]

Hi Apple,

 

I'm glad to see youy posting back on the thread. It's truly appreciated.

[andrew1]

Cheers A1....

 

......there should be no rush......

 

It's much better to truly understand what you are talking about....understand what 'objections' the lender is likely to come at you with.....and be able to deal with it......

 

Apple

 

Sounds like the old bull and the young bull analogy.

 

Young bull sees the farmer's left the gate open to the field with the cows in and says to the old bull " Let's run down and have us a few cows" and the old bull replying and saying " No, we'll walk down and have em all" !!

 

slowly, slowly...catchee monkey..

 

Quite right Apple!

 

A1

Edited January 13, 2014 by andrew1

[applecart]

Thanks Sequenci.....nice of you to mention : )

 

Yes A1......I like the analogy.... ; )

 

The beauty about the First Tier Tribunal Rules is that let's say a borrower goes in and fails to articulate the argument - that will not take all lenders off the hook...not even the lender who was subject to the failed application I' afraid (so no chance of lenders rubbing their hands with glee at a borrower failing at the first hurdle I'm afraid)......

 

why? .....because all it takes is a single borrower to come along who is let's say..... more discerning,....yet, just as determined.... able to articulate, and frame the argument better than those who may have gone before.........it will be at that point that the first tier tribunal has jurisdiction to re-consider and amend any decisions it may have made in earlier applications that were based on exactly the same facts and law........me thinks, there are a lot more 'bulls' waiting than there are Lenders ...... I think the 'bulls' represent some 11.3 million borrowers out there......bound to be a stampede at that point I'm sure..........to clean up on appeal ; )

 

So, there's no point in any lender looking to take solace or taking for granted a finding that any application is alleged to have been 'struck out'......

 

Non of the applications presented should be looking to 'set aside' a "charge".......everyone on here knows..... we are talking about the "setting aside of the deed"........

 

The charge and it's removal is a consequence of there being a void deed and is a means of resolve for any borrower......borrowers should know by now....focus on the deed......the charge will have to be removed if the deed is determined void....... ; )

 

Apple

[mollypockets]

hey Apple,

good points,I`m with you,I guess I`ve been feeling like im pushing water up a hill lately,,,,,,,,,"it never rains but it pours",,,,,,,as they say.Just having a bit of bad luck lately,,,,,,,,,,but the thing is,sometimes bad luck is by design,,,,,,,trying to do the right thing but getting hammered for it,,,,,the one step forward and two back theory,,,,,,awe well,time has a funny way of sorting things out.

I know this is a bit off topic but whilst we are philosophizing a little bit,I thought I could add this point,,,,,,,,the whole money thing is just a game to "them" and we aint supposed to know the rules to their game,,,,,,,it starts when we are at school.You would think the most important subject would be finance and investments etc but unfortunatly most if not all schools do not teach this mysterious game and this thread ,I think,is a good example of how "they" use our lack of knowledge against us.Don`t get me wrong,I realise the importance of learning someone else`s opinions of their particular religion (NOT),,,,,,,,,,or learning how to cook scones in home economics (NOT),,,etc,etc.What if students were taught early on in their pursuit of knowledge,how to invest money so that when they come to buying their first car,they don`t have to go into debt.This weird concept would also apply to buying their first home.Sadly the game is rigged towards debt and so we enter their control system and there most will stay.

[andrew1]

hey Apple,

good points,I`m with you,I guess I`ve been feeling like im pushing water up a hill lately,,,,,,,,,"it never rains but it pours",,,,,,,as they say.Just having a bit of bad luck lately,,,,,,,,,,but the thing is,sometimes bad luck is by design,,,,,,,trying to do the right thing but getting hammered for it,,,,,the one step forward and two back theory,,,,,,awe well,time has a funny way of sorting things out.

I know this is a bit off topic but whilst we are philosophizing a little bit,I thought I could add this point,,,,,,,,the whole money thing is just a game to "them" and we aint supposed to know the rules to their game,,,,,,,it starts when we are at school.You would think the most important subject would be finance and investments etc but unfortunatly most if not all schools do not teach this mysterious game and this thread ,I think,is a good example of how "they" use our lack of knowledge against us.Don`t get me wrong,I realise the importance of learning someone else`s opinions of their particular religion (NOT),,,,,,,,,,or learning how to cook scones in home economics (NOT),,,etc,etc.What if students were taught early on in their pursuit of knowledge,how to invest money so that when they come to buying their first car,they don`t have to go into debt.This weird concept would also apply to buying their first home.Sadly the game is rigged towards debt and so we enter their control system and there most will stay.

 

Well that was the way kids used to be brought up, save the money then buy, not see what you want and get it on credit. Can't afford it? - Can't have it! Houses and cars have always been an exception, but the Americans flooded the UK with cheap money and credit cards like MBNA - the rest is history, but I'd agree that early intervention on how money works for youngsters is a must in their education. But I do like scones too so let's not lose that off their classes either!

 

A1

[Crapstone]

I guess you're right Ben..not much point in letting your head being ruled by your heart in these matters and it is in the interest of a majority. It just felt a little uncomfortable reading it but that's my bad.

 

Hi Mollypockets,

 

Apple is right, we've known each other, (or been here long enough on the same subject!) to bounce things around and it might look like an argument or opposing views but we are all aiming for the same goal. We have to look at every aspect and test each other to breaking point as that's exactly what will happen in court and it's far cheaper to do it here! It's already an been amazing journey from just being 'normal' people to finding out everything we have. Everyone has contributed, read through so many documents, chased leads and followed so many paths its unbelievable that we are still plodding on after so long when THEY thought we'd roll over and give up. How wrong are they?

[Crapstone]

They have started teaching kids about money under Citizenship but it doesn't go far enough. They are happy to teach RE and tell you about crop rotation but not the fundamentals of financial management that are essential in life. However, I think what's happened here on this thread, would be well outside the remit of any class unless they are going for a degree lol.

 

Andy, you'd be lucky to get scones. The last DS classes my children had were how to put toppings on a ready made pizza base and how to make a fruit salad! They get bored stiff when I give them financial advice but don't mind so much when I teach them to cook. We can blame schools but parents have to pull their fingers out as well Mollypockets.

 

I do think you have a point but it's something for another thread perhaps. The law plays a huge part in it as you can't have financial obligations without it and that again is only taught at a very basic level, if at all, which is amazing as we are all expected to know it as ignorance is not a regularly excepted defence no matter what the area of law. How are we to know all the laws, as expressed here with property, when even lawyers don't know them and they chose to specialize? I very much doubt any person in the land can say they know every law and by-law in the UK off by heart and if there is such a person then they clearly don't have much of a life!

Edited January 15, 2014 by Crapstone

[applecart]

I totally agree with all your recent comments,...... money is an essential part of daily life....It makes sense to know as much as we can about it.....i.e, not just how to acquire it and spend it.....but also to know –who wants our money? – why they want it? And most important of all – Are They Entitled To It?????

 

How do we find out if they are ‘entitled’ to take our money???

 

Well.....the FCA has an on-line register of all firms that it regulates....some of you may already be aware of it......

 

From a borrowers point of view...the FCA on-line register is an important tool when it comes to knowing about ‘money’...and who is entitled to your money....

 

Every Borrower should check to see if the company they are dealing with has permission to hold money.......

 

E.G – Accord Mortgages....some of you will know has been mentioned on this thread.....HAS NO PERMISSION TO HOLD CLIENT MONEY........ooooopppppssss!!!!

 

Likewise I checked up on another familiar name that bounces around these threads.....Acenden (formerly Capstone).......interestingly.....they too have no permission to hold client money......oooooppps!!!

 

Yes, I think it is very important to know as much as you can about your money......and understand that if the company you are paying your money to, has no permission to ‘hold client money’......they will need to explain to you .....where your money is going......and who they expect you to pay it too.????

 

I wonder how many other lenders are taking money from borrowers without the necessary authority or permission to do so......ummmmmmm????

 

Here’s a link......if I were you – I’d do a quick check ; )

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmBasicDetails.do?sid=113922

Apple

[Crapstone]

They haven't had permission for a long time and nothing that I pay is held by Ascenden, it's always through SMPL accounts and Accord are probably the same. However, I would like to be a 'fly on the wall' and track every penny paid to the front of house. The twain may possibly meet somewhere along the line. Unless it's money in drawn cash then they are not holding money, just acting as a vessel to pass on cheques etc. that are not in their name.

[bhall]

It terms of any relevance of "unable to hold clients money" -

 

http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/fsa-client-money-guide

 

"1.1 What is client money?

 

Client money is money of any currency that a firm receives and holds for its client (or clients of appointed representatives, field representatives or other agents) when carrying on insurance mediation. It can include premiums, claims money and premium refunds – as well as professional fees due from clients, for example, for onward payment to a loss adjuster."

 

As detailed within the CASS (client assets) section of the FCA handbook, it also applies to firm engaged in investments - A mortgage payment does not fall within the classification given by the FCA of 'clients money'.

 

On a more important note, I would like to wish the two parties presenting their applications to the property chamber on Monday the best of luck and I hope that you get the outcome you are looking for, rather than the one I anticipate and expect

 

Ben

Edited January 17, 2014 by bhall

[applecart]

I think you will find that part iv permissions to hold client money go a lot deeper than that which you present Ben.....

 

We also have no assurance that any of the applications that are being considered by the Chamber are readers of this thread.

 

However, like you Ben, I agree; whomsoever they may be, I too wish them well........

 

Apple

[Doc2527]

 

E.G – Accord Mortgages....some of you will know has been mentioned on this thread.....HAS NO PERMISSION TO HOLD CLIENT MONEY........ooooopppppssss!!!!

 

Likewise I checked up on another familiar name that bounces around these threads.....Acenden (formerly Capstone).......interestingly.....they too have no permission to hold client money......oooooppps!!!

I have a mortgage with Accord and they are wanting to repossess my home......how does affect me??

 

Doc

[IS IT ME?]

I have a mortgage with Accord and they are wanting to repossess my home......how does affect me??

 

Doc

Because accord do NOT own your mortgage they sold it look for brass no1 or brass no2 for the documents confirming the same.

[andrew1]

Because accord do NOT own your mortgage they sold it look for brass no1 or brass no2 for the documents confirming the same.

 

Brass No1? - No 2? What is that and where would one look IIM?

 

A1

[bigphil61]

Hi A1, I believe you can find the info your looking for at post #123 & #124, the links are not working for me, but they might work for you....BP

[citizenB]

To add to the above

 

This is a link to the Deed of Assignment between the lender Accord and the SPV Brass No.1

 

You will note that this deed, is only required to be and is only signed by Accord and a witness. It is only required to be signed by Accord as it only contains obligations for Accord. Brass No.1 does not have to sign it, as the deed includes no obligations for brass. Naturally, this deed is subject to the Mortgage Sale Agreement and the clause previously posted in regard to perfection

 

If your friends mortgage is included within the Brass No.1 securitisation the following is a complete set of documentation.

 

Agency Agreement

Assignation of Third Party Rights

Assignment of Third Party Buildings Policies

Bank Account Agreement

Cash Management Agreement

Corporate Services Agreement

Deed of Assignment

Deed of Charge

Fixed Rate Swap Confirmation

Floating Rate Swap Confirmation

Guaranteed Investment Contract

ISDA Credit Support Annex

ISDA Master Agreement

ISDA Schedule to Master Agreement

Master Definitions and Construction Schedule

Mortgage Sale Agreement

Prospectus

Scottish Declaration of Trust

Scottish Supplemental Charge

Servicing Agreement

Subscription Agreement

Trust Deed

 

Hi A1, I believe you can find the info your looking for at post #123 & #124, the links are not working for me, but they might work for you....BP

 

Here you go.. you dont have to do links BP, just hit the "quote" button at the bottom of the posts you want to refer to .

[andrew1]

Thanks folks, it was more for Doc I was asking as I don't think he'd be familiar with these...

 

A1

[Doc2527]

Here you go.. you dont have to do links BP, just hit the "quote" button at the bottom of the posts you want to refer to .

Folks

When I click on the link, I am taken to the Yorkshire Building Society , which then states "Page not available".

 

Any ideas on how I can check if my mortgage was/is securitised?

 

Doc