Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[Peterbard]

Hi IS IT ME / APPLE

Here is another little nugget from NI, you can read the full decision of Swift Acvances PLC & Justin Heany 2013 NIMaster 18, but here is an extract as the Masterstates "In this jurisdiction, as I have indicated, there is a wider discretion to defer or deny a secured lender’s claim to possession under Schedule 7 where, as in the present case and in the vast majority of cases I have heard over recent years, the mortgage is a charge on registered land. Over a decade before the Human Rights Act 1998 was enacted, Professor Wallace wrote this in his article Mortgagees and Possession (1986) NILQ Vol. 37 at 336:-

`Unlike a legal mortgagee of unregistered land, the owner of a charge on registered land does not have a common law right to possession of the land charged nor does he acquire the status of a legal owner". Is this not what you and Apple been arguing for the last 285 pages and hey, given the fact that a Lender needs the status of Legal Owner to securitise your Loan what does that say to you. Geeeezzzzzz are these not exixiting times ?

By the way, the best of luck for the comong days although I don't think its down to luck at all.

gham

 

Wonderful thing Google, the rest of the quote reads

 

`Unlike a legal mortgagee of unregistered land, the owner of a charge on registered land does not have a common law right to possession of the land charged nor does he acquire the status of a legal owner. The Land Registration Act (NI) 1970 provides that upon registration of this charge he has –

 

the rights and powers of a mortgagee by deed within the meaning of the Conveyancing Acts, including the power to sell the estate which is subject to the charge….

 

Yes I can see, much better

[applecart]

hi All,

Re my earlier quote from the NI Master and so there is no confusion by way of interpretation it means, you cannot mortgage registered land.

 

Stop this GHAM .... I haven't finsihed my first cup of tea yet...... oh...ok then......Time for more tea me thinks - whether you are in the UK or Ni.....guess what....... it's time for more tea.....

 

 

Sequenci.... do you have that Chardonnay on ice mate? Only a few days now until the decision you know ; )

 

Apple

[applecart]

Wonderful thing Google, the rest of the quote reads

 

`Unlike a legal mortgagee of unregistered land, the owner of a charge on registered land does not have a common law right to possession of the land charged nor does he acquire the status of a legal owner. The Land Registration Act (NI) 1970 provides that upon registration of this charge he has –

 

the rights and powers of a mortgagee by deed within the meaning of the Conveyancing Acts, including the power to sell the estate which is subject to the charge….

 

Yes I can see, much better

 

Read what you have posted above .....s.l.o.w.l.y...... oh and keep it in context Dodge (remember your forte is CCA not LPA as admitted by you)

 

Whilst the rest of us drink our tea ; )

 

Apple

[Peterbard]

Read what you have posted above .....s.l.o.w.l.y...... oh and keep it in context Dodge (remember you forte is CCA not LPA as admitted by you)

 

Whilst the rest of us drink our tea ; )

 

Apple

 

It is all in context Apple, perfectly as you well know This doesn't have to be my forte, it is just a matter of being ab e to read.

[Crapstone]

Read what you have posted above .....s.l.o.w.l.y...... oh and keep it in context Dodge (remember you forte is CCA not LPA as admitted by you)

 

Whilst the rest of us drink our tea ; )

 

Apple

 

 

They don't seek to 'possess' as an owner. They merely seek to sell in order to claim their charged amount.

 

What do you think they are going to do? Fight over which bedroom they get to sleep in and pop around to meet the neighbours over a nice cup of tea?

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Dodge,

 

You need to see a little further

 

"I agree with Professor Wallace. The plaintiff has a registered charge to which Schedule 7 applies. The plaintiff does not have a “contractual and legal entitlement” to possession

Sorry, gham

[bhall]

Hi Ben

 

I moved on the 'premise' that the lender has 28 days to consider his position.

 

I think you are confused because you did not understand the point I made to Fletch70 (post copied at #5721)..it appears Fletch didn't either - oh well.... it's no bother....Is It Me understands and that's the main point....this is afterall Is It Me's thread ; )

 

The 'reserved judgement' is exactly what it says......on that point, as I understand it .....the Judge will reserve Judgement for '28 days' or if you will '4 weeks'.......

 

I pointed out that you and others (and LENDERS) have that period of time to consider the merit of LRA s.23 - I assert that they have NO DEFENCE to LRA s.23 and that on that point - there is nothing they can do.......I assert that the Judge cannot and will not be expected to avoid the protection it affords any Borrower - IT IS STATUTE....stated simply and FACTUALLY.

 

so, in that regard, when I say the Lender has 28 days to set aside the decision... it is based on the 'premise' that the Lender who was 'dumbstruck' will get 28 days to appeal what I assert to be the Judges acceptance of the merit of LRA s.23....

 

 

Hope this helps you see where it is at?

 

Apple

 

 

That is a lot of asserting there Apple, mind you don't strain yourself and cause an injury

[applecart]

It is all in context Apple, perfectly as you well know This doesn't have to be my forte, it is just a matter of being ab e to read.

 

LOL...good thing I'm only drinking tea Dodge...

 

"mortgagee".....ummmmm.... how do you get to be one of them then...when the Borrower has no statutory power to grant a '.mortgage'?..... you can only be a 'mortgagee' if you have been granted a 'mortgage' ... right?

 

The Borrower has no STATUTORY POWER to grant a MORTGAGE....in registered land.... how has the Lender become a MORTGAGEE Dodge????

 

Now, who's up for another cup of Tea??

 

Apple

[Peterbard]

They don't seek to 'possess' as an owner. They merely seek to sell in order to claim their charged amount.

 

What do you think they are going to do? Fight over which bedroom they get to sleep in and pop around to meet the neighbours over a nice cup of tea?

 

Yeas as said earlier, different, different, same.

 

Slightly different processes but the same result. Repossession and sale.

 

Come off it why would they miss out the last part of the quote if they were not intending to mislead. silly FOTL nonsense.

[applecart]

That is a lot of asserting there Apple, mind you don't strain yourself and cause an injury

 

Hi Ya Ben

 

I "assert"..... is the LRA s.23 an 'assertion'...... I do not have to cause myself any injury....LRA s.23 is STATUTE....how would reliance on it cause an injury??

 

Apple

[Peterbard]

LOL...good thing I'm only drinking tea Dodge...

 

"mortgagee".....ummmmm.... how do you get to be one of them then...when the Borrower has no statutory power to grant a '.mortgage'?..... you can only be a 'mortgagee' if you have been granted a 'mortgage' ... right?

 

The Borrower has no STATUTORY POWER to grant a MORTGAGE....in registered land.... how has the Lender become a MORTGAGEE Dodge????

 

Now, who's up for another cup of Tea??

 

Apple

 

I understand why you have to use this silly method of conversing on these forums, obviously any normal presentation of you ideas would promote instant and justifiable disbelief, using your kind of street sarcasm takes the edge off for the uninitiated, I dare say they have classes at the FOTL conferences on how to talk BS.

 

Anyway shortly I dare say we will be seeing the last of you for a while. Shame.

 

Night all

[applecart]

Yeas as said earlier, different, different, same.

 

Slightly different processes but the same result. Repossession and sale.

 

Come off it why would you miss out the last part of the quote if you were not intending to mislead. silly FOTL nonsense.

 

WRONG... yet again Dodge/Crapstone.

 

How does a Lender become a mortgagee of registered land when the Borrower has no statutory power to grant it??

 

Answer the question please?

 

Apple

[applecart]

I understand why you have to use this silly method of conversing on these forums, obviously any normal presentation of you ideas would promote instant and justifiable disbelief, using your kind of street sarcasm takes the edge off for the uninitiated, I dare say they have classes at the FOTL conferences on how to talk BS.

 

Anyway shortly I dare say we will be seeing the last of you for a while. Shame.

 

Night all

 

LOL.....get yourself a cup of tea before you go to bed Dodge.

 

Apple

[bhall]

Hi Ya Ben

 

I "assert"..... is the LRA s.23 an 'assertion'...... I do not have to cause myself any injury....LRA s.23 is STATUTE....how would reliance on it cause an injury??

 

Apple

 

What you assert it to mean (not what it actually states) will possibly cause further financial injury to those that have followed your advice.

 

It will of course cause no injury, financial or otherwise to you personally, as you have nothing to risk with the Property Chamber rejecting your fanciful ideas.

 

Anyway, 28 days is up soon - let's see what happens then

[Crapstone]

I hope you're stocking up on tea Apple and have a rather large cup. You'll be needing it to cry in very shortly if it goes the way of your other theories of security avoidance.

 

Same tune - Different fiddle.

[Peterbard]

WRONG... yet again Dodge/Crapstone.

 

How does a Lender become a mortgagee of registered land when the Borrower has no statutory power to grant it??

 

Answer the question please?

 

Apple

 

Well the anwer as far as the NI is concerned is in the earlier post, perhaps you should have read it, here it is again:

 

`Unlike a legal mortgagee of unregistered land, the owner of a charge on registered land does not have a common law right to possession of the land charged nor does he acquire the status of a legal owner. The Land Registration Act (NI) 1970 provides that upon registration of this charge he has –

 

the rights and powers of a mortgagee by deed within the meaning of the Conveyancing Acts, including the power to sell the estate which is subject to the charge…

 

That is how they do it over there apparently

[Crapstone]

Well the anwer as far as the NI is concerned is in the earlier post, perhaps you should have read it, here it is again:

 

`Unlike a legal mortgagee of unregistered land, the owner of a charge on registered land does not have a common law right to possession of the land charged nor does he acquire the status of a legal owner. The Land Registration Act (NI) 1970 provides that upon registration of this charge he has –

 

the rights and powers of a mortgagee by deed within the meaning of the Conveyancing Acts, including the power to sell the estate which is subject to the charge…

 

That is how they do it over there apparently

 

Pigot's case was also repealed for judgement purposes...but Apple would know that don't ya know Dodge..

 

If anyone needs the luck of the Irish I know who my bet is on..

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi Apple,

 

That Dodge and Crapstone are not they the ones... the judge says you cannot mortgage registered land you can only charge it, you have no common law right to repossession nor do you aquire the status of legal owner and he reiterates this point later on in the decision... not only do they want to argue with you all ady long that you are wrong but now they want to tell this Master he is wrong.... what are they like.

 

gham

[Peterbard]

Hi Apple,

 

That Dodge and Crapstone are not they the ones... the judge says you cannot mortgage registered land you can only charge it, you have no common law right to repossession nor do you aquire the status of legal owner and he reiterates this point later on in the decision... not only do they want to argue with you all ady long that you are wrong but now they want to tell this Master he is wrong.... what are they like.

 

gham

 

No he is right they can evict you

[Peterbard]

Here it is again ?

 

. The Land Registration Act (NI) 1970 provides that upon registration of this charge he has –

 

the rights and powers of a mortgagee by deed within the meaning of the Conveyancing Acts, including the power to sell the estate which is subject to the charge…

[Peterbard]

I thought I had read some nonsense on these forums Apple but I must admit that when I read some of your fanciful ideas I was DUMBSTRUCK

[applecart]

Hi Apple,

 

That Dodge and Crapstone are not they the ones... the judge says you cannot mortgage registered land you can only charge it, you have no common law right to repossession nor do you aquire the status of legal owner and he reiterates this point later on in the decision... not only do they want to argue with you all ady long that you are wrong but now they want to tell this Master he is wrong.... what are they like.

 

gham

 

 

Yes I know... I give their posts the wide berth they deserve to be honest (looks like they put on 'ignore' the parts of anyone's post that does not suit their fanciful ideas..hahaha)

 

Thank Goodness for the LAW ; )

 

Apple

[Crapstone]

Yes I know... I give their posts the wide berth they deserve to be honest (looks like they put on 'ignore' the parts of anyone's post that does not suit their fanciful ideas..hahaha)

 

Thank Goodness for the LAW ; )

 

Apple

 

 

Which you choose to interpret in your own unique way and not as was intended or actually written.

 

But let us not forget.

 

It is not Apple that will be evicted.

[applecart]

I thought I had read some nonsense on these forums Apple but I must admit that when I read some of your fanciful ideas I was DUMBSTRUCK

 

Not in bed yet then Dodge???

 

Guess what... I do not have time for procrastinators .... I wish I was a solicitor... I could then increase my cost/time per hour... you would not be able to afford my time....hahahhaha

 

With respect, go to bed man - sleep on it...come back tomorrow in the cold light of day - that way you will see where the FACTS have been delivered upon you like a ice cold sword.

 

Apple

[applecart]

Which you choose to interpret in your own unique way and not as was intended or actually written.

 

But let us not forget.

 

It is not Apple that will be evicted.

 

LOL..... your comments do not thwart the FACTS Crapstone.....

 

Apple