Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[bhall]

In regard to costs - which was one of my main concerns

 

 

 

"The Respondents are, on the face of it, entitled to their costs,"

 

The respondents are the lender

[bhall]

Whilst I anticipate that some may be unhappy that I have posted this decision to this thread. I did previously say that I would not let this thread be left without an outcome.

 

People have been actively encouraged to make applications to the chamber based upon flawed fanciful ideas and a complete lack of understanding of property law. Despite people, including members of the site team, taking their time to explain those mistakes, everything to disprove those fanciful ideas was brushed under the carpet and dismissed because Apple thought they knew more about property law than anyone else

 

The decision from the Property Chamber, establishes that those fanciful ideas have no real merit. Sadly for those involved it would appear that there are now costs involved that will have to be paid, thus increasing the amount owed.

 

I take no pleasure in the application not succeeding and I do feel for those that will now owe additional amounts as a result of Apples fanciful ideas which were so heavily promoted by Is It Me? - I hope Apple and Is It Me? will make a contribution to the costs that the applicants have incurred.

 

I would appeal to everyone that reads this thread, to read the much awaited decision of the Property Chamber before deciding to follow Apple's fanciful ideas and to at least consider starting a thread here to get some real help from people that are very knowledgeable

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?197-Home-Repossessions

[bhall]

Oh dear - I hope no one goes on to lose their home due to reliance on this as a defence

 

That has always been my main concern. I hope it is not to late

 

I hope before posting about appeals etc, Apple first considers the damage they have already done in terms of costs incurred, the likely hood of an appeal succeeding based upon how conclusively Apple's arguments were found to have no merit and how much the costs would be increased as a result of an appeal.

[Peterbard]

"The deed is by its very nature a unilateral act"

 

Yes Ben no real surprises there, I think that we may have been right in that they wanted to take the time to address all of the points in respect of other cases in the pipeline.

 

Lets hope that it is not to late for the other applicants to change their course

Edited February 28, 2014 by Dodgeball
act

[bhall]

Yes Ben no real surprises there, I think that we may have been right in that they wanted to take the time to address all of the points in respect of other cases in the pipeline.

 

The decision does indeed appear to address each point quite conclusively, leaving no need for any interpretation, no matter how mysterious and magical it may be.

 

I do share your hope that it is not too late and that not a single person loses their home as a result of following Apple's advice, instead of considering the more traditional advice offered by CAG

 

I think CAG should be commended for allowing this thread to continue through some at time heated arguments, until a decision was finally issued. Hopefully this will prevent others from incurring costs

[IS IT ME?]

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

[fletch70]

Had a message from citizen B saying the decision was in. I have a fair bit to say but not easy on a phone. It does however seem that isitme was not beung entirely credible the other day when he said no decision was made as people knew. Is apple now going to risk more of other peoples money in appealing? I imagine costs could be quite significant. I do hope is it mes friend has the funds available to pay the costs and the arrears. I take mo pleasure in someone losing their home. I just hope it stops others.

[citizenB]

IsitMe, Ben has simply been taking extracts from the decision which is in post 6293, I fail to see how you can accuse him of not being truthful !

 

Your post is visible and any comments you wish to make will be published as long as they are within the spirit of CAG posting rules !

[caro]

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

It appears from reading the judgment that there is no right of appeal and I don't think anyone has found anything to joke about. It is also clear that the chamber wish such fanciful ideas to be quashed and will not have hesitated to make this matter of public record available. As your friend was no doubt present he will be aware of what the outcome was without seeing the judgment.

 

I do hope you're right that costs aren't as bad as both others and I feared.

[IS IT ME?]

IsitMe, Ben has simply been taking extracts from the decision which is in post 6293, I fail to see how you can accuse him of not being truthful !

 

Your post is visible and any comments you wish to make will be published as long as they are within the spirit of CAG posting rules !

 

Thank you citezenB,

 

There are others which can and WILL be able to PROVE as you keep asking me to do that We have NOT had the chambers ruling, as there is now another party working on this which will come to light later and an appeal will be going in and if you feel that we can not do that then that's what you think!

Edited February 28, 2014 by ims21

[bhall]

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

Hello Is It Me?

 

I sent an email to the Property Chamber and asked them for a copy of the decision. I received an email earlier this week asking for my postal address, so that they could send me a copy. I responded to that email and gave my postal address and today I received a copy of it in the post. As the decision is a matter of public record, anyone can email the chamber and make a similar request.

 

On what grounds would or could you appeal, the decision was quite conclusive in that none of the arguments proposed by Apple and promoted by you had any merit and were based on a misunderstanding of the law.

 

As for costs, I have no idea how much they are but I do know that legal fees are not cheap

 

From what I understand and have seen you are more than capable of posting, hence how I am able to see and respond to your post

[bhall]

Thank you citezenB,

 

There are others which can and WILL be able to PROVE as you keep asking me to do that We have NOT had the chambers ruling, as there is now another party working on this which will come to light later and an appeal will be going in and if you feel that we can not do that then that's what you think!

 

I hope this other party knows more about the applicable law than Apple

 

It is strange you have not received it. It was issued on 21 Feb 2014 and when Crapstone spoke with the Chamber last Friday, the Chamber confirmed that it had now been sent out to the parties involved.

 

However, as you have not received it, may I suggest you take the weekend at least to now read it, digest it and then consider your options.

[Conniff]

I often wonder why, when someone wakes from a wonderland dream, they don't try it for themselves first instead of promoting it in the hope someone else will.

[Crapstone]

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

As Ben has stated it was pretty easy to get a copy of the decision. I have had exactly the same email and am expecting a copy to hopefully land through the post tomorrow.

 

I fail to see how NONE of the parties have had a copy yet or even know the outcome. I'm DUMBSTRUCK that you are actually sticking to that story!

 

The decision quite clearly states that any appeal is futile and all other cases relying on the same basis will be dismissed. I hope you don't cause your 'friend' any further misery or costs in pursuing this 'fanciful' theory.

[Peterbard]

As Ben has stated it was pretty easy to get a copy of the decision. I have had exactly the same email and am expecting a copy to hopefully land through the post tomorrow.

 

I fail to see how NONE of the parties have had a copy yet or even know the outcome. I'm DUMBSTRUCK that you are actually sticking to that story!

 

The decision quite clearly states that any appeal is futile and all other cases relying on the same basis will be dismissed. I hope you don't cause your 'friend' any further misery or costs in pursuing this 'fanciful' theory.

 

The results of this case have been known for some days in my opinion, the input form various posters on other forums says as much. We have just been continually led up the garden path on here, a huge vote of thanks is due to Ben and Crapstone for getting the documented evidence. so those who do not understand the arguments can at least be sure of the courts view on this.

It does make you wonder how long this would have gone on for without the judgment being unearthed, it seems that even with it, the daft claims continue.

[Conniff]

Should we open a book on Apple coming back to post ?

[IS IT ME?]

Gentleman

Thank you for your replies however as it can be confirm by the post office I don't think I need your in put.

As for an appeal, I can not see any where on the document that it is not allowed.

Also as there was other things which were stated at the hearing and will be on the tape I will await a judge to make that decision and by the way

If you have a hearing and all parties have documents they rely on but then one side send documents 8 days after the hearing to which you have no knowledge of that justice is it....

If you think for one second that we will not appeal then sorry.

I also find your wolf in sheep's clothing funny if it wasn't so serious

As for thinking of others who are you kidding????? Lol

[fletch70]

I am sick to death of the innuendo and snide comments that are being made. Isitme I am sorry but assuming your case was the one on 20th I do mot believe that you do not have the decision. The fact you state the costs aren't as much as we think suggests you do. I am assuming that Apple has now been sacked as you state someone else is dealung with it. Can I suggest you man up and tell people what is really happening.

[caro]

Gentleman

Thank you for your replies however as it can be confirm by the post office I don't think I need your in put.

As for an appeal, I can not see any where on the document that it is not allowed.

Also as there was other things which were stated at the hearing and will be on the tape I will await a judge to make that decision and by the way

If you have a hearing and all parties have documents they rely on but then one side send documents 8 days after the hearing to which you have no knowledge of that justice is it....

If you think for one second that we will not appeal then sorry.

I also find your wolf in sheep's clothing funny if it wasn't so serious

As for thinking of others who are you kidding????? Lol

 

On re-reading I stand corrected on the appeal issue. I'm more than willing to admit I made a mistake. I obviously misinterpreted what I read.

 

Incidentally, a big thank you to Ben for taking the time and trouble to remove names and addresses from the judgment before posting.

[ims21]

Well this now seems to be the end of this then.

 

It is clear from the decision of the chamber that the ideas put forward to them have no merit whatsoever and they decided to dismiss the matter. It seems that the decision will also be the same with all other cases before them which are in a similar vein.

 

We had agreed to allow this thread to run to its conclusion and we have managed to achieve that despite some hassles along the way.

 

There is nothing further to be said in respect of this other than to thank those who have contributed and thanks to those who sought to get the decision sent to them and who were successful in that. As has been said, thanks to bhall for taking the time to redact the papers and post it up for all to see.

 

As this matter is now concluded this thread is now closed.