Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[bhall]

Not being one that likes to speculate and as I like to stay up to speed with developments, I took the liberty of keeping in regular contact with the Property Chamber

 

 

From: Land Registration

Sent: 05 February 2014 12:22

To: bhall

Subject: RE: Decision Notification Request

 

Good afternoon,

 

I have double checked the cases that were in court on 20 January 2014. The Mortgage dispute Decision is still outstanding with the Judge, so I would advise you to keep checking back with this office after xxxx when a Decision is more likely to have be issued. For your information the mortgage application Case numbers are REC/2013/00xx&00xx.

 

Sorry the only other case heard that day wasn't relevent to you as it was none mortgage case.

 

Hope this helps

 

Mr xxxx

Property Chamber, Land Registration

3rd Floor 10 Alfred Place

London

WC1E 7LR

 

 

 

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

 

 

 

I will post it to this thread as soon as I have it

[Peterbard]

Yes, I see your point....however; leopards do not change their spots......a mortgage is a mortgage whichever century you are in.......

 

It matters not how a lender looks to 'shoehorn' a 'mortgage' to fit......the Law says a Borrower has no power to mortgage......no power to grant a charge by way of legal mortgage - for a charge by way of legal mortgage has the same effect as a mortgage by demise or sub demise.....

 

HLMR's approved form of charge does not meet the formalities necessary for a Deed...The Lender has not executed it....

 

It is regrettable that the 'common practices' have been overlooked for many years......However, it's good that we are debating this topic and are able to define for both the Lender and the Borrower that the Deed is void....and is apt to be set aside.....

 

 

Apple

 

I do hope your not basing your argument on this belief, a mortgage by demise ins not the same as a charge secured by the way of a mortgage, if they were they would not be separated in both the LRA and the LOPA.

[fletch70]

Maybe I misread the link you gave me Apple.

 

The way I read it was that once a decision has been made there is then 28 days to present further arguments . However to be fair wouldn't it be only proper for the decision to be given to both parties . It would be manifestly unfair to allow one party to present a case without the other party being able to challenge it.

 

My gut feeling is that to try and read between the lines is both foolish and pointless

[applecart]

Not being one that likes to speculate and as I like to stay up to speed with developments, I took the liberty of keeping in regular contact with the Property Chamber

 

 

From: Land Registration

Sent: 05 February 2014 12:22

To: bhall

Subject: RE: Decision Notification Request

 

Good afternoon,

 

I have double checked the cases that were in court on 20 January 2014. The Mortgage dispute Decision is still outstanding with the Judge, so I would advise you to keep checking back with this office after xxxx when a Decision is more likely to have be issued. For your information the mortgage application Case numbers are REC/2013/00xx&00xx.

 

Sorry the only other case heard that day wasn't relevent to you as it was none mortgage case.

 

Hope this helps

 

Mr xxxx

Property Chamber, Land Registration

3rd Floor 10 Alfred Place

London

WC1E 7LR

 

 

 

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

 

 

 

I will post it to this thread as soon as I have it

 

It's amazing what magicians can pull out of the bag at the tap of their wand - don't you think?

 

Apple

[bhall]

It's amazing what magicians can pull out of the bag at the tap of their wand - don't you think?

 

Apple

 

If that is your polite way of calling me a liar again ;-)

 

I should let you know that I sent a copy of that email unedited to a member of the site team earlier this week ;-)

 

As I anticipated that you would again accuse me of "shoehorning" lol

 

How did Is It Me? get on with his copy of Halsbury's laws of England that he brought for £29.99 ?

 

Has he been able to tell you yet that Halsbury's Laws of England which you have previously referred to as "the law" - confirms that you are wrong on all points ;-)

[bhall]

You would be amazed what else I have been keeping in my bag ;-)

 

So keep posting and pretending you know what you are talking about ;-)

[caro]

Hi Caro

 

The Lender does not 'defend' he 'objects' - the 'objection' was made months ago......they can now only reply to the decision made.

 

They have 28 days to to so.

 

Apple

 

I stand corrected but unconvinced about the decision.

[fletch70]

If that is your polite way of calling me a liar again ;-)

 

I should let you know that I sent a copy of that email unedited to a member of the site team earlier this week ;-)

 

As I anticipated that you would again accuse me of "shoehorning" lol

 

How did Is It Me? get on with his copy of Halsbury's laws of England that he brought for £29.99 ?

 

Has he been able to tell you yet that Halsbury's Laws of England which you have previously referred to as "the law" - confirms that you are wrong on all points ;-)

 

Ouch I have some solpadol if you need them

 

Where the hell do you get that for 30 quid?

[applecart]

If that is your polite way of calling me a liar again ;-)

 

I should let you know that I sent a copy of that email unedited to a member of the site team earlier this week ;-)

 

As I anticipated that you would again accuse me of "shoehorning" lol

 

How did Is It Me? get on with his copy of Halsbury's laws of England that he brought for £29.99 ?

 

Has he been able to tell you yet that Halsbury's Laws of England which you have previously referred to as "the law" - confirms that you are wrong on all points ;-)

 

No not at all Ben - don't take on so.....albeit there are some that would suggest that if the cap fits then wear it.....that's not what I am inferring at all...

 

I asked you to tell us more - I had a feeling you knew more - but were not 'letting on' - you deflected my enquiry - instead making out that it was Is It Me who should provide more detail.....he did so more or less right away......

 

You, on the other hand delayed until - just now......... that's all...nothing more ; )

 

Stop being so paranoid...... you have even used the word 'brought' instead of 'bought' - but hey ho, I understand what you meant without feeling the need to make a big song and dance about it ; )

 

Apple

[bhall]

Ouch I have some solpadol if you need them

 

Where the hell do you get that for 30 quid?

 

I don't think he actually said where... ( sorry for dots) but what a bargain

[bhall]

No not at all Ben - don't take on so.....albeit there are some that would suggest that if the cap fits then wear it.....that's not what I am inferring at all...

 

I asked you to tell us more - I had a feeling you knew more - but were not 'letting on' - you deflected my enquiry - instead making out that it was Is It Me who should provide more detail.....he did so more or less right away......

 

You, on the other hand delayed until - just now......... that's all...nothing more ; )

 

Stop being so paranoid...... you have even used the word 'brought' instead of 'bought' - but hey ho, I understand what you meant without feeling the need to make a big song and dance about it ; )

 

Apple

 

Twisting, twisting the night away

 

Do I have to post Sam Cooke again ?

 

Apple, I hate to break this to you and I mean this with all due respect you are not half as clever as you think you are with your posts. Even Stevie Wonder can see through your word games.

 

Don't worry Apple the truth will soon be revealed ;-)

[applecart]

You would be amazed what else I have been keeping in my bag ;-)

 

So keep posting and pretending you know what you are talking about ;-)

 

See, here you go again..... ; )

 

I simply can't wait - Before you share your titbits........wait and see what I have in my bag waiting for you..........; )

 

You're clever Ben - but remember, there are those who are much cleverer than you (albeit unknown to you) happy to assist this cause undercover......(conflict of interest issues I believe)

 

Apple

[applecart]

I stand corrected but unconvinced about the decision.

 

oh ok.....no problem ; )

 

Apple

[bhall]

I do hope your not basing your argument on this belief, a mortgage by demise ins not the same as a charge secured by the way of a mortgage, if they were they would not be separated in both the LRA and the LOPA.

 

Unfortunately you have hit the nail on the head.

 

Apple is mistaken that a mortgage by demise is exactly the same as a mortgage by legal charge.

 

Apple regretfully does not appreciate the difference between a mortgage by demise and a mortgage by legal mortgage.

 

I did post an extract the other day to explain it but it looks like that simple explanation went over Apples head.

 

At least no one can ever say I have not tried my best.

[IS IT ME?]

It's amazing what magicians can pull out of the bag at the tap of their wand - don't you think?

 

Apple

 

I agree this sounds ridiculous ! What the hell it's got to do with Ben you could not make this up

Apple

The case was in the county court and they have the time to supply the documents which they have sworn do not exist well not until we gave them to the court opppppps

Another N I case I think lol

[applecart]

Unfortunately you have hit the nail on the head.

 

Apple is mistaken that a mortgage by demise is exactly the same as a mortgage by legal charge.

 

Apple regretfully does not appreciate the difference between a mortgage by demise and a mortgage by legal mortgage.

 

I did post an extract the other day to explain it but it looks like that simple explanation went over Apples head.

 

At least no one can ever say I have not tried my best.

 

Sorry Ben

 

Are you referring to the definition of a Legal Mortgage under the LPA 1925 s205 (xvi)??

 

Here it is for you:

 

(xvi)“Mortgage” includes any charge or lien on any property for securing money or money’s worth; “legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage and “legal mortgagee” has a corresponding meaning; “mortgage money” means money or money’s worth secured by a mortgage; “mortgagor” includes any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagor or entitled to redeem a mortgage according to his estate interest or right in the mortgaged property; “mortgagee” includes a chargee by way of legal mortgage and any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagee; and “mortgagee in possession” is, for the purposes of this Act, a mortgagee who, in right of the mortgage, has entered into and is in possession of the mortgaged property; and “right of redemption” includes an option to repurchase only if the option in effect creates a right of redemption;

 

Oooooh look it even includes "Charge by way of legal Mortgage"..... ; )

 

Apple

[bhall]

Just wanted to add... Apple you appear to feel aggrieved that I did not share that email earlier.

 

However, it should be remembered that if it was not for my disclosures to this thread, we would be none the wiser that a hearing was held. Neither you or Is It Me? posted about when the hearing was due to be held. Remember that, please

 

Furthermore except for a few vague comments Is It Me? has been reluctant to disclose anything that occurred during the hearing he implies he attended. I have trouble in accepting being unable to discuss it for legal reasons, given the responses I have received from the Property Chamber.

 

Both you and Is It Me? failed to keep this thread updated, despite repeated requests for an update from different people.

 

Before you look at me, come off your moral high ground soap box and look at your own actions and comments and those of Is It Me?

 

You two lost the right to be aggravated a long time ago about information being or not being posted in this thread.

 

There is no need to get upset just because I know more about it than you. That's life, get over it and move on.

[applecart]

I agree this sounds ridiculous ! What the hell it's got to do with Ben you could not make this up

Apple

The case was in the county court and they have the time to supply the documents which they have sworn do not exist well not until we gave them to the court opppppps

Another N I case I think lol

 

Hahahahahahaaaa........ yes indeed ...... ooooooppppps!!! ; )

 

Is that perjury Is It Me or contempt or one and the same??

 

Apple

[bhall]

I agree this sounds ridiculous ! What the hell it's got to do with Ben you could not make this up

Apple

The case was in the county court and they have the time to supply the documents which they have sworn do not exist well not until we gave them to the court opppppps

Another N I case I think lol

 

So you was not talking about the Property Chamber then ? ;-)

 

Or was the property chamber hearing heard in the county court ?

 

I would not know, I was not there

[bhall]

Sorry Ben

 

Are you referring to the definition of a Legal Mortgage under the LPA 1925 s205 (xvi)??

 

Here it is for you:

 

(xvi)“Mortgage” includes any charge or lien on any property for securing money or money’s worth; “legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage and “legal mortgagee” has a corresponding meaning; “mortgage money” means money or money’s worth secured by a mortgage; “mortgagor” includes any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagor or entitled to redeem a mortgage according to his estate interest or right in the mortgaged property; “mortgagee” includes a chargee by way of legal mortgage and any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagee; and “mortgagee in possession” is, for the purposes of this Act, a mortgagee who, in right of the mortgage, has entered into and is in possession of the mortgaged property; and “right of redemption” includes an option to repurchase only if the option in effect creates a right of redemption;

 

Oooooh look it even includes "Charge by way of legal Mortgage"..... ; )

 

Apple

 

 

You keep over looking the word or - it is basic English

 

"“legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage"

 

A mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage

 

Remember that all important word "or"

 

You will learn one day

 

You don't even have to use your magical and mysterious powers of interpretation - it says very clearly "or"

[applecart]

Just wanted to add... Apple you appear to feel aggrieved that I did not share that email earlier.

 

However, it should be remembered that if it was not for my disclosures to this thread, we would be none the wiser that a hearing was held. Neither you or Is It Me? posted about when the hearing was due to be held. Remember that, please

 

Furthermore except for a few vague comments Is It Me? has been reluctant to disclose anything that occurred during the hearing he implies he attended. I have trouble in accepting being unable to discuss it for legal reasons, given the responses I have received from the Property Chamber.

 

Both you and Is It Me? failed to keep this thread updated, despite repeated requests for an update from different people.

 

Before you look at me, come off your moral high ground soap box and look at your own actions and comments and those of Is It Me?

 

You two lost the right to be aggravated a long time ago about information being or not being posted in this thread.

 

There is no need to get upset just because I know more about it than you. That's life, get over it and move on.

 

Hi Ben

 

I suppose you knew all about the LPA 1925 section 205 (xvi) too???

 

(xvi)“Mortgage” includes any charge or lien on any property for securing money or money’s worth; “legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage and “legal mortgagee” has a corresponding meaning; “mortgage money” means money or money’s worth secured by a mortgage; “mortgagor” includes any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagor or entitled to redeem a mortgage according to his estate interest or right in the mortgaged property; “mortgagee” includes a chargee by way of legal mortgage and any person from time to time deriving title under the original mortgagee; and “mortgagee in possession” is, for the purposes of this Act, a mortgagee who, in right of the mortgage, has entered into and is in possession of the mortgaged property; and “right of redemption” includes an option to repurchase only if the option in effect creates a right of redemption;

 

You forget - both Is It Me and I were on moderation - Is It Me still is - 'moderation' encumbers postings Ben..... now that I am off moderation - you can see my posts are flowing - when Is It Me is off moderation - I am sure his/her posts will flow also....

 

You cannot expect people to post up freely when their hands are tied.....

 

Apple

[applecart]

You keep over looking the word or - it is basic English

 

"“legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage"

 

A mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage

 

Remember that all important word "or"

 

You will learn one day

 

You don't even have to use your magical and mysterious powers of interpretation - it says very clearly "or"

 

And..... your point is what??

 

Apple

[applecart]

And..... your point is what??

 

Apple

 

Here is the LRA s.23 (1) ....

 

(1)Owner’s powers in relation to a registered estate consist of—

(a)power to make a disposition of any kind permitted by the general law in relation to an interesticon of that description, other than a mortgageicon by demise or sub-demise, and

(b)power to charge the estate at law with the payment of money.

 

other than a mortgage by demise or sub-demise

 

Where and why are you taking issue with the word "or"

 

Both the Definition in LPA 1925 s.205 (xvi) and the LRA s.23 (1) have the word "or" included ....

 

Pray tell - why do you take issue with the word "or"???

 

 

Apple

[applecart]

Hi Ben

 

LRA s.23 (2) excludes any legal charge by way of sub-mortgage over the principle charge - it tells you - NO Legal sub-mortgage - then it tells you in LRA s.23 (3) that a Legal sub-mortgage is a charge by way of legal mortgage.....

 

SO, please explain the point you are making and why you are fixated on the word "OR"??????

 

Apple

[caro]

I have to admit I've missed isitme's account of his friends hearing which would have been helpful for those who either have either made applications themselves or are considering it.