Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

[bhall]

So

 

C&G would have been the proprietor of the charge originally and named as such on your deeds, until 2007 at which point the charge was transferred to Lloyd's.

 

As Lloyd's is the registered owner of the registered charge, it is in Lloyd's name that any action must be in.

[bhall]

As for the deed not being signed by the lender, my feelings on the matter are very clear. At best it will get you an adjournment, giving you time to consider your situation.

 

However, once the chamber has confirmed the deed is valid, after the hearing and applies that decision to all similar such applications, the lender will recommence proceedings, you have to be prepared for that eventuality

[bhall]

Sorry by the way FULL TITLE GUARANTEE is the whole lot sold not just a bit here and there or any thing like BEN states.

 

I am not sure if you are referring to the mortgage deed or to securitisation, as I know you like to jump from one to the other .

 

In terms of the mortgage deed , if what you say was in anyway true , why are you registered as the proprietor of the legal estate and not the Lender ?

 

You need to look at the amended application as, I pointed out previously, it contradicts itself on this point too.

 

In terms of securitisation, as you are fully aware the Mortgage Sale Agreement, clearly confirms so that there can be no doubt that the transfer is left uncompleted and as confirmed by Pender an uncompleted transfer does not divest the Lender as the registered owner of the registered charge of its right to possession.

Edited October 24, 2013 by bhall

[bhall]

The reason an uncompleted transfer does not divest the Lender of its right of possession is that as confirmed by s.27 of the LRA 2002, a transfer of a legal charge is a disposition that is required to be completed by registration. s.27 also confirms that if a disposition is required to be completed by registration, it does not operate at law until the relevant registration requirements have been met.

 

A transfer that does not operate at law can still operate in equity but it can only transfer an equitable interest.

 

Look at what the judge actually said in the Irish case you posted.

 

Santander (UK) Plc v Carlin & Anor [2013] NICh 14 (19 September 2013)

 

http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIHC/Ch/2013/14.html

 

 

"[2] It is clear law, as has been recently reaffirmed by the Court of Appeal in England in Paragon Finance v Pender and Another [2005] 1 W L R 3412 that a legal owner of a charge can part with the equitable interest in it without losing their right to enforce the charge. "

 

And as you know in Pender

 

Paragon Finance Plc v Pender & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 760 (27 June 2005)

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/760.html

 

109.In my judgment Mr and Mrs Pender's case on this issue is misconceived. It is common ground that Paragon, as registered proprietor of the Legal Charge, retains legal ownership of it. One incident of its legal ownership – and an essential one at that – is the right to possession of the mortgaged property. I can see no basis upon which it can be contended that an uncompleted agreement to transfer the Legal Charge to the SPV (that is to say an agreement under which, pending completion, the SPV has no more than an equitable interest in the mortgage) can operate in law to divest Paragon of an essential incident of its legal ownership. In my judgment as a matter of principle the right to possession conferred by the Legal Charge remains exercisable by Paragon as the legal owner of the Legal Charge (i.e. as the registered proprietor of it), notwithstanding that Paragon may have transferred the beneficial ownership of the Legal Charge to the SPV.

Edited October 24, 2013 by bhall

[GiveHimaMask]

Hi, IsItMe/Apple/Marika

 

Apple, your post #2301.

 

para 4 of the re-draft states LPA 1925 section 25, (1) (a) should read....LRA 1925 section 25, (1) (a).

This also applies to first draft.

 

This is my first post and I am watching and reading this with a NI perspective in mind.

 

Many thanks All

GiveHimaMask

[marika41]

my mortgage with c & g was started 11.8.95 I am totally confused as to what is going on even more than I was before now, thank you bhall for the advice but I do not have enough time to start chasing down requests etc as the legal defence time I have left is running out. I do not want to be rude but I trust the people on here and am going with their advice and am grateful for their time and help. Please do not think I am being rude I am not

[UNRAM]

I dont want to be rude either bhall, but i trust the people on here, too.

[applecart]

Hi, IsItMe/Apple/Marika

 

Apple, your post #2301.

 

para 4 of the re-draft states LPA 1925 section 25, (1) (a) should read....LRA 1925 section 25, (1) (a).

This also applies to first draft.

 

This is my first post and I am watching and reading this with a NI perspective in mind.

 

Many thanks All

GiveHimaMask

 

Thank you for this....

 

Marika41....make sure and amend it from LPA to LRA 1925 section 25...ok?

 

Apple

[applecart]

Land Registration Rules 2003..............................

 

Variation of the terms of a registered charge

 

113. (1) An application to register an instrument varying the terms of a registered charge must be made—

 

(a)by, or with the consent of, the proprietor of the registered charge and the proprietor of the estate charged, and

(b)with the consent of the proprietor, or a person entitled to be registered as proprietor, of every other registered charge of equal or inferior priority that is prejudicially affected by the variation,

but no such consent is required from a person who has executed the instrument.

 

(2) The registrar may accept a conveyancer’s certificate confirming that the conveyancer holds any necessary consents.

 

(3) If the registrar is satisfied that the proprietor of any other registered charge of equal or inferior priority to the varied charge that is prejudicially affected by the variation is bound by it, he shall make a note of the variation in the register.

 

(4) If the registrar is not so satisfied, he may make an entry in the register that an instrument which is expressed to vary the terms of the registered charge has been entered into.

 

The above acts as your guide...... you were not the Lender selling on the loan or transferring the loan....YOU are the Defendant letting the court know as part of your DEFENCE that you did not sign a Deed of Variation.......

 

For C & G to cause you to become liable to Lloyds....they should have asked you to sign a Deed of Variation..... YOU are the PROPRIETOR of the REGISTERED CHARGE....AND the REGISTERED ESTATE...you are the only person with OWNERS POWERS.....

 

I know Ben must mean well....but on this occasion....as on previous occasions, he remains of the misguided belief that the Lender is the proprietor of your registered estate and registered charge - when this is not and has never been the intent of the legislator in regard to any registered land.

 

.....The TR forms that may have been scurried to HMLR between C & G and Lloyds are of NO relevance to your DEFENCE.....if Lloyds wish to contend that it does....let them put it in their 'Reply to Defence'.....that's of course if they too are misguided enough to believe that it will assist them in any way.....

 

 

Apple

[applecart]

my mortgage with c & g was started 11.8.95 I am totally confused as to what is going on even more than I was before now, thank you bhall for the advice but I do not have enough time to start chasing down requests etc as the legal defence time I have left is running out. I do not want to be rude but I trust the people on here and am going with their advice and am grateful for their time and help. Please do not think I am being rude I am not

 

Hi Marika41....

 

Ben is a one isn't he?.......he led me to believe I could become part of his harem....then..led me to believe I had a 'horse' under my kilt...then told me it was just a 'guinea pig'....he left me high and dry..............I was gutted!!.... so don't you worry yourself.....he misled me too.....

 

But, I'm over it now ... You and others will be too in due course...... you will be fine...... just stick to your DEFENCE... we are tweaking as and where necessary.....there is no need to amend the detail regarding the deed of variation....a District Judge will understand the implication of the statements made....even if Ben doesn't..... :. )

 

Ben must have far too many men/women on the go in that harem of his - drinking his tea...it's gone to HIS head .... LOL

 

Apple

[applecart]

Hi, IsItMe/Apple/Marika

 

Apple, your post #2301.

 

para 4 of the re-draft states LPA 1925 section 25, (1) (a) should read....LRA 1925 section 25, (1) (a).

This also applies to first draft.

 

This is my first post and I am watching and reading this with a NI perspective in mind.

 

Many thanks All

GiveHimaMask

 

Hi GiveHimaMask

 

Forgot to mention..... I'm pleased to know that NI are taking on board what is going on here..... I believe a lot if not ALL is relevant to England, Northern Ireland and possibly Wales...... ; )

 

Just shout if we can help you as you have kindly taken time out to assist us.... Thanks again : )

 

Apple

[applecart]

Hi Marika41

 

When you have finished preparing your DEFENCE and you are happy with the way it looks (presentation is important); you will need to make 3 copies of it...including 3 copies of each piece of evidence.....(make sure you sign and date the 'statment of truth'...ok?)

 

This is because the Court need copies so that the Lender will get a copy, the Judge too, and one for you.

 

I recommend taking it to court...getting them to stamp receipt ..... on each copy.....leave 2 copies with them and take your stamped copy back home with you.

 

If there is a fee to pay....(although I don't think there will be... you are not 'counterclaiming' ) then pay it.... check with the court staff on this to be sure....

 

You and the Lender are then waiting for a court hearing date via the post....let us know when this is...ok?

 

The Lender during the interim period may decide to serve and file a 'Reply to Defence' from the Lender .... (they may not do so....sometimes they may 'hand' this to you on the day of the hearing...if they do, let the Judge know that you have not had time to consider it...and push for the Adjournment based on your defence)

 

Read your DEFENCE over and over to familiarise yourself with what it says...and what it means......the reason being... you want to be sure that if you are asked any questions... you have your response verbatim.....ok?

 

Over the proceeding days I will work on your 'grounds' for the application to the Chamber for you.....so, sit tight.....it will be with you in due course.......

 

Apple

[IS IT ME?]

Apple,

I once again (DARN) have to agree Ben is one of what well I leave that to you lol

For you Ben this is what is says;

 

The roots of the C&G can be traced back to 1850 and the Cheltenham & Gloucestershire Permanent Mutual Benefit Building and Investment Association.

Originally founded in Cheltenham, it gradually expanded through the early years of its life, opening its first Gloucester branch in 1896.

 

C&G converted in 1995 and became part of Lloyds, just months before Lloyds bought the TSB group. This was done because they were in trouble and were being taken over by Llods well before this date and it would be easier to do.

I used to have shares in C&G so I have some ' KNOWLEDGE' of this one thank you and we where conned then the same as we are being now.

[p.j]

Apple,

I once again (DARN) have to agree Ben is one of what well I leave that to you lol

For you Ben this is what is says;

 

The roots of the C&G can be traced back to 1850 and the Cheltenham & Gloucestershire Permanent Mutual Benefit Building and Investment Association.

Originally founded in Cheltenham, it gradually expanded through the early years of its life, opening its first Gloucester branch in 1896.

 

C&G converted in 1995 and became part of Lloyds, just months before Lloyds bought the TSB group. This was done because they were in trouble and were being taken over by Llods well before this date and it would be easier to do.

I used to have shares in C&G so I have some ' KNOWLEDGE' of this one thank you and we where conned then the same as we are being now.

 

hi IS IT ME it seems i don't have permission now to send pm but i got yours ok and to answer your question its yes.

 

pj

[bhall]

my mortgage with c & g was started 11.8.95 I am totally confused as to what is going on even more than I was before now, thank you bhall for the advice but I do not have enough time to start chasing down requests etc as the legal defence time I have left is running out. I do not want to be rude but I trust the people on here and am going with their advice and am grateful for their time and help. Please do not think I am being rude I am not

 

Hello Marika

 

Of course I do not feel you are being rude. You are not being rude at all.

 

In fact I can admit that I do see the attraction of following Apple's "fanciful ideas" - after all they do promise so so much.

 

By the sheer fact that the Land Registry updated your Title Deed's to show that the charge has been transferred from C&G to Lloyd's is evidence that the Land Registry received the request in a form that it considered to be acceptable.

 

Contrary to Apple's "fanciful ideas" a transfer of a legal charge is not made via a deed of variation, it is made by either using a TR3/4 form. The biggest giveaway is of course the name of each form. For me this only further serves to strengthen my belief that Apple has very little knowledge of property law. Don't get me wrong Apple tells a good story but that's all it is.

 

As you may be aware before your hearing a copy of your defence must be served on the claimant. So don't be surprised if they turn up with a copy of the form to wave in front of the Judge.

 

It is a pity as just one more phone call to the Land Registry would have at least prepared you for that possibility so that it would not come as a surprise to you, during your hearing.

 

However, as I said I see the attraction of the hope offered by Apple's fanciful ideas. It is just a shame it is false hope.

Edited October 24, 2013 by bhall

[bhall]

Apple,

I once again (DARN) have to agree Ben is one of what well I leave that to you lol

For you Ben this is what is says;

 

The roots of the C&G can be traced back to 1850 and the Cheltenham & Gloucestershire Permanent Mutual Benefit Building and Investment Association.

Originally founded in Cheltenham, it gradually expanded through the early years of its life, opening its first Gloucester branch in 1896.

 

C&G converted in 1995 and became part of Lloyds, just months before Lloyds bought the TSB group. This was done because they were in trouble and were being taken over by Llods well before this date and it would be easier to do.

I used to have shares in C&G so I have some ' KNOWLEDGE' of this one thank you and we where conned then the same as we are being now.

 

Thank you Is It Me?

 

As you had shares and taking into account you can't have shares in a building society, seems strange that you previously stated that C&G was never a bank, when that was the reason you had shares.

 

Anyway, thank you for confirming what I had previously posted was correct, it is appreciated

[bhall]

This is a link to a TR4 form

 

http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/_media/downloads/forms/TR4.pdf

 

As you can see it is entitled

 

"transfer of a charge or a portfolio of charges"

 

The above is the big give away, as the form 'does exactly what it says on the tin' ;-)

[IS IT ME?]

Ben, Ben,

why oh why

Contrary to Apple's "fanciful ideas" a transfer of a legal charge is not made via a deed of variation, it is made by either using a TR3/4 form. The biggest giveaway is of course the name of each form. For me this only further serves to strengthen my belief that Apple has very little knowledge of property law. Don't get me wrong Apple tells a good story but that's all it is.

Can you post up ANY of the mortgages so far in this thread that have used a TR3 or TR4 form NO YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO SO OR SHOW ANY

Because these companies have NOT USED THEM for years.

I have THREE of them and NONE are TR3 or TR4 forms as used by the LR!

[IS IT ME?]

BEN

You will also note what box 8 States.

[bhall]

Ben, Ben,

why oh why

Contrary to Apple's "fanciful ideas" a transfer of a legal charge is not made via a deed of variation, it is made by either using a TR3/4 form. The biggest giveaway is of course the name of each form. For me this only further serves to strengthen my belief that Apple has very little knowledge of property law. Don't get me wrong Apple tells a good story but that's all it is.

Can you post up ANY of the mortgages so far in this thread that have used a TR3 or TR4 form NO YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO SO OR SHOW ANY

Because these companies have NOT USED THEM for years.

I have THREE of them and NONE are TR3 or TR4 forms as used by the LR!

 

A TR3/TR4 form is only used when a charge is transferred. So unless your charge has been transferred of course there won't be a TR3/TR4 form. When you remortgage, the charge is not transferred. The original charge is discharged at redemption of the loan and you grant a brand spanking new charge to your new lender.

 

 

They still use them now, I posted a link for you to read - being a practice guide published by the Land Registry which was updated this month to prove to you that they still use the TR4 form. Please go back and read it.

 

I hope the above answers your question, as I would hate to think that I have not answered your question Is It Me?

[bhall]

BEN

You will also note what box 8 States.

 

Yes and I have already answered your point on this, at least twice before.

 

Do yourself a favour and read the practice guide published by the Land Registry as I have posted, it will prove that the TR4 is still being used today

[IS IT ME?]

Ben

 

NO I asked have you a copy of the form which people on here have as their TR form and is IT the same as the TR form used by the LR????

[IS IT ME?]

Ben,

Sorry but doing some thing else as well,

You will note that it is NAMED as a CHARGE ??????

NOT DEED

[IS IT ME?]

AND BEN

The transferor has received from the transferee for the

property the following sum (in words and figures):

Under 7 will you see that this is for a transfer of the house or flat for the amount you have paid???

[marika41]

Thank you for this....

 

Marika41....make sure and amend it from LPA to LRA 1925 section 25...ok?

 

Apple

 

Thank you, do I change every LPA to LRA or just this bit?