Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi friends,  I’m a bit worried I may have got confused with timings here. I thought I had 33 days from my acknowledgment to submit a defence but the date added above says 3/6/24.   have I missed the date?   if so how can I apply for an exception due to my disability and problems with deadlines and dates etc (ADHD)?   what should I submit as a defence?   I’ve had no reply from BW so far 
    • Normally we don't advise playing your cards early in a snotty letter, but as you have appealed we might as well use what you wrote in the appeal against them. There is no rush, you have until 6 July to get it to them.  See what the other regulars think too. How about something like this? -   Dear Rachael & Sean, cheers for your Letter of Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea you'd actually thought I'd take such tripe seriously and would cough up! As usual you'll have been too bone idle to do any due diligence.  Had you done so you would have seen that I appealed to your client.  Indeed the driver on the day is a textbook example of having done exactly what you should do when you do not wish to be bound by the T&Cs in a private car park. Of course none of that mattered to the spivs you represent but do you really want to put such a useless case in front of a judge? To be fair, your clients are very useful members of the human race - as comedians.  How I loved the page turner of their antics at The Citrus Building in Bournemouth.  It was chuckle after chuckle reading about them, letter after letter, month after month, insisting they were legally in the right, even through someone who had done just the first day of a GCSE law course could have told them they weren't.  Until the denouement - BOOM - an absolute hammering in court.  In fact - SLAM, BANG - managing to lose twice against the same motorist for the same car park in front of two different judges. Your client can either drop their foolishness now or get yet another tolchocking* in court where I will go for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) and spend the dosh on a nice summer holiday, while every day laughing at your clients' expense. I look forward to your deafening silence. COPIED TO COUNTRYWIDE PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD   *  This word is used under licence from Brassnecked
    • Well yes, ... and the tax dodgers ... Trump May Owe $100 Million From Double-Dip Tax Breaks, Audit Shows A previously unknown focus of an I.R.S. audit is a dubious accounting maneuver that effectively meant taking the same write-offs twice on a Chicago skyscraper. nytimes.com WWW.NYTIMES.COM  
    • more detest the insurrectional ex variety dx
    • Laura, I was surprised that the Director said that you hadn't appealed twice. I thought that the letter you posted on 24th June was the second appeal and that was to the IAS. And they did say that there was no further appeal possible. Could you please explain how many times you appealed. I am going to read your WS now. PS  Yes I meant to say that the keeper did not have a licence therefore it was wrong of them to assume he was the driver and the keeper. Thanks for picking that up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Home rights notice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3544 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have received a home rights notice from the land registry which was instigated by my absent wife who left me nearly three years ago.

 

I now don't know my wifes whereabouts,

she doesn't reply to my emails so I can't discuss this issue with her.

She hasn't petitioned for divorce so I don't know where I stand.

 

The home rights notice states that I can't sell the house without my wifes permission.

 

However, as I can't communicate with her I seem to be stuck in a situation that I can't solve.

 

Being legally unable to sell it without permission that I cannot obtain what should I do?

 

The home rights notice doesn't say that I can't demolish the house so I assume that would be legally acceptable.

 

I would be happy to negotiate a sale of the house with my wife if she would only communicate with me.

 

Should I just demolish the house and ignore the home rights notice if my wife continues to ignore my emails?

 

Being notified by the land registry that I can't sell my house without the permission of someone who's location is unknown

and I can't borrow any money against the equity implies that the house is worth nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The home rights notice form has a contact address for the person who is submitting the form. This will probably be your wife's solicitor. Contact them if you want to reach an agreement.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Essentially a B94-1 is notification of application made at H M Land Registry which has the effect of preventing you from selling or remortgaging your property.

 

You do not have to pay anything. It does not entitle your ex wife to anything. It is normally used to "secure" property pending ancillary relief proceedings (where the assets are split).

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unable to afford a divorce due to living on a small private pension and I'm certain that my wife wouldn't

be able to afford a divorce either. This situation has been made worse by the withdrawal of legal aid from divorce

cases. I therefore seem to be stuck in a situation that has no solution.

Being unable to afford a divorce and now being unable to sell the house implies that my house has no value.

The value of something is based upon how much someone is willing to pay for it.

Therefore if you aren't legally allowed to sell something then it must have a market value of zero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can read about how to get a divorce here: https://www.gov.uk/divorce/overview

 

 

Just because you have no income does not mean that you cannot have a divorce. Divorce doesn't necessarily mean you have to pay your wife cash, it can also mean that she becomes entitled to a 50% share of the property. The house would then be jointly owned.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that link. I have had a good read through the information.

 

Am I correct in thinking that if I could obtain a divorce which resulted in my wife owning

50% she couldn't force me to sell the house without my agreement.

Also I assume I couldn't sell the house without her agreement.

I wonder if under such circumstances if she could charge me rent on her half

of the property. I assume so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you can't sell the house without her agreement (although it is difficult to see why she would not agree).

 

 

She can't sell the house by herself but, if granted a 50% share, she could ask the court to grant an order that the house be sold. These orders can be difficult to get, but are available for example if in a situation where you could reasonably be expected to move to a smaller house in order to release her share of the equity.

 

 

She can't charge you rent on her half of the property.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The notice on the register alerts a buyer to the third party right she has .

The registrar won't register the new proprietor until the notice has been removed, and it'd be a poor solicitor that allowed the conveyancing to go forward with the notice in place.

 

As she has registered it, it is binding on any possible purchaser as a (notice on the register regarding an) "interest affecting a registered estate" (IARE).

 

Were she to move back in, and remove the notice, she couldn't claim the protection of being "in actual occupation" which normally protects people living in the property (This 'occupation' right is an "over-riding " interest under Schedule 3, Para 2 of the Land Registration Act 2002, but the Family Law Act matrimonial home right is specifically excluded from being eligible from Schedule 3, Para 2 by S31(10)b of the Family Law Act

 

You also CANNOT circumvent her home right by

1) asserting you hold the property on trust for both of you

2) appointing a second trustee, then

3) getting a buyer to "over-reach" her beneficial interest.

 

So, your options are:

1) reach an agreement, contacting her via the address on her FLA home right application, or

2) divorce her without her knowledge, if you really can't contact her. You'd need to show the court you'd tried all reasonable measures to contact her, before they allowed a "dispense of service " application to do away with the need to serve the papers on her. If you went down this route, you'd need to ensure her share of the equity in the property was held on trust for her as part of the divorce - the court won't grant a divorce without issues of property being resolved, and if she isn't able to be contacted the court will ensure her interests are fairly represented.

Once divorced the registrar at the Land Registry will remove the FLA notice and the sale can proceed : she still gets her money, though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you can't sell the house without her agreement (although it is difficult to see why she would not agree).

 

 

She can't sell the house by herself but, if granted a 50% share, she could ask the court to grant an order that the house be sold. These orders can be difficult to get, but are available for example if in a situation where you could reasonably be expected to move to a smaller house in order to release her share of the equity.

 

 

She can't charge you rent on her half of the property.

 

Thank you for that information. Maybe then I could continue to live here for the rest of my life without the worry of a forced sale. I don't mind my wife being granted 50% ownership as long as I can continue to live here. Regarding moving to a smaller house, there are no houses in Bristol that I could afford with 50% of the proceeds from this house and I wouldn't be eligible for a mortgage. Therefore moving to a smaller house is financially out of the question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The notice on the register alerts a buyer to the third party right she has .

The registrar won't register the new proprietor until the notice has been removed, and it'd be a poor solicitor that allowed the conveyancing to go forward with the notice in place.

 

As she has registered it, it is binding on any possible purchaser as a (notice on the register regarding an) "interest affecting a registered estate" (IARE).

 

Were she to move back in, and remove the notice, she couldn't claim the protection of being "in actual occupation" which normally protects people living in the property (This 'occupation' right is an "over-riding " interest under Schedule 3, Para 2 of the Land Registration Act 2002, but the Family Law Act matrimonial home right is specifically excluded from being eligible from Schedule 3, Para 2 by S31(10)b of the Family Law Act

 

You also CANNOT circumvent her home right by

1) asserting you hold the property on trust for both of you

2) appointing a second trustee, then

3) getting a buyer to "over-reach" her beneficial interest.

 

So, your options are:

1) reach an agreement, contacting her via the address on her FLA home right application, or

2) divorce her without her knowledge, if you really can't contact her. You'd need to show the court you'd tried all reasonable measures to contact her, before they allowed a "dispense of service " application to do away with the need to serve the papers on her. If you went down this route, you'd need to ensure her share of the equity in the property was held on trust for her as part of the divorce - the court won't grant a divorce without issues of property being resolved, and if she isn't able to be contacted the court will ensure her interests are fairly represented.

Once divorced the registrar at the Land Registry will remove the FLA notice and the sale can proceed : she still gets her money, though!

 

Thanks for your informative posting. I am currently living alone in the property. I thought that being in actual occupation only protected occupants who were under 18 or in full time education. I am therefore worried that should a divorce come about, the court would force a sale leaving me homeless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being in actual occupation can protect people other than the owner of the legal title to the property from coming home one day to discover it's been sold from under them (except for spouses : who HAVE to register their FLA home right, as your wife has done).

 

It doesn't protect you as you are the owner of the legal title : a court COULD order a sale ( that doesn't mean they would, only could).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the mess I am in could be my fault. My wife deserted me nearly three years ago and has only recently applied for home rights. I should have sold the house when she deserted me and disappeared abroad with the money.

Oh well, I had my chance but now my chance has gone.

Maybe I could adopt a child or go back into full time education to ensure the court don't grant an order for sale

in the near future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the land registry would tell me my wife's address?

 

They should tell you the address the home right was applied for from.

It may not be her address, but should be an address documents can be served to, such as a solicitor's

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I obtained my wife's address from the Land Registry and sent her a letter by recorded delivery.

She has received the letter and failed to reply.

I asked her for permission to sell the house so she can have her half of it's value.

Her ignoring me means that I can't sell the house despite me offering her half the value.

Therefore being legally unable to sell, it must be worth nothing.

Would my wife have a financial claim against me if I were to demolish the house?

I assume not because half of nothing is nothing.

I know a chap who lives locally who ownes a large JCB.

He is willing to demolish the house for a modest fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Divorce her.

As part of the divorce settlement get the court's approval to sell the house.

Once divorced : her home right ceases : which is why the division of property is done as part of the divorce.

 

If you are worried that that would "leave you homeless", then stay : her home right may prevent you selling the property but you aren't homeless (nor can she insist on moving in!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a chap who lives locally who ownes a large JCB.

He is willing to demolish the house for a modest fee.

 

Where will that get you ?????????????????????

 

 

Your best bet is follow post # 20 BazzaS

Link to post
Share on other sites

BazzaS thanks for your reply. Divorce her, yes I agree. However, there are a few problems.

I am living on a very small private pension and cannot afford to divorce her.

Around two years ago, all legal aid was withdrawn from divorce cases.

I took some legal advice recently and discovered that my wife is fully entitled to move

back in here any time she wishes. The home rights notice gives her exactly that entitlement.

I therefore wonder why you think she can't insist on moving back in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BazzaS thanks for your reply. Divorce her, yes I agree. However, there are a few problems.

I am living on a very small private pension and cannot afford to divorce her.

Around two years ago, all legal aid was withdrawn from divorce cases.

I took some legal advice recently and discovered that my wife is fully entitled to move

back in here any time she wishes. The home rights notice gives her exactly that entitlement.

I therefore wonder why you think she can't insist on moving back in.

 

My error : I confused it with the rights of an owner of a beneficial interest.

 

So, you are saying that you can't sell it without her agreement, might be able to afford to sell and move somewhere else (I'm not sure if you are saying if you could afford to do this if she were to get half of any equity.... Which she is likely entitled to!)

 

I'm still not sure why you'd want to knock your home down, other than "to cut your nose off to spite your face"??

Link to post
Share on other sites

A home rights notice does not mean you cannot sell the property. It means you would have to agree with your wife what should happen as part of a divorce settlement, or that you would have to seek a court order saying what should happen if you cannot agree.

 

Being married is a bit like having joint ownership of the house. Marital assets are in that context 'co-owned', even if only one spouse's name is mentioned on the land registry. On divorce, both spouses get a share of the marital assets.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...