Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • hey your doing fine, stop sweating, it's really no big deal, you need to understand you are what is classed as 'a litigant in person' - meaning joe public against what can be seen as a somewhat daunting judicial system, that is too your advantage.   IMHO thats just a reprint of your defence, it might be better to structure around something like this, whos basis is around the WS in the thread i pointed too.         WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT XXXXXXXXXXXX CLAIM NO. XXXXXXXX                                                                                                                                   Defendant: XXXXXXX                                                                                                                               Date XX/XXX2019 IN THE COUNTY COURT AT                                                                               CLAIM NO:XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     BETWEEN     XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      CLAIMANT     AND XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     DEFENDANT    1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed ...10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Idem Capital securities issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.    2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   I accept I have in the past had financial dealings with {insert original creditor name]. That being a Loan Agreement . I do not recall the precise details of the agreement but do recall it was on or about the year xxxx.   After seeking advice this led me to check all paperwork I held with creditors, from this I could not find any Credit Agreement relating to the account the claimant is referring to.   I have therefore sought clarification and requested copies of the agreements from the claimant by way of a section 77 request    exhibits   (DOC 1) A CPR 31.14 request pursuant to sec 61 B of the CCA1974 was sent xx/xx/xxxx via Royal Mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxxx. Request for the following :   1.a copy of the default notice served under section 87 of the consumer credit act 3. Notice of assignment 4. A statement of account   (DOC 1A) To date NO default notice been produced.    (DOC 2) A Section 77 request was sent on xx/xx/xxxx via royal mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxx. The claimant to date has failed to comply to my Section 77 request.   the defendant has failed to produce a copy of the Default notice issued by the original creditor,  as far as I can recall any breach with the original creditor would have been on or around xxxx.   The claimant as an assignee would not be able to legally issue a Default Notice as the debt would have already been terminated before assignment.   (DOC 3) I sort clarity of any Default Notice by the way of a CPR 31.14 request, sent via Royal mail signed for on xx/xx/xxxx and shows as received signed for xx/xx/xxxx   The claimant has still yet to comply to my CPR 31.14 request with regard to clarity of any valid default notice issued, as yet I have never received an original or seen a copy of a valid default notice from the defendant.   Conclusion   I contest that the documents I have received do not meet the requirements and prescribed terms of a legal binding credit agreement, and that the claimant has acknowledged that they are unable to produce an agreement and are unable to enforce litigation action.     I also state NO VALID Default has been produced from the claimant.   I believe that the that the facts stated in the witness state are true   ..................   have you received the claimants witness statement yet...   the above is just musings...    
    • A shortage of drivers has disrupted supply chains and fuel deliveries, with vehicles queuing for petrol.View the full article
    • Hannah Peel wore a sustainable dress to the Mercury Awards - but is the fashion industry changing?View the full article
    • Hi I know you are a busy site but I have posted the last few very important messages as I will be in court in the next few weeks   as you can see time is of essence and I have had few cryptic replies of look for your self messages which I have tried to work out about new guidance on statement of truths but this is not something that I am familiar with   yes I understand this site is not here to spoon feed everyone but sometimes it feels like a cap in hand approach. I have not had any feedback as to whether my statement is going to stand or if it will be thrown away by the judge?   I wish I had the knowledge of all you guys that assist everyone in their time of need who ask for the guidance that is readily available here but unfortunately it’s not the case sorry.   If anyone could advise on my post it will be very much appreciated.   Thanks G
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Receivers appointed and are asking me to remove my belongings from the property - residential property


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1189 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 defaulted on a bridging loan and Receivers have been appointed. They have secured the property (changed the locks) and have asked me to book a time to remove my belongings (Torts Notice served).

 

The property was and is my home and my only home but I have not lived there since taking out the bridging loan is because the loan was unregulated and I did not want to be in breach of the terms. However, it was never rented out; in fact, I never removed my belongings from the property.

 

I have never desired to be landlord and the only reason for taking out the loan was to keep my home. This was declared to the lender from the very beginning; nonetheless, the product offered to me was an unregulated loan. As I was not eligible for a mortgage at the time and it was very unlikely that I would be by the end of the loan term, sale was my only option of exit strategy. This was a better option than having the property repossessed.

 

The Receivers have said I must either remove my belongings or pay for storage. I have not abandoned my belongings or “left them behind”. I am in the process of remortgaging and they are aware of this, as I have kept them informed. The mortgage has been agreed subject to valuation which is due tomorrow. Can they force me to empty the property?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Your being forced into bankruptcy if the recievers are in and changed the locks.

Bridging loans are always secured in property as they "bridge" between mortgages.

Its of no concern that you never let the property.

You say you were not eligible for a mortgage but you took the bridging loan out to stop a repossession but are now re-mortgaging.

I think you were in financial difficulty and obviously used this to be a stop gap but defaulted.

The loan was not unregulated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Yes. Your being forced into bankruptcy if the recievers are in and changed the locks.

Bridging loans are always secured in property as they "bridge" between mortgages.

Its of no concern that you never let the property.

You say you were not eligible for a mortgage but you took the bridging loan out to stop a repossession but are now re-mortgaging.

I think you were in financial difficulty and obviously used this to be a stop gap but defaulted.

The loan was not unregulated.

 

 

Thanks for the response. You have answered my question as to whether or not they can force me to empty the property. However, in response to your comments

 

 

  1. This has nothing to do with bankruptcy. They have not presented a bankruptcy petition to the courts and there is no reason for them to. They will simply sell the property to recover what I owe.
  2. I "was" in financial difficulty. I experienced a setback from which I have since recovered, and as you have said, used the bridge as a stop gap.
  3. The bridging loan I got was definitely unregulated. I know the difference.

 

Anyway, the Receivers confirmed in writing that the reason they wanted my belongings removed was so as not to void their insurance and not for any other reason. They said they could give me some time but I can't leave them indefinitely and asked for timescales wrt remortgaging. Valuation has gone to the lender, solicitors have been instructed and the Receivers are no longer putting pressure on me to remove my things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...