Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you need to ring northants bulk and ask for a copy of the judgement and the claimform by email pdf. it is quite usual for them to not have a copy of the claimform. so you need to record the call and ask them to read out the particulars of claim and the address it was sent too.     old wives tales , if you have a debt owing that shows on your credit file or you know exists from say the last 7yrs you should NEVER move without WRITTING to the debt owner with your new address. never run from debt which falls within the above .     all mortgage style SLC loans that were not deferred with erudio following the gov't sale in 2013 and that did not have a court claim raised within 6yrs are SB'd.   drydens simply did this because they wrote to your old address, got no response, and knew they'd get a default roboclaim CCJ where no human checks anything.   shot yourself in the foot.      
    • yep.   if all these are still owned/with the original creditors and you are not paying any powerless DCA's  then little point in any CCA requests at this stage unless any (non OD A/C's) are say pre 2000 opening.   our pro rata letters are the way to go you'll find those in the debt collection section of our library.   get any income payments on going or otherwise moved into a parachute A/c.   it is most probable that whatever you do most A/c's will be defaulted once this is done if not already. bearing in mine your wish to re mortgage or move in a future, it is most probable that the quicker you do default , the earlier a DN will be registered thus the earlier these will not show following their 6th birthday. this might involve you thinking about stopping all payments now ensuring this does happen, then resuming payment under a pro rata scheme self administered , once this happens.   just be aware that no DMP providers will ever question enforceability, should that be relevant.     
    • LL would have Absolutely no chance of getting the smart meter changed back.....
    • slow down ...read what i'm asking , stating and trying to clarify.. it all might seem useless or totally irrelevant but it's important information moving forward with the whole situation and useful in the SPC claim moving forward     there was not 2 loans - the litigated OD is not a loan but it appears from your comment here..     sorry but then you did get scammed on many fronts... they allowed you to settle the loan exploiting your confusion over thinking it was the litigated account. they didn't tell you either and they would also have been aware of your statement filed response form:   The respondent had a junior account with the Bank of Scotland since a young age.  The Bank of Scotland offered the Respondent a loan of around £2500. This Respondent serviced the loan until losing her source of income and ran into some financial difficulty resulting in defaulting in servicing the loan.   they settled for a discounted sum... why? we usually find this is because they hold no enforceable paperwork at all. or was full of charges , charges could have been the discount or it could have been due to 'a business decision' ...   but sure as eggs is eggs there is no way 1st credit would not have raised a court claim for both the OD and the loan unless there was a very good reason. they didn't that smells...badly.   OD 's are notoriously difficult to litigate upon if defended properly...but with a loan in the same claim, with enforceable paperwork, they would have almost been guaranteed to win.   it's also a shame you didn't come where before you did anything but we are where we are.   now the above might seem harsh..even petty but our posts are not only for you and your issue they are also for future readers that find us via search engines or read like threads here alerting debtors to frequent pitfalls and innocent wet myself actions many do that all these dca's will and have exploited time and time again over the last +40yrs .   i'll try and get around to properly redacting all your pdf's tonight and get them back up. but before i finish and get on with the above........the status of the claim as it stands now.   From what i can gather the claim now hinges upon proving her ex at the time settled by a discounted payment to HBOS well before the sale to Intrum and the SPC Claim.   In all honestly and with regard to your comments in your previous posts upon his character, i seriously doubt this ever happened. the disclosures from Intrum contain all the OD statements , should that have happened, it would be detailed in those.   there is little point in the claimant hiding that info as they would be in far more legal trouble should they have doctored them than insuring a mere +£1k claim win. Even 1st credit wouldn't pull such stunts.   Sorry but there is little point in requesting HBOS to attend any future hearing, nor hoping the SAR shows anything different to the statements the claimant has disclosed . That will cost you more money , and more money in terms of the claimant attending another hearing.   there is one exploitation i see. that being the mention of a default notice. the claim states:  The respondent fell into arrears under the Finance Agreement. A Default Notice was Issued by the Original Creditor .   now default notices are not issued for OD A/C's (which ties in to the possible loan confusion and scam settlement i mentioned) . This tallies with a common mistake that many DCA's, including why i keep mentioning 1st credit, which is the previous name for Intrum, made on numerous claims and was one of the reasons for the name change. To Hide that They lost many Statutory Demand and court claims over the non existence of a DN or proof of it's issuance by the OC (a DCA can't issue a DN) .. No copy of a default notice is fatal to to successful  litigation.   even though in this OD case one was not ever needed. (Poor particulars of claim showing copy and paste, and never expecting a claim to be defended but responded to by a wet themselves response , which you did by settling a loan which you believed was the claimed debt when it never was)    other than that you indicate you made an OOC F&F offer in 09-20  have you advanced this option since ?   dx
    • A government-backed firm is looking for new ways to get people to put money aside for a "rainy day". View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Multiple signatures on tenancy deed of transfer - can they be on different documents and by email?

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 893 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I am a landlord, I did think this might go into the lettings forum, however I think it could be a general legal issue relating to contracts.


We have a joint and several tenancy agreement for tenancy due to start next month, students. (Downloaded from National Landlords Association so hopefully current. Note my LL NLA membership has lapsed but they do keep giving me free access to the document library as an ex member)


One tenant wants to exit the agreement and has been very helpful in finding a replacement T. The other T's are happy with the new T so wish to employ a "deed of transfer" document, which I have used a few times before and have the latest version also from the NLA.


My problem is that all the T's are scattered across the globe, until after the tenancy starts - Europe, Asia, Uk and Canada.


In my work capacity in the past (EU funded research projects) I have been involved with collating signatures to contracts by sending the whole contract and asking the co signatories to sign their own copy and return, on the EU advice that this was fine and we just collated the signature pages of each contract to make a master document.


I can easily get three of the 6 T's in the UK to sign the same document, but is it OK to get the others in Europe Asia and Canada to print out and sign effectively a separate identical document and scan and email back to me as per the EU research projects example above?


I could wait but I am a bit anxious about the tenancy starting without this being fixed.

Also the T's, new, existing and old want to get it fixed too as finding someone later on (ie a month after clearing) is more difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Popped you in residential as more knowledgeable people frequent here

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the first joint T will be there on 1st day, others soon after, its the three others who are travelling. Plus resorting to voiding a tenancy is not my style, I don't find that approach constructive. We have all the pieces in place we all just want to get docs sorted asap. Do you know if my proposal to get separate signed copies will hold water?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, hence the reason why all of tenants want to get it signed before anyone arrives. It is about minimising risk. I do not want to be in a situation where I have to chase tenants to pay for someone else's rent, that is still a risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but that is THEIR risk, not yours.

If this question was the other way round and it was a prospective tenat asking about liabilities I would warn them they become liable for all of the rent if the others do a runner so as they have agreed to share the risk


i would be letting them know that if all of the tenants dont turn up at the beginning of the academic year then those that do will be paying the full whack until they find someone else to move in.

Not at all unusual

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is very much my risk.


This is about pragmatism/practicalities.

They are much less likely to pay someone else rent, or at least they may put up a fight, then there is the risk of court or whatever, these things are not always cut and dried. I would prefer not to engineer a situation where I increase the chances of that happening, it could take months. The contract signed serves as a pressure to get everyone in line.


I have been a landlord since 2001, I have lost the equivalent of a single tenants 2 months rent in 17 years being cautious and not allowing these situations to develop. I am not going to wade into a risky situation if there is a simple way round it. You may sleep well at night by feeling that you can just sue whoever but my experience of a couple of trips to small claims is that it is time consuming, costly and risky.


So whilst I very much appreciate your concern to reply here, I would prefer to leave your advice aside for now and try to protect myself a little more deeply.


I am hoping that someone may have experience of contract counterparts, it works for business, I wondered if there was any issue with using counterparts in a deed of trust.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup every year since 2001. When this has happened before it normally happens during the academic year so everyone is available to sign a deed of transfer. It has happened before the tenancy commenced a couple of times in the past, but they were all still around in halls, as they sign up during the academic year before, so we did a deed of transfer and it worked great.. This is the first time it has happened before the tenancy, and during hols when they are off travelling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant to ask why you asked?

FYI I am by no means an expert, I have learnt an awful lot over the years and have a kind of method/process that seems to work. Always looking for new and better ways to continue to make a success of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or would it be better to let on a yearly basis?

I don't understand? I do let on a yearly basis - well 11 months, all occupants on joint and several AST.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law makes a distinction between ordinary contracts and deeds.


As you say that this is a "deed of transfer", I assume it needs to be executed as a deed. There are special requirements to execute a deed. In particular, the deed must be 'witnessed' and 'delivered'.


The document will need a signature block saying something like 'executed as a deed by [NAME]', with another signature block for the witness saying 'witnesses by [NAME]'.


The formally correct way of handling this is to ask each tenant to print out and physically sign the document. The witness would need to sign as well. The tenant should then return a scanned copy by email, and would confirm in their email that a master copy may be created once all signatures have been obtained. You would insert the date and create a master copy containing all signatures produced once all signatures are received. This is the process which is suggested by Law Society guidance in cases where signatories are not physically present in the same room.


What would not be valid is someone just responding to the email - they do have to print and sign the document, in order for it to be validly signed as a "deed".




Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you steampowered for answering my question. I tried to add reputation but apparently I have given you some recently and it would not allow me to do so again.

I will proceed as you said, that seems like a sensible approach. The deed of assignment does indeed include a line "This document is a DEED and has been executed as a DEED."

I don't really want to upload the whole thing here as it is copyright of the NLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries. The key thing to remember is that a deed must be witnessed in order to be valid ... so make sure the tenants get someone to witness the signature as well as signing themselves! The witness can be pretty much anybody.




Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...