Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • CB ....this conclusion is true.   as for PB, i can assure you that user most probably ( well i know but shouldn't say} holds the record here for the most reported posts by users as well as from those of the site team concerning his posts. if you hold on someones username further info can be seen.   however , a bit like say vodaphone or virgin media , very large companies with millions of customers will get the most complaints made against them...and that equates to posting levels here too. as for 'royalties account holder' that again merely points, by a default label in the software package we use, to the number of posts made.   one could further this by noting were we to agree with all their posts they would be on the siteteam... i will leave you to understand why not .....       don't think anyone did?    regards  DX
    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do.   The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66."   Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66.   He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help.   What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcement Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'.   Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in.   Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.
    • There was another poster (Hammy1962) who understood (#3) the distance selling point you were trying to make, but you may have inadvertantly put him off in your subsequent post.  He may still be following this thread.  Wonder if he has any ideas that could possibly help you?    I'm concerned about how you continue if the TS route is not helpful...
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 5 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Help reclaiming property sale £s from ex


Recommended Posts

Have a question about how to claim back £s from ex, now property sold?

 

Many years ago my relative sold their first home and used all the sale proceeds to pay the initial down payment on a family house - apx £300k.   

A mortgage on the balance of the purchase price was also taken out on the property. 

This house was legally in joint names - relative and their partner.   They  had a  very long-term relationship - with kids - but never married.      

The partner always paid the mortgage.   Although  - over the years this partner also remortgaged the property twice  - hugely - to pay off his parent's debts.

Unfortunately the relationship failed and the family home got sold.   

The proceeds from the sale got split, 50/50.

This doesn't seem a fair split.    Taking into account the huge £s the ex borrowed  - against the property - to clear his  own parent's debts. 

The ex-partner also refuses to consider relative's initial down payment  - 300k - should be treated separately, outside of any profit share.

It seems that relative has really been short-changed.

 

I am trying to research how relative can

a) get back the initial 300k down payment?

and maybe

b) get a larger % of the sale proceeds?   

 

Could relative serve a statutory demand on the ex for a) and maybe b) ?

The ex co-owns a property with a previous ex-wife.    His 50% share would  easily cover the 300k.   

Could relative get a SD and then a CO on this property?

This property may be going on the market soon... So it seems prudent - if it's possible - for relative to try secure an interest in it.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were not married, no legal agreements were entered into about the share of the equity in the property at any stage and therefore when it is sold, there is no legal basis other than a 50/50 split.

 

Suggest your relative speaks to a Solicitors to see if they are aware of any way to increase their share in the property, given the information in your post above. 

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks UncleB

 

50/50 would be acceptable - IF the ex hadn't already taken out almost the exact same amount for his own personal use - i.e.: paying £s towards his own parent's debts.    The profit share would have been / should have been double. 

And the ex has also excluded the original cash amount invested by my relative.

The "deal" was that the ex would have repaid the £s paid to his family over time from his well paid job. But job got lost and relationship failed.   So ex then excluded the amount he'd already taken out of the profits.

 

The main issue now is that he has no £s - he's spent everything. 

Relative feels short-changed from a split that is not 50/50 of what should have been the profit share.  Ex has definitely gained more (albeit for his parent)

But relative doesn't think she'll ever get this amount reimbursed - cos he just doesn't have it.

He only has a 50% share in ex-wife's property.  As a compromise relative wants to demand back her original cash down-payment by making a claim on ex's share in this property.  It is a lot less than relative should be entitled to as a 50/50 profit share.

Can this be done?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The same ex also borrowed £s from relative's elderly parents - 5-6y ago.

The ex promised to return the £s.

When relative's family house got sold the relative's elderly parents expected to be repaid from the sale proceeds - of which there was ample ability to repay.   

A letter email was sent to ex -  2y ago - reminding him for the £s to be returned.

He never replied.

 

Could the elderly relatives issue a statutory demand for the return of the funds - rather than do a money claim/ ccj?

 

Its a lot of money for the elderly relatives - many 000's - and they need the funds for making  essential (old age) alterations to their home.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just to be clear -

The ex remortgaged the family home to pay off his own parent's debts;

yet he borrowed from his partner's parents and has so far refused to repay their loans

a lawyer advised the relative's down payment should be returned before the 50/50 was apportioned - he didn't do this.

Meanwhile he doesn't consider the sums he took to pay off his parent's debts should be  off-set against his share of the profits in the 50/50  (or otherwise) split

 

Relative and their parents have a potential opportunity to stake a claim in his ex-wife's/his jointly owned property.

Am just trying to figure their best next moves?

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is documented.

 

The elderly relatives only use cheques.  So each cheque was sent / documented why.    Sometimes the cheque was sent to relative but the equal corresponding amount was then sent to the ex.

 

All exes sums to cover his parent's expenses/ debts were  apparently logged as the £s were used mostly for company expenses.. Such as legal fees and company  debts - so  should be clear records there.   They were not expenses that should ever have been attributed to relative or the future 50/50 split of sale proceeds

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to check what was written and what was simply said.

I do know that he promised to repay the elderly relatives.

 

Personally,  it seems he's just a rogue.  The type that shuffles funds to try hide what he really does with it

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, HP Mum said:

I need to check what was written and what was simply said.

I do know that he promised to repay the elderly relatives.

 

Personally,  it seems he's just a rogue.  The type that shuffles funds to try hide what he really does with it

 

There's a saying that could sum up your problem 'If it isn't written down, it didn't happen.'

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes.  

Well relative and relatives potential problem

Although I am sure there is enough written down to prove...

 

Could they each serve a SD on the ex?   Assuming they have the proof

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - there is a lot of proof.  I just dont know if for all of it.

 

The loans from elderly relatives would be a separate claim - could they send a SD to him to start with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I may not be explaining this very well. Has the ex signed one or more pieces of paper stating how much he was lent by your elderly relatives please?

 

If not, I'm not sure how they could prove they're owed the money.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

The main issue they have is the were not married and there was not legal agreement in writing as to who pays what so the 50/50 split was in settlement.

 

When you say evidence it is difficult to advise when you don't state the exact evidence they have i.e. the cheque's, were they only signed over to this party concerned only or were these cheque's signed  over in the partiy concerned parents name.

 

It would be better if the party you are trying to assist would come onto CAG as the advice from getting it direct from that party would be more relevant to this issue.

 

 

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relative should seek free consultations with Solicitors to see whether worth taking this to Court.  Think I remember reading in media of cases where unmarried couple have gone to Court to argue about perecentage of equity,.

 

A Solicitors should be aware of such cases and will advise on costs, plus how how long it would take to go through relevant processes.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^^  This from unclebulgaria.  It's foolhardy with such amounts of money at stake that you (or your relative) are not taking paid for, professional legal advice.

 

Normally a 50:50 split would be what the law would support, but if your relative paid the whole of the deposit themselves and then the ex remortgaged twice to settle their parents' debts, then I'd be surprised if a court decided a bare 50:50 was appropriate.  But as others have said, it depends on what was agreed and what evidence there is, written or otherwise.

 

I hate to say it, but this demonstrates the perils of co-habiting without any written agreements or records as to who contributed what.  My wife and I co-habited for about 20 years before marrying but we kept meticulous accounts of our contributions to joint property just as if it was a commercial/business partnership.  We didn't need it, but we might have done.

 

You can't reasonably expect to get a reliable answer to this from a forum.  (And when I say "reliable", I mean professional legal advice that your relative can sue over if it turns out to be wrong!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all.

 

I am just asking for all  the paperwork so i can then collate and ascertain what is good enough evidence to substantiate a claim for both of them.

 

Manxman - I agree with you that a court should decide against 50/50 with such facts.   We just need to prove the facts.   And, as you say, perhaps take legal advice?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would want legal advice.  As unclebulgaria suggests some solicitors will offer 30 minutes advice for free.  Whether it's worth paying to retain someone to act for you is up to your relative and how much money is involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have sat down with relative and gone through their details.

Relative has a legal document stating that one property sold and proceeds then used on family home.   

The sale proceeds were held by lawyer in their holding account before transfer.

This sum is indisputable.

 

There is a further large sum that "should be due" from the profit share.   

Relative can prove what sums were taken by ex for own personal use - which should have been considered as  his advance payments from potential future profits ie to be deducted off the final balance.     However, looking at ex's position realistically he won't have the funds to repay it.

 

It seems more prudent to lodge a claim just for the lump sum down payment that relative paid.

The proceeds of ex's former marital home will cover this.

 

Is it as simple as serving a SD and attaching the legal documents as proof??   Will ex then have just 18 days to respond/ defend?

 

As for relative's parents:

Nothing was put in writing by ex. 

He "asked" for the money.  He "promised" the money would be loans and he would repay.   

On "trust" relative's parents wrote several cheques.   

The "agreement" was that the loans would become due upon sale of the family home.

Relative's called in the loans upon the sale - and ex has failed to repay.

What would happen if relative parents served a SD on him?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎03‎/‎08‎/‎2020 at 00:59, HP Mum said:

  Although  - over the years this partner also remortgaged the property twice  - hugely - to pay off his parent's debts.

 

 

 

51 minutes ago, HP Mum said:

As for relative's parents:

Nothing was put in writing by ex. 

He "asked" for the money.  He "promised" the money would be loans and he would repay.   

On "trust" relative's parents wrote several cheques.   

The "agreement" was that the loans would become due upon sale of the family home.

Relative's called in the loans upon the sale - and ex has failed to repay.

What would happen if relative parents served a SD on him?

 

 

 

I'm confused!  Are you saying your relative's ex-partner borrowed money from your relative's parents in order to pay off his (the ex-partner's) parents' debts, and used the property as security?  Or was this loan from your relative's parents in addition to the double re-mortgaging?  It all seems a very Byzantine financial arrangement...

 

And also, from your first post:  "Many years ago my relative sold their first home and used all the sale proceeds to pay the initial down payment on a family house - apx £300k. "  Are you saying (1) the down payment was £300k, or (2) the total purchase price was £300k?  If you are saying(?) your relative has lost £300k or more, they do need paid for legal advice.

 

(Please don't take this the wrong way, but you and members of your family seem to be involved in some very unfortunate and complicated legal situations?)

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Manxman

1) The ex remortgaged the family home (the home he jointly owned with relative) - and used these funds to pay his own father's business and personal debts.  He bullied relative into agreeing.   Over the years their equity increased a lot - but he took a chunk out by remortgaging and sending all this money to his father.

 

2) Separately the ex also borrowed money from  relative's parents.   He used this money for his own use and promised to repay them when the family home was sold.  He hasn't.

 

3) the relative sold her first home and made 300k.   The next property  (the family home) was of higher value.  Her 300k was the down payment/ large deposit..  Then there was a mortgage for the balance of the purchase price.   When the house was sold she never got back the 300k.   The ex just split the proceeds 50//50.  Her lawyer had drawn  a doc that stated her 300k was separate from any joint profit share.  Ex did not honour this.   Again relative was bullied into agreeing.   Put in context, she was very sick (C) and has depression...

 

I agree this situation is unfortunate. 

I am furious with the ex for taking advantage of their vulnerability and intrinsic trust.   

I think they have a small window of opportunity right now  - with his former marital home being up for sale - to recoup their money.   This is why I am trying to ascertain if they can both serve a SD on him now (via process server) ???

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HP Mum.

 

I apologise for saying this but I'm not the first on this thread. You're talking about large amounts of money and asking for advice online from people who are extremely well-meaning but with the best will in the world, we aren't lawyers.

 

Your relative could ring specialist property lawyers locally [see the Law Society Find a Lawyer function for ones in the right locality] and ask if they're able to help. They should be willing to talk your relative through the issues for up to half an hour without charging.

 

HB

 

  • Thanks 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

honeybee - I understand.

 

In principle I am enquiring about the SD process.

 

I never knew this process existed until I had a lender attempt to serve one on me. 

I have a separate thread on this.   Which simply was: behind my back - knowingly at an incorrect address - a lender tried to serve a SD on me.  They somehow managed to get a substituted service of the SD.   I did not know of any of this at the time.  I recently discovered however, that they managed to secure another hearing, within 1 month, in which they tried to present a bankruptcy petition.   They failed at this point apparently as they could not prove service of documents.   They were given 2 months to serve the petition.   Then Covid got in the way and  the process got extended for months; I don't know when or if there will be a hearing...   In my case, despite being in constant email contact and serving them with a SAR - the lender failed to  ever alert me to this legal action.    But that is a digress.    What I really mean to say is that having had this process used against me, it seems to be a potentially useful process - as long as relative has concrete evidence - to speed up debt collection.

And I  guess I am wondering if anyone here has ever used a SD on anyone who owes them money?

 

I will suggest relative gets a free legal session with a lawyer anyway...

And  separately, relative's parents too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...