Failing that send a SAR to MEX, it will cost you £10 but should contain all the info you are seeking

First of all I would ask/insist on being provided with a completion statement

Did you ever get a completion statement?

Where in the contract does it say that your property cannot be let out to relatives?

ECHR can only be approached once all the domestic remedies have been exhausted

Was the finance taken out in your late husbands name? You are not responsible for his personal debts, any debts rest in his estate.

I thought that costs were usually "in the case", and as Judge has ordered your case to go to trial all and any costs would then be assessed. Did they apply for security for costs? If you had been in the position to be able to pay funds into court would you have been granted the injunction.

Going to trial seems like a good result, even if you didnt get the injunction that you wanted. Re the indemnity - Dont really understand this, what costs and damanges would MX & WS suffer if the injunction had been granted. Think WS ans MX will be really feeling the pressure now, watch out for their next round of dirty tricks, watch especially for them filing out of time documents ordered by the court, and failing to make applications for late service.

Tried to reply to Chilin's thread this afternoon, only to find that it has been closed. Why????????????????

Hi Chillin Did the court grant the injuction to allow mediation to take place? If so, I would suggest that they are in contempt of court if they have disobeyed the order.

Mortgage Express Mortgage Complaints Data http://consumer.bbg.co.uk/site-services/complaints/complaints-data.aspx Mortgage Express Data Complaints Publication Report Firm Name: Mortgage Express Group: Bradford & Bingley plc Other Firms Included in this Report: None Period Covered in this Report: 1 January 2011 - 30 June 2011 Brands / Trading Names Covered: Mortgage Express

Hi Keates In my case the LPA Receivers were not in funds as they didnt collect any rental income. It was a commercial property that was involved, and the Receivers were unhappy with the existing tenancy agreement and wanted the tenants to enter into a new tenancy agreement with them, but the tenants resisted. The receivers intimated that if they collected rent under the terms of the old agreement it would give the tenants security of tenure and they would have difficulty selling the the property with tenants in occupation. Meanwhile the Receivers ran up various costs, eg insurance, security, etc and invoices that needed paying whilst they were not in funds were sent to the Bank for payment, and increased the amount due.

Keates Re: your question - "Has anyone else had the situation where the LPA Receivers send invoices to the lender for work done on the properties and the lender sends them a cheque?" I need to check on that, however I do have a copy of a letter from the Receivers to the Bank that basically says in order to avoid payment of VAT by the Bank xxxx will be asked to invoice the Bank direct.

Think Chillin meant a Group Action, not a Class action

Ed 999 Its all very well suggesting that people must seek legal advice, but many of these MEX/WS victims have already been cleaned out and dont have any money to instruct solicitors or Direct Access Barristers. In my experience Direct Access Barristers require substantial upfront funding to review a case before they will assist. Lawyers operating on a CFA basis also require up front funding to review a case before they can decide whether the claim is suitable for a CFA. Many CABS dont have the necessary expertise to be able to assist, and are therefore reluctant to advise for fear of getting it wrong. My local CAB told me that I was the 1st person in 15 years that they had to turn away without being able to help. Community Legal Service will generally only assist with consumer and welfare cases etc. They will not help with this type of legal issue. The bottom line is, if you have no money you have no option but to go it alone.

Yes you are right. WS have their own estate agency and market property under their control themselves. WS is a partner led business and consists of Walker Singleton Asset Management Ltd, Walker Singleton Commercial Ltd, Walker Singleton Property Management Ltd. In addition the Firm has a dedicated Residential Sales office in Bradford established in the City in 1936 and trading as Charles Walker Chartered Surveyors.

I'll speak to chillin about this, its the first Ive heard time Ive heard about this.

So they only paid out for about 22 weeks when the house was unoccupied for 60 weeks? Was this insurance part and parcel of your MX mortgages, or was it a separate insurance you took out?

Ive never heard of insurance cover for loss of rent before, sounds interesting, think it needs a bit of research

May be wrong but I think its maybe a case of some properties in surplus and some in arrears. But as MX have consolidated all the individual mortgages into one portfolio account the account as a whole shows the portfolio in arrears. There is some sort of clause in the T & C re redemption that basically says if the mortgagor wishes to redeem a mortgage, he must redeem them all. Even if the mortgagor himself doesn't wish to redeem, LPA receivers are in law, the agents of the mortgagor. Wonder if they are using this to their own advantage to wipe out the portfolios.

Receivers act in the mortgagors name and "by his hand" Ive come across this before, but sorry I dont know the answer

Patrick, I believed that WS was a private limited company, You say their parent company is Barbon, can you clarify please?

A recent interesting article here- http://www.jgrweb.com/downloads/buy_to_let_property_law.pdf

Chillin, in a legal charge/mortgage that Im looking at right now, one of the clauses says- Owner not to grant leases The Owner shall not except with the written consent of any person duly authorised by the Bank exercise the powers of leasing or agreeing to lease or of accepting or agreeing to accept surrenders conferred by sections 99 and 100 LPA 1925 on a mortgage of land while in possession. Now considering that your mortgages are BTL I imagine this sort of clause wont be included in your contracts, as the intention behind your mortgages in the 1st place is to provide tenanted accomodation.

If section 103 is excluded that would suggest to me that borrowings are repayable on demand, and I wonder if this is how they are getting round the redemption date issue, but I find it very confusing as mortgages are usually for around 25 years. Have you checked to see if there is any expression of contrary intention which would prevent the power of sale being exercised. Fingers crossed that someone more knowlegeable will come along and clarify