repo date 21/09/2009

[jansus]

I would just like to say that I can not take credit for the info - it all came from TaffyR - but he is banned from posting.

 

However if you have any specific questions I can ask him off line

 

Jan

[micko19]

Hi Micko,

 

Thanks again for your web-site tips. Will look into it. I have emailed Mr Bennion and will let you know if he responds. TaffyR is excellent on the securitisation and also Janus has written some great stuff. They both are spot on. With respect to securitisations, I too have some relevant experience in securitisations as I have worked on some the transactions.

 

My case is a repossession case and thus, because of my knowledge on securitisations (and how the process shafts the borrowers), I also know that the company that purports to be the lender - is not the lender in fact and law and therefore does not have the legal standing to bring the action against me in the first place! That is why I know that Janus was right when she says in her posts that the lender is an SPV and not the lender that is named as the Claimant. All repossession claims should fail for this reason alone if the rule of law is reeally being applied. Hence, this again is another of my legal arguments that the Claimant does not have a cause in action against me because they sold the mortgage with "full title guarantee" two years before the claim was commenced!

 

Yes I'm really going to test whether there is a Rule of Law and whether there is Equality before the Law; or whether the court will just rubberstamp what the court's favoured "little darlings" want (i.e. the powerful banks).

 

With respect to choosing a solicitor (when you get legal aid), remember that most solicitors will have no idea about the securitisation legal issues and therefore, try to find and choose one that knows about securitisations which will be much better value for money.

 

hi ss

just noticed there is a signature on the front page of the loan offer ie pat savery from beacon home loans ie not redstone...would that be enough for them to counter the s2 argument.

cheers

 

mick

[supersleuth]

Hi Micky,

 

Are Beacon home the original lender? If they were, then it depends. What is Pat Savery's job title. Was she an "Officer or Director" or did she sign the letter for and on behalf of an officer or director. Also does the letter say, (signed) "for and on behalf of Beacon Homes"" - then Pat Savery signed? If these answers are Yes, then it might be properly executed, but only PROVIDED that the contractual terms states that the cover letter constitutes one of the contractual documents. Need to read the T&Cs to check out which booklets/documents constitute the contractual documents.

 

If Pat Savery was a clerk/secretary that signed with a "pp" beside her name then it depends. Can't really say without looking at it. Companies Act 1985 s. 36 governs the law on how companies can enter a contract. Only an Officer or Director can legally sign a contract however, the Officer or Director may delegate the authority to an administrator.

 

Main point is, if the signature area does not say "for and on behalf of Beacon Homes Limited" (or plc or whatever they are), then it most likely is not a contractual signature.

[supersleuth]

Oh BTW, just to make it clear, the contract can only be valid IF it is signed by the original lender. A new lender (who acquired your mortgage through an assignment) CANNOT validly sign the contract.

 

i.e. the contracts must be signed by both of the original parties to the contract (namely you and the original lender from whom you borrowed the money).

[micko19]

hi ss

just noticed there is a signature on the front page of the loan offer ie pat savery from beacon home loans ie not redstone...would that be enough for them to counter the s2 argument.

cheers

 

mick

 

damn... just my luck ...it does say for and on behalf of beacon home loans ltd and it would appear pat savery is an underwriter..????

 

would it be argueable that it should be a redstone employee???

 

many thanks

 

micko

[supersleuth]

Hi Micko,

 

Seems like the s.2 argument will be a tough one for you then (sorry). The underwriter will most likely have authority from Beacon Homes to create the binding contract. Nonetheless, it was worth checking.

 

It can't be argued that a Redstone employee should sign because they are only an "assignee". This is to do with the doctrine of "privity" of contract. You and Beacon are the contracting parties (and that can never change) and you and Beacon were in privity of contract.

 

Because Beacon "assigned" their rights, benefits and duties under their contract with you, Redstone are now deemed to have "stepped into the shoes of Beacon" as an assignee. Thus, you are no longer in privity of contract with Beacon. There is now contractual "privity" between you and Redstone.

 

Does all this technical legal stuff make sense. Main point is, that at law, you are now contracted to Redstone. BUT Redstone can only hold you to the contractual terms that existed between you and Beacon. i.e. Redstone cannot change the terms of your original contract without your consent and signature to the any new terms. However, mortgages get assigned all the time and part of the securitasation process is that your mortgage may have been assigned by Redstone to another company (but Redstone have not yet told you about it yet - very common practice)

 

Do a search for the word "Redstone" on the CAG website. I remember reading that Redstone do not own the mortgages as they've been sold to an SPV. See a poster that Janus wrote regarding Redstone and its SPV. She even gave the email address of the SPV that may now own your mortgage. You could send them an email and ask them if they own your mortgage and when they bought it.

 

In which case, you could argue that Redstone do not own your mortgage and therefore have no legal standing i.e. "locus standi" to commence legal action against you. On that ground, you could ask the judge to "strike out" their claim (if you can get proof that the SPV now own your mortgage).

[micko19]

with my continuous digging on this mortgage I now have SAR'S returned from IFA and mortgage company Redstones.

 

To cut to the quick the IFA mortgage questionnaire revealed the following.

1. It contains a spreadsheet of perhaps 200 interest rates offered by mortgage companies...they all say no or ask for data. The reason for this is the IFA put ccj's in the search criteria for my mortgage. .....I had no ccj's at the time.

2. In the Redstone SAR the underwriter and many other docs state that their are no ccj's only arrears on other loan which would be consolidated. and the laon is described as near prime....

3. The mortgage questionnaire contains at least 6 forged signatures of ours(myself and my wife) 100% obvious.

4. I have the full chain of emails between myself and the IFA who told me to ignore paying of unsecured loans that had been invented by him to get the mortgage through.

6. I don't know if this may have been to hide the fact that I was £100 a month worse off under the new agreement...or section 18 awareness

 

I am in the processs of trying to get the complaint in front of the FSA. There is so much paper work I cannot afford to copy and send.. I need to get email access to the FSA which as i say I am trying to arrange at the moment.

 

IN my view our mortgage was miss sold and we have proof. We have not been repossesesed yet but it is looming still

 

any advice much appreciated ....

 

micko

 

bump, bump

[micko19]

My wife has now decided to leave end of aug so repo will not start until then because we get interest support from government. However that will be crunch time as I am not willing to keep going 1000 in debt every month. I have very strong evidence of misselling against the IFA....however I also know as you... will some of these operators although regulated etc are like nailing custard to the wall ...also I do not believe the judge would stop the repo when most evidence is against IFA. I think I might just hand over the keys and be done. Done fsa, fos and written to LIME who represent IFA who have told me i will have to pay for the handwriting expert which I cannot afford. LIME also FSA REGULATED. The signature forgeries are 100% obvious and we have clear proof that he used ccj on search criteria to limit our choices.

 

Am i write to assume that the courts will not take misselling by IFA into account when giving repo...If so I will hand over the keys and wait for the big debt bill and go through Fos ETC. It might be 12 years before I get a job things are so bad...

 

any advice appreciated

 

micko

 

bump

Edited July 14, 2009 by micko19

[micko19]

Repo docs ariived today hearing date 21/09/2009 my story mainly on here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/206470-fraud-act-2006-a-9.html#post2362390

 

All advice gratefully received

 

called huddersfield legalaid advice line who are going to call me back in the next 24 hours..

 

cheers

 

micko

Edited August 13, 2009 by micko19
minor update

[enoughisenough]

I will try to respond in full as soon as I can. Don't do anything yet . You have 14 days. Keep the faith. EiE.

[Doc2527]

Hi EIE

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "you have 14 days"?

I have a repossession hearing coming up on 8th Sept 2009, I wasnt aware that I had a limited time?

I am now worried, if this micko has only 14 days left, how does that leave me??

 

Doc:?

[enoughisenough]

Hi doc I'm on the move at the moment but I will respond later on. The 14 days refers to the filing of the defence. Don't worry too much. I've fought these off a few times now.

 

Keep the faith eie.

[enoughisenough]

Hi Doc and also Micko,

 

These actions can be fought off but there are no guarantees and it depends on the relative strengths and weaknesses of your situations.

 

Micko I'll reread your postings on the other thread to get myself up to speed.

 

Doc, I'll need to ask you a few questions via pm and then try to feed back.

 

One obvious thing to do if you want to put a spanner in the works is counterclaim for all the charges on the basis of the UTCCRs and counterclaim for all the legal fees which have not been awarded by the court.

 

Be in touch again soon.

 

Keep the faith EiE.

[Ell-enn]

Hi EIE

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "you have 14 days"?

I have a repossession hearing coming up on 8th Sept 2009, I wasnt aware that I had a limited time?

I am now worried, if this micko has only 14 days left, how does that leave me??

 

Doc:?

 

Hi there, it refers to the filing of your defence, but most courts will accept your defence up to a week before the the hearing. If you need help with a statement for No 27 of the N121M defence form, let me know and I'll help you with it.

 

If you can offer even a small amount towards your arrears each month in addition to the normal monthly payment you should be OK.

 

Ell-enn

[Dougal16T]

Good morning all

 

Thanks to advice I received from these online discussion groups I managed to fight off repossession twice from the same company (GE Money), the first time it was the day of the eviction and the second time it was 4 working days before!!

 

I'm not particularly good, but the advice and help I received from everyone did the trick.

 

Basically what happened was terrible arrears built up over two years following very bitter divorce (her broomstick and black cat kept getting in my way...)

 

I really thought that I was going to lose everything, but the District Judge at my County Court heard my personal application at 10.45 today (Eviction due at 12 noon!!), and suspended the Warrant for 2 months with leave for me to apply to further extend. He veered towards a permanent suspension pending the sale of the property, I believe this was because, I said " This is a case where a sub-prime lender who purchased the mortgage from another lender by acquisition of their company (GE Money acquired the I Group), and has persistently failed to respond to correspondence". Copies of my correspondence were provided by myself to the Judge with proof of receipt by GE Money.

 

He was not very happy with GE Money or my ex-wife (!!) - The reason for GE is their lack of response and failure to deal with my financial difficulties despite being on notice to that effect. He considered the possibility of 'rolling up' the arrears and adding them to the amount outstanding. He made no order for the arrears to be paid. Unfortunately for my ex-wife, this was the Judge who made the Order at the FDR, (which I am considering revisiting in the light of Myerson-v-Myerson, even though that is going to further Appeal), His view was that my ex should pay her half share of all bills, which he had ordered her to at the FDR, forthwith, and in any event he left the 'door open' for me to apply to him for an Order to that effect.

 

To all those out there who think that there is no hope of Justice being on your side, I say there is and even when it seems hopeless don't give up!!

(I almost did, and could have let down a great number of people - my motto will always be 'Remember it's YOUR money they're after!')

 

Just hope this helps - this was the first time I had to attend Court to stop the proposed repossession....

 

Then more news, the Eviction date had been suspended until 8th June 2009, I applied for an Extension of Time on 2nd June, (the Eviction Warrant had still to be re-issued I was told - I didn't know that!), hearing 10.30 a.m. on 2nd June.

 

DJ agreed to allow a further 2 months and told GE Money solicitor (a local agent), that the 'property MUST remain with the borrowers in order to effect a sale which is beneficial to all parties.' He also told him that he (the DJ) was not pleased that the Mortgage Protocol had not been adhered to, and they had not contacted me to discuss a plan to add the arrears to the remaining term (rolling up the arrears).

 

The Order stated that there was an 'Extension of Time to 10th August 2009, with liberty to apply'!!

 

That was the second time......Then I sold the property some 7 weeks later.

 

All I can say is I know how bad those who are facing repossession feel, I have never felt so low and alone.

 

BUT I did try and that is (in my view) the most important part, being successful was a bonus.

 

I hope I have helped, if you need any info about my case please let me know.

 

As always best wishes to all

 

Dougal

[enoughisenough]

For clarification

 

Statement 27 is the bit where they ask for exceptional circumstances such as illness, bereavement, redundancy separation etc. Or if you believe the repossession would cause extreme hardship.

 

Ell-en is right though. If you can start 'chipping off' the arrears and keep to your payments you should be ok. THis is a bit of a laugh as the charges will be more than the overage. I pointed this out to the judge and he went mad with them and ordered another hearing on the lawfulness of the charges.

 

Your basic defence must be that you can afford to pay off the arrears. Also read this.

 

Cheltenham & Gloucester v Norgan

[Doc2527]

Hi EIE and Ell-enn

 

I have sent a PM.

 

Regards

 

Doc

[Suetonius]

Post deleted by Suetonius

Edited August 14, 2009 by Suetonius

[Suetonius]

Post deleted by Suetonius

Edited August 14, 2009 by Suetonius

[enoughisenough]

Hi Doc

 

I've responded to your PM in as full a manner as I can. Some of what I have said has been directly referenced by Suetonius right here.

 

Suetonius may I just take this moment to say that this is a hugely useful contribution you have made. Excellent stuff. Many thanks.

 

EiE.

[micko19]

Ok I have to tell you I pulled them up on the charges few months ago and they have waivered all the late payment fees. They are also aware that they can delay repo's.

 

My sort of last straw of hope was the fact that the forged signatures and the evidence that the MCOB rules(section 4.7) were not followed would amount to misrepresenting the loan and rendering it void. I had an inappropriate loan foisted on me and no due care was excercised in selecting a product for me. The special conditions specified that invented unsecured loans be paid off also ...invented by the IFA...

 

However i do know how bent the system is and am aware that many judges just rubberstamp these repo's and as I say I am fully expecting the worst but will keep fighting till the end. Securitisation is important and the future may bring some changes to the law so I will make the point that the arrangement was misled and did not involve real lenders so it goes on record.

 

The police have been informed.... and i fully expect to wade through a few attempted fob offs there as well..

 

Also setonious you mention "the loan I originally applied for" .....I never applied for any loan and was given no choices whatsoever..... with the IFA misleading potential lenders by saying I had CCJ'S!!

 

thanks for all the advice

 

mick

Edited August 14, 2009 by micko19
CCJ

[Suetonius]

Post deleted by Suetonius

Edited August 14, 2009 by Suetonius

[Suetonius]

Post deleted by Suetonius

Edited August 14, 2009 by Suetonius

[Suetonius]

Post deleted by Suetonius

Edited August 14, 2009 by Suetonius

[micko19]

Thanks for your directness and your opinions.

 

Do you believe there is no remedies for the misrepresentations in my case regarding forgeries and falsification of search criteria when offering Independent Financial Advice...

 

The issue of securitization is one on which I must be really honest and say I know little about....however.. I would say one could be forgiven for wondering why the company you are getting your mortgage from Beacon Home Loans suddenly becomes a company called Redstone(without any employees also called HBV EUROPE) and is administered by a company called HML in Skipton. None of these facts of which you are ever made aware of... If this is the acceptable level of mortgage transparency in agreements god help us all. We can all look forward to the next day we wake up with an empty pension pot.... nothing in the Bank....... and a Bankrupt Government....

 

Sorry for the rant and thanks again for your advice...also i have sent passport copies and licences and very thorough timelined documentation to both police and FOS..

 

micko