Landlord property is being repossed - please help

[lihi]

Hi

 

I feel like I've been punched in the gut. My landlord owns the two properties I am joined to, I was shocked to get a knock on the door this evening and more so because it was both the guys from each house. I was shocked to find them on the door, they came in and told me that they had both received letters today from receivers for the landlords mortgage company RBOS. I haven't received mine but should receive it tomorrow.

 

I signed a year contract at the end of April, I know that my deposit is protected but other than that I'm not sure what else to do. One of my neighbours advised me not to pay any more rent under no circumstances, save it and move once we get evicted. He's been told we should be here until just after xmas

 

I've never been in this situation before, I'm reeling with shock and have been physically sick. We moved here at the end of April and I'm tempted to go to the landlords house and punch him on the nose because he must of known when we signed the tenancies.

 

I can't afford to move into another rented property, no landlords will accept hb in my area now so I have no chance and it will be back to the council. I'm so upset because I worked hard to save my money and go into rented and now this. I'm devastated and can't stop crying.

 

Please someone share their experience or knowledge of this area and what to do next. We are in receipt of HB or will be once they finish reviewing our info, I've already planned to visit one of the law centres first thing.

[MrShed]

To be totally blunt, not a lot to add.

 

If the landlord had permission from the lender to let the properties, then they should honour the tenancy. Invariably in these situations, they dont have permission.

 

As such, the lender can force eviction.

 

Without meaning to lump too much on, why does your neighbour believe it will be Xmas before eviction occurs? Normally these things happen a LOT quicker.

 

Although unlikely, bear in mind that he may not have defaulted on any mortgage for YOUR property. As such, wait until a letter is received before assuming you will have to vacate.

 

You can sue the landlord for failure to adhere to contract after the event if you so wished - however, doesnt sound like there is realistically any chance of getting money out of him.

[lihi]

He mentioned xmas, because I think, he had spoken to the fixed charge receivers. I've just checked companies house and the company has definitely been dissolved. The neighbour gave me a copy of his letter, the other neighbour received the same letter and am waiting for mine. What I am wondering is my tenancy is with an individual but the recievers letter mentions a company. I'm assuming the landlord owns this company as it begins with his first name. i.e. john properties

 

The letter says

I am writing to advise that 'mrs smith' and I were appointed fixed charge receivers over the freehold interest in the above property on the 15 September 2010.

 

The appointment was made by RBOS under the terms of the legal charge.

 

The effect of this in practice is that the receivers have stepped into the shoes of 'company'. therefore, 'company' is no longer in a position to demand or accept rental or any other payment from you, although as receivers, we may instruct our managing agents to liaise with you in this regards. Any rent you pay to 'company' from now on will not be recognised by the receivers as having been paid. I would be grateful if you could arrange to contact me as soon as you are able in order to let me know the following;

details as to who and when rental has last been paid

also whether your property is let furnished or unfurnished

if you have any gas heating and if so when the boiler or fires were last inspected by a corgi registered inspector

do you share occupation of the property with others

 

would you please telephone blah blah blah at your earliest convenience to discuss. if you wish to refer this letter to a legal adviser or the CAB then please do so.

 

The company that the receiver mentions is registered as dissolved on companies house. I've just spoken to the other neighbour now I've regained some composure and he said he spoke to the receiver who told him he should try and get out as soon as possible but I think he's said that just to make his life easier because then they won't have to pay to get us evicted. We have no other option but to go to the council and I know they'll make us drag it out at every hurdle before they house us.

 

Theres no point taking the landlord to court, more wasted money. Might as well save it for a move.

 

Thanks for your advice, what is the process now, what should we expect? Should we start packing? Do I get our housing benefit suspended until this hell is over.

[Aequitas]

First, if the company has been dissolved it no longer exists and all its property belongs to the crown. If that is the case the receivers have no authority. I think a check needs to be made to establish exactly what the status of the company is.

 

If it turns out that the company has not been dissolved, then if:

 

i. your tenancy was created before the property was mortgaged to HBOS; or,

 

ii. your tenancy was granted with the consent of HBOS; or,

 

iii. if the mortgage did not require consent for letting

 

the receivers/HBOS cannot bring your tenancy to an end before the expiry of the fixed term.

 

Otherwise, the tenancy is not binding on HBOS. There is though an argument that the terms of the letter are such that they will prevent HBOS form asserting that they are not bound by the tenancy. The letter gives the impression that the company is no longer the landlord. If a court agreed it would be bound by the decision in Chatsworth Properties Ltd v Effiom. However in that case the letter was more specific as it referred to the former landlord.

 

In any event the terms of the letter do not give any indication that the receivers are contemplating a sale, but on the contrary that they intend, at least for the time being, to collect rent.

[lihi]

Thanks. The company they refer to has definitely been marked as dissolved by companies house but my tenancy is with an individual, no company mentioned on the tenancy agreement. the company is recorded as 7011 - development and sell real estate. I know the history of the houses, its not even 2 years old it used to be a scrap yard and was bought by a developer and 3 homes were built on it, the homes went up for sale after completion but as the market had crashed they wouldn't sell so they were rented out, the first lot of tenants each left the houses in march for various reasons. We were lead to believe by agent that the developer was a person not company which seemed right as the tenancy is with a person, no company mentioned. When I signed some information for the tenancy at the start I noticed that all 3 houses were all up for sale. My gut instinct tells me that there are no mortgages for these houses, they were owned/built by the developer with a bridging loan from the bank until properties were sold and now the business has been dissolved these are being prepared for release to offset against company debt. But how does that fit with us, our tenancy is with 'john smith' and the letter is about 'john matthew homes limited'. Does this change the situation for permission from mortgager and notice period available to us? From what my other neighbours said from his conversation with receivers they are intending on getting rid of the houses which is why xmas was mentioned but for the short term will be collecting rent. One neighbour has asked me not to pay rent to anyone but I will have to play ball if I go to the council otherwise they'll throw 'intentionally homeless' me but if they're selling anyway why the hell should I, can they pursue me for rent not paid as of date given? The receiver said another landlord might buy the property and your homes could be safe but to me thats as reliable as saying father christmas might buy it - do I realistically need to start packing and putting my stuff in storage now?

[lihi]

Okay so done some research. The company mentioned on receiver letter is definitely resolved but the person who I have been paying my rent to and his wife resigned from the dissolved company as directors in 26 August 2008. My tenancy started in April 2010. The company has been a running joke and people who run these type of businesses are fly by nights and need their heads banging against a wall. The company has loads of stuff against them over the years like suspended compulsory strike offs. FIDIOTS, these crooks knew what they were doing.

[MrShed]

All that is important from the repossession perspective is who is the mortgagee of the properties - not who is listed as landlord in the tenancy agreement.

 

Aequitas makes an excellent point above as well - it appears that they arent going for immediate eviction, which would imply they are going to honour the fixed term of the tenancy.

[lihi]

So today I meet with solicitor. He's told me that until the company provide the charge document I should refuse to deal with them, there is nothing to say this is nothing more than a [problem], though we know its not. The receivers supplied an appointment document on request for a charge document, is there another word for the document I need because I've googled it and can't find anything. For now I don't pay rent to anyone. He's told me to tell HB straight away as they may withold payments and could result in eviction quicker but I have to stay until the court bailiffs turn up to turf me out which could take up to 6 months from first notice and will cost me 600approx in court fees.

 

At this stage the bank is intending on letting us stay until the end of the tenancy and then on a month by month basis until they are sold off but this will depend on the lender if they change their mind. This depends on how well they react to me being on HB and what a total pain in the backside they are being at the moment.

 

I had the landlords agent call me to say the landlord is going to arrange to buy or transfer the property back and it will all be sorted in a couple of days after a meeting and he only found out yesterday in a letter. He got a mouthful, when I asked why his boss was letting properties that he didn't own? No answer. I asked him why he was pocketing rent from a let property that belonged to a company he resigned from over 2 years ago. No answer. Either he is extremely naive or thinks I'm stupid if I'm going to believe it will be sorted in a few days. I immediately phoned the receiver and the landlord has no more right to buy the property than myself or a man off the street and will take months and he will have to pay full wack. The receiver told me he was only trying to get rent out of me, I laughed and said you will not be getting anything out of me, you've not shown any proof that you have the right to collect this debt and until you do you're not getting anything either.

 

So does anyone know what the next step is? I know that nothing has gone to court yet, the receiver said the lendee has defaulted and the terms of agreement say the lender can step in with receivers, they can remedy it but as the company has gone under no one will remedy it. Do we have to wait for it to go to court before they have a right to request rent? Anything on what to expect next?

 

Thanks Mr Shed and Aequitas for your input so far.

[/url]

[lihi]

So I asked for a copy of the charge notice by the bank and I've been given a land registry document which shows the charge was entered onto the property in 2006 (we moved in 2010), we've also been sent a declaration form which asks me to sign an acknowledge that the properties will be sold soon after being told verbally we'll be allowed to stay until the end of the tenancy. I've told the receivers property managers that until they provide evidence they have a legal right to collect against the property I will not give or sign anything. Can I sit back and wait for this to go to court before I hand over cash, I know that someone is trying to step in and take over the land and the debt, is it worth standing back to see what happens incase it prevents this going to court?

 

I'm not sure what I was expecting but it wasn't the land registry document. I can't see the solicitor at the law centre until next week if I can get time off but I don't want to go just to be told I've got the wrong document. The solictor needs to see a copy of the charge which gives conditions inc whether there is a clause about no sub-letting. The document I have shows the history of the land since 1929 and shows a charges register. I don't think this is what I want but I'm not sure what it is that I want, I know this sounds strange but does anyone know the name of the document that I need to ask for?

 

Thanks

[lihi]

Can anyone answer my question about the document, please?

[Kentish Lass]

The Land Registry document is probably the right one. The charge referred to is the charge against the property - when a mortgage is taken out, the mortgage company's interest is recorded as a charge against the property. This prevents the property from being sold without the mortgage company's charge being removed e.g. by paying off the mortgage.

 

By the charge document, the solicitor may be looking for a copy of the actual mortgage document and I am not sure that would be available to you - this would show whether the mortgage document allowed for the property to be sublet by the owner. The land registry may have a copy in their records which you can get a copy of via their website - you will need the title number from the document you already have. If available, it costs about £8 I think.

 

By the way, if you are not paying your rent to anyone, make sure you put it into a saving account so that you can pay it when required - which you will surely have to at some time.

[johnhowell]

I doubt any mention of Renting would appear on the Land Registry title documents you can purchase on line. HMLR transcribe off the original deeds the clauses they wish - not all clauses.

 

John

[Dragons Dennis]

Use the situationm to your advantage. I was in a similar postition many years ago when my flat I was renting was repossed. A letter (not in an envelope) was put through my letter box by Abbey National telling the owner (my landlord) of the respossesion.

 

I rang Abbey National and explained my position as a sitting tenant. I did a 'deal' with them whereby I stayed for 4 months rent free on condition I gave them the keys at the end. I was very pleased and they had no hassle at all.

 

Ironically, the landlord rang me a couple of days later to ask why I hadn't paid the rent. He claimed he knew nothing about it, but he certainly did.

[lihi]

Hi, thanks for coming back to me.

 

Thanks KL, I will be putting the rent payments into a spare account until someone can prove they have the right to collect rent.

 

The land registry document shows the charge was applied well before I moved in, which has answered one of my questions but my solicitor wants to see proof that the bank has the right to step in and take over the property. He was quite specific asking for the charge document but because the receivers and property management company seem blank every time I ask for the document I'm wondering if I'm asking for the correct document. I think the solicitor wants to understand whether the landlord has the right to sub-let. He's told me I don't have to offer them a copy of my tenancy agreement but theres no reason why I should give it to them and that I should use it as a bartering tool, to get the charge doc before I give them the tenancy agreement.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience DD, unfortunately because I cleared out my savings to move into this property 5 months ago I will have to go back to social housing which means I can't leave until the court bailiffs come to remove me. I think the person I've been paying my rent to may be buying the properties but no one is telling us anything so I can't make any plans.

[lihi]

Still sitting about waiting for something to happen, apparently the houses will be put up for auction but it's only hearsay. I'm sick with stress wondering about whats going to happen and when.

 

Do I have any recall on the estate agent, for the reason that they never obtained proof of ownership on the property before vetting us as applicants. Had they have had this before they set up the tenancy we would never be in this situation. He has renounced his original offer to transfer us across to one of his other properties if we supply a months rent up front, and because the receiver has his contact info he's now supplying all our personal information to the receiver, against my request - against my wishes. Can he go against my request? Is he wrong to share my data without my consent?

 

I know there is some recall against the person who we thought was our landlord and paid our rent to, can someone explain exactly what it is.

 

Thanks

[lihi]

anyone?