Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

If the agreement/contract is silent as to how notice a notice of assignment should be served , the provisions of the LPA 1925 will prevail. Express notice, in writing, must be given to the borrower and either delivery evidenced (by Affidavit of Service) or sent by registered letter, and not returned, in order to be validly served in accordance with section 196 LPA 1925. If this is not done, the debtor can argue that they did not receive the notice and that the assignee has no right to bring an action against the borrower in its name.

If the original contract/ agreement states that the assignment notice can be made through the NORMAL postal service, IE First class post, the assignment will then be deemed as served.

Service by recordable mail will result in a signature by the debtor to confirm service. If that recorded postal item is then returned to the assignee, the debtor will not have been informed of service, and the assignment is then ineffectual in law until it has been acknowledged.

Does the note have to be signed by the debtor, or can anyone at the address sign. Yes I agree that if the notice is returned it wont have been served.

You mention that the provision can be contracted out by a term of the agreement, do you have authority for this.

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

There is also requirement for notice to be sent under the 2010 eu directive of course

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Can you be so kind as to send a link to that directive
Thanks

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...lation/36/made

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

i am off to the supermarket

back in an hour, lets keep the gray cells going on this as it needs to be nailed down once and for all:tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

It should be noted that there is no crossover between this and a LOPA 196 notice. The section 82a notice only informs the debtor that the assignment has taken place it does not enable it as in the LOPA.

Failure to provide a notice under the EU directive would just be breach of statutory duty.

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Going back to Section 136 LPA 1925, this is silent as to how the notice of assignment should be served. The statutory provision is found under section 196 LPA 1925. This provides that if notice is given to the other party by registered letter and is not returned undelivered, it will have been deemed to have been served. This means that whilst notice may be given expressly in writing, it will not be deemed served unless it has been sent by registered post.

As the registered postal service no longer exists, it will be by the postal operator under recorded mail service.

To answer gravytrains question

quote

You mention that the provision can be contracted out by a term of the agreement, do you have authority for this.

Section 196 (5) also states that its provisions extend to notices required to be served unless a contrary intention appears

That stipulates how any notices necessary under the contract are to be served, that will take precedence over the statutory provision in section 196.

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

I would also welcome comments on this please people

Kinch v Bullard [1998] 4 All ER 650.

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Section 196 (5) also states that its provisions extend to notices required to be served unless a contrary intention appears

That stipulates how any notices necessary under the contract are to be served, that will take precedence over the statutory provision in section 196.

(5)

The provisions of this section shall extend to notices required to be served by any instrument affecting property executed or coming into operation after the commencement of this Act unless a contrary intention appears.
This section refers to the the when the section comes into force and that it will apply to any INSTRUMENT, unless the instrument says otherwise, i do not think that the act can be avoided by a contractual term.
Can't find the case do you have a direct link

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Logical explanation that, i will pose on that one when burning the midnight oil

Any comments as to

Kinch v Bullard [1998] 4 All ER 650.

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

can't find it

[pt2537]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Logical explanation that, i will pose on that one when burning the midnight oil

Any comments as to

Kinch v Bullard [1998] 4 All ER 650.

Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes - [1973] 2 All ER 476

It seems to me from s 196, and also as a matter of construction, that the intending vendor must get
the notice, and subject only to the exemptions provided by s 196, namely that you take every possible reasonable
precaution by giving it by registered post, and the notice is not returned undelivered. But it will be noticed that, when
you use the registered post procedure, it is not the time when you hand it over to the Post Office which counts but
the time when, in the normal course of events, it ought to reach, and nearly always does reach, the addressee.
Accordingly, I do not think the cases which counsel for the plaintiffs cited are relevant here and in my judgment the
notice had to be received by the defendant, and it clearly was not received.

The point which is clear from Holwell is that the notice must be recieved. If a debtor is given notice whether it was by registered post seems to fall away.


Lets not forget , notice of assignment could follow in say a letter of claim from a solicitor acting on behalf of a creditor.

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Thank you for dropping into our little debate pt2537

Case law reference as well, just what the doctor ordered

What i am getting at is this:

The first contact a debtor receives from a debt agency is normally a goodbye letter from the creditor, and a hello from the debt agency saying the debt has been assigned

The first instinct is to phone the debt agency, that will then result in confirmation of receipt of the notice of assignment.

What will be the situation if the debtor ignores all contact with the debt agency, the debt agency then issues a claim stating a notice of assignment has been served. The debtor states he has not received it.

How can the debt agency prove receipt by the debtor of the assignment notice so it is effectual in law

[PlanB]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Thank you for dropping into our little debate pt2537

Case law reference as well, just what the doctor ordered

I'm hoping PT2537 will respond to your post with the typical *A Lister* line "Don't you know who I am?" :argue:

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

No idea who pt2537 is

But what an impact, straight in with case law

Man/women after my own heart