Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

[Guest]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

I can see why they would want to but it back . The original lender would be liable for providing the rest of the funds under the contract between the borrower(mortgagor) and the original lender (mortgagee), because they were the parties to that particular contract, the contract for the assignment of the charge would between the lender and the third party(which is presumably why the original lender had to buy it back at the full value).

[Streetwise]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

andy58

The charge was taken by the lender for £38k from the outset and within the contract it stated it would be provided in two stages. the first stage was released £10k the lender registered the charge the next day for £38k ( documentation from land registry)

The lender a few weeks later assigned the charge to an inidvidual outside the UK for £38k and from my understanding, this amount plus interest from that date was due by the borrower. My understanding is that this was a legal assignment (this is what i am trying to ascertain) and the third party should have been dealing directly with the borrower to provide the second stage release, not the lender.

The original charge was executed to reflect a consideration of £38k and Yes £10k was the only amount provided

To get to the point why the original lender is pursuing for repossession. The lender went back and purchased back the charge from the third party outside the UK for the exact same amount £38k. this was done a month after the expiry date of the original contract between the lender and the borrower. As I understand he had to do this so that he could provide the borrower with the calling up notice for the £10k plus fees even though he was the one that breached the contract.

As i mentioned earlier, I had no intention to provide half a story, all i wanted to do was keep the post simple and hopefully an answer to the issue with the type of transfer that took place for the only reason that the lenders solicitor made many threats of increase in monies due (to the original lender), to repossess (on behalf of the original lender)and also while all the time the original lender did not hold the security.

I simply want to understand who was in control and who was liable to produde the second stage funds after the transfer from the lender to the other guy took place.

You never had a contract or agreement with the third party,your agreement was with the original lender,from what you say you only stumbled upon the third party by chance,but is it your name that is on the title deed.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

I can see why they would want to but it back . The original lender would be liable for providing the rest of the funds under the contract between the borrower(mortgagor) and the original lender (mortgagee), because they were the parties to that particular contract, the contract for the assignment of the charge would between the lender and the third party(which is presumably why the original lender had to buy it back at the full value).

What i am looking to find out is, what it wrong of them to put the borrower in this position without notification and authorisation rom the borrower, this is why i am trying to ascertain what type of transfer it was. To add to what i have said, the actual contract was between another company name whom the lender owned (was a Partner) and the security was in the name of the lenders Limited company. As i mentioned, this is a small part of the big picture there is much more serious things going on where the borrowers financial adviser is a very good mate and ex employeee of the lender and very shortly before the lender released the first stage funds the financial adviser took up new employment with the lender without telling the borrower and as i have also said very shortly afterwards the original lender pulled the plug on the rest of the funds.

Its a mess

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

I can see why they would want to but it back . The original lender would be liable for providing the rest of the funds under the contract between the borrower(mortgagor) and the original lender (mortgagee), because they were the parties to that particular contract, the contract for the assignment of the charge would between the lender and the third party(which is presumably why the original lender had to buy it back at the full value).

Do you think that the lender was wrong to sell it at full value when he knew he had only provided a part of the loan for which he took the security for?

[Guest]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

Do you think that the lender was wrong to sell it at full value when he knew he had only provided a part of the loan for which he took the security for?

certainly do, I think form what you say it is probably one of the reasons they reclaimed it.

[Streetwise]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

Do you think that the lender was wrong to sell it at full value when he knew he had only provided a part of the loan for which he took the security for?

Definitely.

[Guest]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

It is an intersting one.

When owner creates the charge he does does so in order to secure the loan. He agrees to charge on his property for a percentage of its equity value. The charge by way of mortgage is a unilateral agreement(this is why only the owners signature is required), and if properly executed is effective upon delivery.

however there is a bilateral contractual element, in that there is a contract between the parties and the lenders duties include providing the funds in full.
I would think that the failure to perform on that contract would invalidate the lenders rights under the charge, as the agreement in total would be void. It would I suppose be for the property chamber to decide.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

Definitely.

What do you think about the actions of the solicitor, obviously she knew clearly that the lender had only provided a part of the loan. I am thinking that the solicitor should have only released the funds from the third party to the lender for the amount that he was owed at that time and withheld the rest to honor the contract. The other issue is who was responsible for that decision, was it the lender or was it the third party the lender sold it on to.

There is a complaint in writing to the lenders solicitor but they are being very cautious and not providing a proper reply to that question, they also say that the lender had the obligation to tell the borrower about the transfer of charge, this itself leads to me thinking that it was a Legal assignment or Novation. I know there are other types of transfers that can be done but this is between the lender and the third party which does not intimate a legal transfer of the charge.

[Streetwise]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

What do you think about the actions of the solicitor, obviously she knew clearly that the lender had only provided a part of the loan. I am thinking that the solicitor should have only released the funds from the third party to the lender for the amount that he was owed at that time and withheld the rest to honor the contract. The other issue is who was responsible for that decision, was it the lender or was it the third party the lender sold it on to.

There is a complaint in writing to the lenders solicitor but they are being very cautious and not providing a proper reply to that question, they also say that the lender had the obligation to tell the borrower about the transfer of charge, this itself leads to me thinking that it was a Legal assignment or Novation. I know there are other types of transfers that can be done but this is between the lender and the third party which does not intimate a legal transfer of the charge.

What do you hope to gain,what are you looking for,has the original lender instructed his solicitor to start legal action to recover money from the borrower.
Did the work that was to be carried out started,is the project now in limbo.
If you are looking for malpractice by the solicitor the S.R.A. might be your best option.
If you can post up the signatures page of the deed with names omitted did a solicitor tell you what you were signing re the deed.:beagle:

[Guest]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

I think the issue for me would be that the OP has given away £28k of his equity, this is no longer available as the charge would preclude any further advance, if someone had taken £28k out of my bank I would want to know why.

As regards the assignment to the third party, probably via section 136, unlikely to be a notation. The original lender seem to have re acquired the account now so , not sure of the issue in that respect

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

What do you hope to gain,what are you looking for,has the original lender instructed his solicitor to start legal action to recover money from the borrower.
Did the work that was to be carried out started,is the project now in limbo.
If you are looking for malpractice by the solicitor the S.R.A. might be your best option.
If you can post up the signatures page of the deed with names omitted did a solicitor tell you what you were signing re the deed.:beagle:

It is all part of a bigger picture getting this information. The lender has started proceedings, there is issues relating to that also.

The work has been started and is now in limbo all due to the lender requiring something outwith the contract. one thing to note here, when i mention Lender, it relates to the company pursuing the borrower but looking at the OFT and confirmation in writing from the FCA this company hekld a Consumer licence as a Mortgage Broker NOT a Lender even though it is clear on documentation they state themselves as the LENDER.

there is still outstanding replies from the Lenders solicitor relating to a recent complaint letter to ascertain who the lender actually was, who provided the funds. all i can say is the person dealing with the borrower in person and via their solicitors was a Director and a Paartner in the other company who produced the contract. In my view its clear how they are trying to portray themselves but documents from both Partnership and Limited company (under a SAR) clearly show two separate companies involved. Either way the Limited company held no licence to lend, the Partnership company did hold a licence to lend but they are not the lender in the pursuit to repossess.

Its complicated from an outside view!

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

It is an intersting one.

When owner creates the charge he does does so in order to secure the loan. He agrees to charge on his property for a percentage of its equity value. The charge by way of mortgage is a unilateral agreement(this is why only the owners signature is required), and if properly executed is effective upon delivery.

however there is a bilateral contractual element, in that there is a contract between the parties and the lenders duties include providing the funds in full.
I would think that the failure to perform on that contract would invalidate the lenders rights under the charge, as the agreement in total would be void. It would I suppose be for the property chamber to decide.

The lender required a further condition that was not in the contractual terms, it was explained to him by the borrowers solicitor that there is nothing in the contract relating to what he then required before he would release the second stage funds. It was made clear to the borrower that should he/she not accept them then the lender would not release the rest of the funds. The borower didnt and couldnt accept the new conditions of the lender as it would have cost many £thousands that was not budgeted for and would ultimately default on the loan from the lender as the build stage had to be at a certain point with that second stage funds, catch 22

To throw another spanner in the works, just my thinking on this. When the borrower assinged the charge initially it was for the full amount of funds, although it did state in the contract it would be in two stages, should the borrowers solicitor not have risk assessed the potential for problems arising. This is also the same solicitor who when the **** hit the fan reckoned that the borrower should accept the lenders new demands and stated that the lender has the borrower over a barrel, i can understand why the borrower got rid of him.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

What do you hope to gain,what are you looking for,has the original lender instructed his solicitor to start legal action to recover money from the borrower.
Did the work that was to be carried out started,is the project now in limbo.
If you are looking for malpractice by the solicitor the S.R.A. might be your best option.
If you can post up the signatures page of the deed with names omitted did a solicitor tell you what you were signing re the deed.:beagle:

Post removed

[Guest]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

Firstly I would say that writing "!without prejudice" on this makes absolutely no differnce regarding any concerns re it being repeated and possibly used against you, so if you have concerns in that respect i would remove it.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Secured Loan Assignment Helpl please

Firstly I would say that writing "!without prejudice" on this makes absolutely no differnce regarding any concerns re it being repeated and possibly used against you, so if you have concerns in that respect i would remove it.

It is as how i see it but i will take your advice.....