home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

I made the same mistake, fighting over the BK, because it was false, instead of keeping an eye on were the administration was going.

The administration of the estate, ( from when the trustees involved formally), start a process ( at the lower courts ) , and this process ( the ins and outs of it ) are detailed in the SIPs, are basicaly the rules they have to act by. One of them ( cant remember witch, will check tomorrow ) , set out the rules for the relationships between trustees/creditors/solisitors, one sets out the financial rules around charging agisnt any remaining asset, At any time during the administration, you can challange or request a judge consider a part at the lower court.

Basically, if the Bk has asset in there estate, after the mortgagee+creditors+OR fees+initial court and solicitors costs ( for the bankruptcy order only ), then they have some level of control with the trustees and the administration. The more asset the BK has, the more say they have.

There is also the consideration, of who is the biggest creditor if the mortgage company were not part of the bankruptcy action. In some cases, this can be the bankrupt ( due to remaing asset in the estate )

A real lot depends on how much asset is left in the initial estate, before the trustees fees

Hmm, it's interesting what you're saying, CC. If the T in B (Trustee in Bankruptcy) costs/ fees were fair, it's unlikely there would even be a charge on the OP's husband's estate. The creditor's fees also needs to be looked at in detail through a court application, I think it's called Application Notice - not sure if it's Form N244 or other. The original amount for the bankruptcy petition and subsequent BK Order was 2012 for "less than a £1000."

CC, did you say that these T in B/ Creditors' costs/ fees rules changed at common law (case law), or through BIS (gov) Technical Manual procedure? I know LPA Receivers hike up costs for mortgage situations when forcing a sale or possession in favour of the bank (mortgagee). As the BK (BR) was made in 2012, the bankruptcy period is 1 year, which takes normal BK discharge to 2013. The T in B/ Receiver has 3 years to try and force a sale of the property: EA 2002, which would expire 2015 or 2016 if the 3 year clock ran after the discharge period. Parliament, in another article I read in the past, says it's not possible to lay claim to the property after the 3 years. So, how can this claim still be live now if based on the 2015 date, or alternatively time must be about to run out on the 2016 date.

Update to immediately above paragraph.

Insolvency Tech manual at para. 31.3.72 states the 3 year rule for sale of a domestic property runs from when the bankruptcy is made, and after this period the claim by the Receiver acting as trustee is simply lost:

"31.3.72 Effect of the family home provisions
The official receiver, as trustee, has three years beginning with the date of bankruptcy order [note 4] (though see paragraph 31.3.80 for an exception to this start date) within which to deal with (see paragraph 31.3.83) the bankrupt’s interest in any qualifying property (see paragraph 31.3.71), otherwise the property will re-vest in the bankrupt with the consequence that that interest will be lost to the creditors. https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov..._3.htm#31.3.71

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

I made the same mistake, fighting over the BK, because it was false, instead of keeping an eye on were the administration was going.

The administration of the estate, ( from when the trustees involved formally), start a process ( at the lower courts ) , and this process ( the ins and outs of it ) are detailed in the SIPs, are basicaly the rules they have to act by. One of them ( cant remember witch, will check tomorrow ) , set out the rules for the relationships between trustees/creditors/solisitors, one sets out the financial rules around charging agisnt any remaining asset, At any time during the administration, you can challange or request a judge consider a part at the lower court.

Basically, if the Bk has asset in there estate, after the mortgagee+creditors+OR fees+initial court and solicitors costs ( for the bankruptcy order only ), then they have some level of control with the trustees and the administration. The more asset the BK has, the more say they have.

There is also the consideration, of who is the biggest creditor if the mortgage company were not part of the bankruptcy action. In some cases, this can be the bankrupt ( due to remaing asset in the estate )

A real lot depends on how much asset is left in the initial estate, before the trustees fees

CC, here's a pdf doc for Insolvency practitioners fees/ expenses which I sourced from the link you posted. The fees apply from April 6 2010. Page 8/ Appendix B discusses Trustee's Fixed fees: On the realisation Scale, 20% of the 1st £5,000; 15% for the next 5k; and 10% for the next 90k. On the distribution scale, for the 1st £5k, 10%; the next £5k, 7.5%; the next £90k, 5%

.... http://www.icaew.com/~/media/corpora...0apr%2010.ashx

Great website, thanks for this source.

Here is also the Insolvency Rules 1986 for Trustee Fees:

Insolvency Rules 1986 at Rule 6318 relates to 'Trustee Fixed fees: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1...uneration/made

[Debt Camel]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

The lawyer for the debt collector would be joined as claimant probably, and the lawyers for the Op/ her husband would be lawyers joined for the defence. The unscrupulous debt collector wants to make sure they get their slice of the pie so are using a lawyer to pile on the pressure. The OP's lawyer likely recognised this unfairness, so wanted to appeal to the High Court to limit the powers of the Trustee in Bankruptcy. The debt collector's lawyer sounds to me like he/ they have unduely influenced said Trustee's public (statutory) position.

All sounds highly unlikely to me. I don't think we have a full picture of what has happened. From what we have been told the amount he was made bankrupt for was tiny. There is simply no reason for Lowells to think they are more likely to get their money by behaving like this rather than sitting back and wait until the TiB sorts out the estate.

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

All sounds highly unlikely to me. I don't think we have a full picture of what has happened. From what we have been told the amount he was made bankrupt for was tiny. There is simply no reason for Lowells to think they are more likely to get their money by behaving like this rather than sitting back and wait until the TiB sorts out the estate.

Only lawyer fees can accrue up to 10s of £1000s.. very unlikely the TiB's Fixed Fees get anywhere near this figure. When the Op got a lawyer involved, is probably when the TiB got their own lawyer. If you're a creditor and your £1000 credit could turned into several £1000 by hiring a lawyer to find a way to have the property sold, or make it so uncomfortable that the Op will be forced to sell, you may do the same as the creditor. It's like a sale of a property will be relatively inexpensive but if one party challenges the sale, then lawyers come in for the spoils, taking the amount up to £15,000 quite easily.

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

Hi everyone!
I need some serious advice here because I don't seem to get anywhere with my legal adviser.
I am not bankrupt and I own my house fully which was bought in 2002: I paid for the initial deposit by myself, and till date I am paying all mortgage payment as well as utility bills and council tax though my husband name's appears because he is head of the family while I was the bread winner at the time while he was a student. The law firm that acted on my behalf in 2002 also advised me to draw a deed of trust in favour of my children which was done.
My husband was made bankrupt by a debt collection agency called Lowell Portfolio in his absence for a so called debt from vodaphone of less than a thousand pounds in 2012 and are trying their best to sell the house to pay that deb,t, adding their own fees to it which of course runs into ten of thousand of pounds...
He tried to get the bankruptcy order cancelled by stating that the debt was statute barred and that in any case he never owed vodaphone and had never agreed to acknowledge debt or make any payment, the lawyers acting for lowell portfolio made life very difficult and played fully on his lack of knowledge of court procedures. There are now trustees in bankruptcy.
Later on, while I was in court with my husband, the debt collectors' lawyer and the trustees' somehow entered the courtroom without us being called and asked the judge to make an order for sale of my home, claiming that my husband owns half of it because his name appears on the Land register, without allowing me to have a say in the matter.
After formal complaint in writing to the court, another judge suspended that order for sale.
the two successive lawyer that we have instructed do not seems to know what to do about the matter and have withdraw on each occasion at the eve of a court hearing leaving us with no rep on each occasion. it looks like everybody is afraid to stand against this abuse.
in March the trustees in bakruptcy sent a warrant for the repossession of my home but in the county court the judge suspended the order on hearing my lawyer stating that I and my children are living there and that I was in fact the owner.
Before withdrawing, my lawyer started a appeal case in the High court against the decision made in my husband's bankruptcy matter for the sale of the house but I am not convinced it was the right course of action or the right court because I have instructed him to affirm my full right on my house not to fight my husband's bankruptcy matter.
What am I to do now, I do not want to sell my home as I am not bankrupt and the whole matter looks like a sham to me?
Many thanks.

The remedy was not statute barring under the Limitation Act but barred under the Enterprise Act 2002, which should have been your/ husband's defence. As I stated below, the Trustee in Bankruptcy (acting for the creditors) has 3 years from when the bankruptcy period started to claim to sell the property but once this period (the 3 years) expires, the claim by said Trustee is simply lost. The Limitation Act and the Insolvency Act 1996 will have been amended by the Enterprise Act 2002, to protect domestic properties such as yours. Did you/ your husband use this defence or just state the Limitation Act? It shouldn't be too late now to rely on the EA 2002 as a defence - as this is insolvency law and affective currently. It seems the Trustees' claim to your property ran out at some point in 2015, 3 years after the bankruptcy commenced.

As for Lowell's I do not know of any claim they have except if they had their own charge on your property prior to bankruptcy period commencing. If this were the case, then Lowell's have the legal right to ask the court for a Order of Sale in their own right.

[Debt Camel]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

Only lawyer fees can accrue up to 10s of £1000s.. very unlikely the TiB's Fixed Fees get anywhere near this figure.

Where there is a property involved, TiB fees are often over 30k.

[JulieM]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

I imagine that poor Nicola's head is spinning after reading all the above.

As DC suggests , I think there is more to the history, it seems very heavy handed to go straight to BR for such a small debt.

So so maybe some answers
was there a ccj
was there the correct process for Bankruptcy

I too wonder why two solicitors withdrew at the last minute.

Personally I would never treat a man as head of the household just because he is a man but each to their own.

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

I imagine that poor Nicola's head is spinning after reading all the above.

As DC suggests , I think there is more to the history, it seems very heavy handed to go straight to BR for such a small debt.

So so maybe some answers
was there a ccj
was there the correct process for Bankruptcy

I too wonder why two solicitors withdrew at the last minute.

Personally I would never treat a man as head of the household just because he is a man but each to their own.

Well, not wanting to Invade upon a person's right to privacy, but the man being the 'head' of the family is largely now a religious concept but it wasn't always like this. We're not here to suggest to families how they're run, neither judge them, but merely to offer support.

[Openlaw15]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

Where there is a property involved, TiB fees are often over 30k.

Well in this case the debt was only a £1000, so it would be disproportionate to have fees in the 10s of 1000s. As CC provided, Trustees Fees are limited as it's a statutory function. I know they try it on sometimes, ie a clerk for the Official Receiver. The other matter is the op's husband has no legal ownership per se - rather rights possibly at equity, ie beneficial rights. The Op paid the mortgage and deposit so it's doubtful whether the op even had beneficial ownership rights to even attract the interest of the T in B's for purposes of the statutory estate for the Insolvency Act 1986.

[Crazy council]

Re: home repossession from Lowell portfolio for a disputed statute barred debt

Hi

@PRETYNICOLA The questions i put in post 4, once answered, will give anyone a better idea how to advise you. Some of the rules around the administration of an estate, are relient on these