serious advice

[rida abdelwahab]

need advice,
2003 my wife and i wanted to buy a property form a company that said they could help us.The mortgage broker although had a different company name, worked for this particular company that sold the property (i will call them F)
The owner of F said, we can buy his flat, but he will charge us more (at the time the property was worth 130.000, but he said he would value it as 195.000) so when the mortgage broker filled up the application form for us he would say we paid the deposit (so the mortgage would be 170,000 and the Mr F once we get the mortgage would profit by 40,000 from his 130,000 flat) ok, we did over pay for the flat, but thats ok, because we would never get a mortgage otherwise, , he also wanted to give us a cheqeue for 2000 to furnish the property, which we were happy with.
Then the problem started when they were going to give us the cheqeue for the 2000 pounds, he gave us a hand typed contract (nothing offical ) with the property details, a heading which they typed up, saying that , he has given my wife and i 30k, and that we should pay this money to him, plus he has given us 2000 which we must pay, at first we refused, but they said , "dont worry, this is only for the 2000, the other bit is just in case they ask about the deposit and where it came from "so stupidly we signed it!
as soon as we did ,they put a caution on our property and were threatneing us to pay them monthly. since then compnay F had gone into adminstration, as soon as i was aware of that i manged to remove the caution, but since then another company has taken over saying that they had bought the "loan book" from F.So i have been doing my own investigation trying to find out about the deposit being paid, (which obviously it hasnt because he cant pay the 30k to himself,he just made out that it was paid) I contacted my solicitor( which worked for him too) my mortgage company and none of them has any documentation or otherwise of a deposit being paid, and I have asked this new company taking over the account if they have and documentation and all they say is "youve signed the contract youve made payments in the past so you have to pay, and besides we have put the caution on again"
My question s this, yes we did sign the contract, and we were happy to pay the 2000 pounds, but surely in any contract , shouldnt the creditor prove that this sum of money was indeed paid to us? because such a large sum of money would have been paid to us by cheqeue or bank transfer ? as the contract said the sum of XXXXXx was paid to us ? do i have a case here? or am i just clutching on straws? shoudl they not have proof or documentation that this money was given to us!

[paulb2905]

Re: serious advice

I think you should put some company names up for this - certainly the one that has now ceased trading.

Despite the advice you were given im afraid this "smacks" of Fraud to which you were a party which is a serious crime.

So i think you need to be very careful in what you proceed with.

[Angry Cat]

Re: serious advice

A lot of dodgy deals were struck in the 1990's prior to the tightening up of mortgage regs/ endowment mis-selling.

Sorry to say it, but you must have been extremely naive or, desperate to enter into such a contract without your solicitor going over the details prior to entering into same.

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

In 2003 you wanted to buy a property worth £130,000. The mortgage broker (“F”) worked for the vendor. Correct?

The vendor (who owns the mortgage brokerage) said they would sell the flat for £170,000, even though it was only worth £130,000 and that you could apply the £40,000 difference as a deposit.

If so, this would be 100% mortgage fraud.It would be defrauding the mortgagee (the lender).

Once you were in receipt of the mortgage funds of £170,000, F would then profit by £40,000 from the £130,000 flat. Correct?

You were happy to “over pay” for the property because you would never have got a mortgage otherwise.

You received from the vendor a cheque for £2000 to furnish the property, which you were happy with. A sort of cash-back arrangement. The problem started when the Vendor wanted to give you the cheque for the £2000 pounds. The vendor gave you a hand-typed contract (not drawn up by solicitors) with the property details, a heading which they typed up saying that he had given you both £30,000 and that you should pay this money to him, plus the £2,000 which you must pay. Correct?

At first you refused. The vendor said "don’t worry” as the contract was for the £2000, “the other bit” of £30,000 was just in case someone asked about the deposit and where it came from.

The vendor will have received the £30,000 already, so he is also defrauding you in asking for the £30,000 as well.

The vendor has put a Caution on the property and begun threatening you asking for you to repay the £30,000 they have presumably already received! Ten bucks and my left nut says they are not using solicitors to pursue this debt yet. If they are you might want to run the mortgage fraud argument by them.

F has gone into administration and presumably the holding company has as well? You remove the Caution (well done). However, another company has taken over saying that they have bought the "loan book" from F.

You intimate that F SHOULD have paid his company the deposit but in fact he seems to have kept the deposit sum for himself. Assuming he was a director then this also is fraud and he has defrauded the company that purchased F. Their cause of action is against him.

You have signed the so-called “contract” but I would question its viability and legality given the above. It really is critical that you obtain separate and independent legal advice on this as you risk everything if this is not sorted out soonest.

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

I think you should put some company names up for this - certainly the one that has now ceased trading.

Despite the advice you were given im afraid this "smacks" of Fraud to which you were a party which is a serious crime.

So i think you need to be very careful in what you proceed with.

Hi. Totally agree. However, this is going to "out" regardless, as someone else has purchased F's company (and dodgy debts). Best thing for the OP is to get legal advice ASAP. He has of course been defrauded by F as well as being a party to the fraud on the mortgagee. It is clear that F took advantage of the OP's desperation and that (the £2000 for furniushings aside) the OP stood to gain nothing from this fraud. In fact, he loses out.

[paulb2905]

Re: serious advice

I agree with everything that has been said.

I guess the biggest question is "who" is the mortgage with? - is it even a registered lender? Or is the situation effectively a "privately funded" arrangement, which tbh i have no idea if it is legall, if this is the case the "lender F" would have to hold a Consumer Credit Licence and if it didnt would not be able to legally provide a mortgage which they are charging interest on........

Also was there any survey carried out - as this would be where an issue with the valuation of the property could have been "picked up" and should have been flagged to a registered lender.

The kind of situation you describe is called "Vendor Undersale" (if its legitimate ofc) eg parent sells a house to a son/daughter - this "is" allowed by certain mortgage companies as there is nothing stopping you from selling a property for just £1 if its clear of mortgage - obviously there may be tax implications here such as Inheritance Tax etc.

So i think its best in this situation for you to name some companies so it can be investigated futher to allow anyone to give you some advice based in fact.

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

100% agree with you Paul.

If it is a supposedly "arms length" transaction with a high street lender then the survey may have been fixed as well (I'm not sure if all lenders use a panel of valuers?). However, I agree, this smacks of private finance, although he does say "I contacted my mortgage company." Probably some sub-prime outfit that didn't look too carefully into who did the survey?

Interesting this one, isn't it?

[paulb2905]

Re: serious advice

Yes it is interesting.

Think we need to know the name of the company now dissolved, the name of the mortgage lender, the valuers (if known and if any)

Also the Solicitors may be useful as they would have some liability, at least with ensuring the property is registered with the Land Registry.

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

Absolutely Paul.

It is now up to the OP to tell us more.

[WendyB]

Re: serious advice

The owner of F said, we can buy his flat, but he will charge us more (at the time the property was worth 130.000, but he said he would value it as 195.000) so when the mortgage broker filled up the application form for us he would say we paid the deposit (so the mortgage would be 170,000 and the Mr F once we get the mortgage would profit by 40,000 from his 130,000 flat) ok, have to pay, and besides we have put the caution on again"

I took this to mean that they would say the flat was valued 195k, but they would say a deposit of 25k had been paid, hence having a mortgage for 170k?

[paulb2905]

Re: serious advice

Yeah looks like this is the breakdown;

1. Flat On sale for £130k
2. Increased Value to £195k
3. Mortgage £170k
4. Deposit £25k
5. Surplus Mortgage £40k to be paid to the owner of flat on completion of mortgage
6. £2k to be paid to the purchaser (or nett of £38k above)

I use those terms above "tongue in cheek"

I guess another question is DID you actually pay the seller the £38k (or £40k) surplus?

This is another reason for requiring the solicitors details as they should have had the "deposit of £25k" paid to them prior to the mortgage if it is in fact a mortgage lent by a lender registered and holding a CCL.

As already pointed out very very very dodgy, possibly fraudulent, even more possibly criminal.

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

Good one. Forensic squad lol.

[Angry Cat]

Re: serious advice

One presumes that this must have been a "self certification" mortgage application?

In 2003, they were all at it; desperate to lend...people were encouraged to be economical with the truth!

[The Debt Star]

Re: serious advice

I guess another question is DID you actually pay the seller the £38k (or £40k) surplus?

This is another reason for requiring the solicitors details as they should have had the "deposit of £25k" paid to them prior to the mortgage if it is in fact a mortgage lent by a lender registered and holding a CCL.

As already pointed out very very very dodgy, possibly fraudulent, even more possibly criminal.

I get the impression from the OP that the property was purchased from the company and not a member of Joe Public, so they would, presumably, have paid themselves the surplus.

They may even have been the original mortgagee, hence the survey point not being an issue.

Someone has now presumably purchased those mortgages. And, guess what? The Directors of the original company never credited those sums to the company accounts.

They're probably in Northern Cyprus or Panama right now.

[rida abdelwahab]

Re: serious advice

Yes it is interesting.

Think we need to know the name of the company now dissolved, the name of the mortgage lender, the valuers (if known and if any)

Also the Solicitors may be useful as they would have some liability, at least with ensuring the property is registered with the Land Registry.

The companies name was FLEX INVESTMENT, the mortgage broker was SILK something (i forgot long time ago but somewhere in my files) now the present company now is FLEX MORTGAGES Ltd.
The man chasing the money now is called Armid Abdullah ,he said
Flex Morgage Ltd purchased the loan book owned by FLEX INVESTMENT FROM THE ADMINISTRATORS GRANT THORNTON
"Good bye letters" were sent by Marlin financial services Ltd,then the managers of VILCOL who are appointed by us as the new managers, My name is Armid Abdullah and i am the director of FLEX MORGAGES!

that is what he sent me