Mortgage question

Theres a lot more to it of course. The house was believed to be ok at purchase time, but has since turned out to have major problems. As someone said, its effectively saleable as a building plot. Mortgage co surveys are far from thorough, so it doesnt look like negligence AFAICS, just an ignorant buyer.

NT

"Bob Mannix" wrote

Same here for house purchased 2002

Phil

For deeds substitute the present day electronic version. It will have logged the charge on the property and stop it being sold until arrangements have been made to pay off that charge.

Thought the whole idea of the BS survey was to make sure the property was ok to lend money on? Of course this can't take into account a drop in value, but this sounds more than just that?

Such surveys are far from thorough though.

NT

I'm not expert here either, but I thought once discharged from bankruptcy, you can't be persued for debts before then. However, I've heard that some banks are now persuing people for debts which they should not be, so it's probably worth checking if this is happening in that case.

Yes, I wrote and asked for mine, and they were only too happy to free the space up in their expensive paper record centre. Mine go back to 1650 for the land ownership, and cover a significant area of the town, very much larger than the current plot, probably now with more than 100 houses on it.

Better check you don't still own the freehold on all that land ! Be hard to go into negative equity on that. You might be able to claim back-rent, or evict the orphans and peasants ;-} Simon.

That's not what a charge is -- the owners cannot have a charge.

The owners would have to pay off the negative equity in addition to the offer they had accepted on the house, which is impossible, as there wouldn't be any negative equity if they were prepared to offered enough to clear the charge.

and the BS may be able to claim from the surveyors for their losses after they've recovered everything they can from the borrowers, but the borrowers won't be able to claim anything, as it wasn't their survey.

Of course. But given the sums likely to be involved, a decent solicitor acting for the house owner might be able to make something of it. The BS aren't entitled to be reimbursed twice. They are the one who insist the property they lend on is sufficient security on its own. And charge the customer for making sure this is so. Of course hindsight shows some were more interested in lending money regardless. But this doesn't mean the borrower is totally to blame for accepting their offer. After all, they are the professionals in this field - the borrower the amateur.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Dave Plowman (News)" saying something like:

It happens. I knew of a retired couple who'd ploughed their savings and investments into buying a farm in the Scottish Borders. Yes, the paperwork all appeared to be present and correct and the purchase went ahead. Everything was fine until the Clydesdale Bank turned up looking for its mortgage money from the previous occupier... A bent solicitor in Scotland, an incompetent solicitor in England, a crooked bastard of a PO, and a penny-pinching buyer.

If only the buyer had employed a local independent solicitor instead of trying to do the purchase from Blackpool and save himself a few quid.