High Court blow for UK homeowners

carolt

I don't think my reputation is entirely deserved. :rolleyes:

I believe it sprung from some mud slung that stuck? Or from a certain poster who seems unable to stop commenting on me?

Who knows.

I'm no teddy bear - but I'm no ...um, whatever the opposite of teddy bear is.

Just speak my mind, that's all.

Find battles v tedious - not really the competitive type.



Oh, and do you have the link for what you accused !!!!!! of?

It sounds very unlikely - I certainly don't recall comments like these. But do post the links if you have them.

mean_momma

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Actually, it's usually the other way round. OOs get a lot more slack. Typically, it takes several hearings and broken repayment plans before eviction in the case of a mortgage.

Maybe more personal mortgages are held jointly than tenancies. Spouses can be put in a terrible situation if one has got into debt and the other is threatened with losing the jointly owned house . (unless the law has changed since the recession of the early '90s).

Really2

carolt wrote: »

That is the reverse of what I said.

Neither may be irresponsible - both may be unlucky - but both should be treated equally insofar as both are being funded by the taxpayer.

As a taxpayer, and a renter, I resent strongly the idea that homeowners should get an extra leg-up than I would in their situation, just because they're owners.

And you forget - whilst self-cert may well be a small percentage of total mortgages, they're probably - I suspect - disproportionately involved in repossession - for bleeding obvious reasons.

So it's likely to be particularly the dishonest rather than the honest homeowner that the taxpayers will be asked to bankroll.

Carol that is why I said it was the OP's oppinion not your own.

Really2

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Actually, it's usually the other way round. OOs get a lot more slack. Typically, it takes several hearings and broken repayment plans before eviction in the case of a mortgage.

Well that could also be true of a court order for rental? (delayed dates etc)
I would say a bank is more likely to get the court procedings rolling earlier than a LL.
But what ever we say without case by case break downs we are just quoting hear say.

carolt

Fair dos - and what do you think of the points I raised?

Really2

carolt wrote: »

I don't think my reputation is entirely deserved. :rolleyes:

I believe it sprung from some mud slung that stuck? Or from a certain poster who seems unable to stop commenting on me?

Who knows.

I'm no teddy bear - but I'm no ...um, whatever the opposite of teddy bear is.

Just speak my mind, that's all.

Find battles v tedious - not really the competitive type.



Oh, and do you have the link for what you accused !!!!!! of?

It sounds very unlikely - I certainly don't recall comments like these. But do post the links if you have them.

you could serch on !!!!!! and said word. I have been on the wrong end of !!!!!! going off on one, he is not all sweetness and light.

neverdespairgirl

Really2 wrote: »

Well that could also be true of a court order for rental? (delayed dates etc)
I would say a bank is more likely to get the court procedings rolling earlier than a LL.
But what ever we say without case by case break downs we are just quoting hear say.

No, because 2 months' arreas is mandatory possession, so it's rarer for renters to be delayed as much.

And LLs tend to get going faster, because, unlike a bank, they have no security for the debt.

Honestly, I'm sure from my own experience that it takes a lot longer to get repossessed than evicted.

None of the above applies to councils, though.

carolt

I've got better things to do, I'll let DD produce the proof if there is any.
I've certainly never seen posts like that, and DD does have a history of 'twisting' things, shall we say.

So I'll await proof before assuming it's gospel. :rolleyes:

chucky

Really2 wrote: »

you could serch on !!!!!! and said word. I have been on the wrong end of !!!!!! going off on one, he is not all sweetness and light.

of course he isn't, but neither am I but I've never claimed to be either - the last search on another thread was 23 single posts that he used the word Retard and then found it funny that he used it.

this time there is only 11 posts of him using it - funny that
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.html?searchid=41705565
someone has been deleting!!! funny that he accuses other of deleting but he has been doing it himself - what a hypocrite!!

he's the self proclaimed King of the Forum so you're not allowed to say anything, otherwise all his other user names pop-up - Banderman, Fatpig, Napoleon, Pizza Girl, Downey etc....

carolt

Links please, or it all gets tiresomely 'he said, she said'. Let people make up their own minds.

I know you don't like !!!!!!, chucky, any more than you like me, as we stand on differing sides of the house crash divide - but that doesn't make you the most reliable witness to whatever !!!!!! is supposed to have said.

I say this as someone who has been selectively misquoted - or just downright made up - by DD in the past, hence my scepticism.....