mum may have to sell her house?

Flyboy152

dmg24 wrote: »

I am not the solicitor, so how would I know the facts?

The OP has admitted that they do not know the full story,so nor do we. Yet you criticise the solicitor for giving advice based on all the of the facts. Go figure ...

And you have a go at me for not knowing all the facts....go figure. :wall:

chewmylegoff

Flyboy152 wrote: »

How can they put a lean on her house, if she never agreed to secure the loan against it in the first place?

She cannot be personally liable for debts against a limited company (kind of the point of limited liability), unless she signed guarantees.

she appears to have signed a personal guarantee re: the car.

if she defaults on the guarantee, the finance company can take her to court and obtain a CCJ against her. then they can take her to court again and ask the court to place a (second - assuming already mortgaged) charge on her house.

she may end up having a charge against the property for the remainder of the lease creditor and the lease creditor's legal costs in obtaining the CCJ and charging order.

this appears to be what is envisaged in the "do nothing" option that the solicitor refers to.

poppysarah

If he has forged signatures then it's fraud.
The police need informing.

bris

Your mum went guarantorfor the car, this isn't in dispute, the fact your mother didn't know she was signing for this is irrelavant.
Sorry to say but she is now liable for the whole shortfall of the balance due. If your mother can't come to some sort of deal with payments, then yes they may very well get a charging order placed on the house to recover the money.

Emmzi

iof I were mum, I would take son to small claims court for the money once she had paid it - but then i am damn harsh

G_M

asked my mum to be a director of his company as a favour

So unless it's a limited company she is liable for all company debts.

she starts getting letters saying she owes thousands of pounds. it turns out his company was going under.

Bingo. Company debts about which she knows nothing but for which she is liable.

tells her all will be fine just give the letters to him and he will sort it.

And from what we can see, this really got 'sorted' ???

she recieves something which has her signature on buts he has never seen before in her life.

So now it looks like she is alos liable for further (fraudulent) unknown liabilities.

I'm afraid if people sign things they don't understand or bother to read, they leave themselves open to anything - even from family.
On top of that, there is fraudulent use of her signature.

The solicitor appears to be right, though we don't have the full facts. Clearly the son is a scumbag who could have done / commited her to anything.

If the creditors chase the debtors (which includes mum as she is a Director and has signed things) through the courts, the court can place a charge on the property to ensure the creditor gets paid eventually when the property is sold.

is there anythings he can do that hasnt been mentioned

Yes, pay back the money to the people he owes it to.

i dont understand why my brother cant be held accountable and not her

.
He is accountable, not instead, but as well as her. They are both (presumably) Directors. However I suspect he has no money, no savings and no house. But she does. So the creditors will go after the one who has assets with which to repay them.

Annisele

Your mum needs proper (and paid for) legal advice; not opinions from people on a forum. If (for whatever reason) she doesn't trust the solicitor she has, she needs a new one.

She might be able to get the guarantee set aside if she can claim "undue influence", but she'd need expert advice to do so. I'd assume that the solicitor has already considered that possibility though, and has decided it doesn't apply.

chewmylegoff

G_M wrote: »

So unless it's a limited company she is liable for all company debts.

i think it would be more accurate to phrase this "unless it's an unlimited company, she is not personally liable for the company debts." almost all companies are limited companies, the chances of this being an unlimited company are basically zero, so your post has the potential to mislead, especially when you take the next part of your quote into account...

Bingo. Company debts about which she knows nothing but for which she is liable.

no. she will not be responsible for the (limited) company's debts. the company is responsible for the company's debts. however, in this particular case she has given a personal guarantee in respect of one of the company's debts - so she is personally liable. she will not be personally reponsible for the rest of the company's debts unless she has given other personal guarantees. (the bank often requires directors to give personal guarantees as well).

Emmzi

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You cannot have a liability secured against a property, without knowing about. If there is a first charge, for example, the lender of that charge has to agree. The land registry needs to involved and that will more than likely require a solicitor to do the conveyancing. Then there are the requirements for identification etc.

There is no conveyancing involved in raising a charge.

It's simply lender two gets agreement from lender one, and asset owner signs a document (which may be forged or not._ Depends on dubiousness of solicitor/lender.

Also the word is Lien, not Lean.

You've no idea what the son may have been up to, neither do I. Hence, as a director of the comapny, mum needs copies of the accounts and other financial paperwork.

Flyboy152

Emmzi wrote: »

There is no conveyancing involved in raising a charge.

It very much depends on whether this is a second, or first, charge, hence the use of the word, "likely." If it is a second charge, it could not have happened without the first lender knowing about and being confirmed by the mortgagee.

It's simply lender two gets agreement from lender one, and asset owner signs a document (which may be forged or not._ Depends on dubiousness of solicitor/lender.

So, the lender took the loan contract, without confirming identity as well. This will not do them any favours at all.

Also the word is Lien, not Lean.

Well, excuse me for a flipping typo. :wall:

You've no idea what the son may have been up to, neither do I. Hence, as a director of the comapny, mum needs copies of the accounts and other financial paperwork.

No I don't, but then neither do you, or anyone else it seems. So we are all working on conjecture.