New offer from mortgage lender

silvercar

Ineedaname wrote: »

If Bigjl didn't buy the BI back at the price of the OR's negligible offer and waited out the 2 years 3 months, wouldn't the BI revert at no cost now?

If it is 2yrs and 3 months and if there is no equity.

JCS1

If the property is solely owned, then the OR is normally required to countersign any sale paperwork. With the OR having a restiction with the Land Registry, I'm not sure if it would apply in this case though (though potentially it is a way that the OR might find out)

silvercar

JCS1 wrote: »

If the property is solely owned, then the OR is normally required to countersign any sale paperwork. With the OR having a restiction with the Land Registry, I'm not sure if it would apply in this case though (though potentially it is a way that the OR might find out)

Does that apply once the BI has been given back?

JCS1

silvercar wrote: »

Does that apply once the BI has been given back?

The restricition would be removed after the BI has been dealt with.

bigjl

Ineedaname wrote: »

Silvercar - would the OP also need the OR's permission to take the deal, as the OR owns the BI still?

On that basis, surely the OR would take the money as they still own the BI?

The BI is the money leftover after the mortgage company is settled.



The OR doesn't own the House the mortgage company does and always will.

After BR i was told the only debts you have to service are those secured on the house and are only included in the BR if the house is reclaimed.

If the house is reclaimed now then the OR has no input or claim on any monies until the mortgage is settled, the leftover is the BI.

The OR can only force a sale if the mortgage company is in agreement, usually if there is money to be obtained after the mortgage is settled that can be used to pay debtors.

bigjl

Ineedaname wrote: »

Bigjl - I do hope you're finding this discussion useful, stop us if it's not helping.

No it is very helpful to debate such things, i have imparted a few things that i have gleaned from my very helpful OR office in Southend.

They were both professional amd efficient.

JCS1

I'm guessing it depends on how the mortgage company deal with this. If repossession, then I suspect the mortgage co just tell the OR that they've taken possession.

If a transfer of property from OP to the mortgage company, then I think the land registry restriction would come into force, and the OR would need to counter sign paperwork/be notified so the restriction could be removed.

silvercar

JCS1 wrote: »

I'm guessing it depends on how the mortgage company deal with this. If repossession, then I suspect the mortgage co just tell the OR that they've taken possession.

If a transfer of property from OP to the mortgage company, then I think the land registry restriction would come into force, and the OR would need to counter sign paperwork/be notified so the restriction could be removed.

I agree. In the first case the OR is still registered as having the BI until after the house sale. This would be to ensure that if there was anything left over after the house sale, the proceeds go to the OR not the borrower.

silvercar

bigjl wrote: »

No it is very helpful to debate such things, i have imparted a few things that i have gleaned from my very helpful OR office in Southend.

They were both professional amd efficient.

I take it you didn't ask the question on receiving a fee for agreeing a repossession?

Would it not be safer to allow the OR to give you back the BI and then accept the fee?

Remember that, if you definitely intend allowing the repo to go ahead, you may as well stop paying the mortgage as the non payment will just be part of the arrears that are already building up and will be part of the bankruptcy. (Though make sure you have that fee banked )

bigjl

silvercar wrote: »

That is what I'm not sure about. The first question is whether it has to be declared. Now clearly if OP is under an IPA/BRO/BRU it would have to be declared, otherwise given that OP is discharged is there an obligation to declare? On the face of it not, but given that it is a fee being paid to repossess and that the repossession rules out the opportunity for the OR to wait to see if there is equity, then accepting the fee (and going bankrupt) directly rules out an opportunity for the OR to claw back some money for creditors. So accepting the fee potentially disadvantages the OR, so should the OR have some say in it or is the OR entitled to claim on the fee.
On balance I would think not and I'm comparing it to a situation where the OP decides without the fee to go bankrupt and that deprives the OR of the same opportunity.

The circumstances of my BR are probably unusual aswell. I had no debts, all settled with a loan that was secured on the house.

I was involved in an unfair dismissal, a long period of suspension where they said i couldn' t do my second job as it meant i was working whilst suspended which is Gross Misconduct, i was unable to pay the Council Tax and the council made me BR for less than £800.

After i won my case the BR was already done and dusted, i included my two CC's and a couple of utility bills, and two council CCTV parking tickets, win.

Even then my entire BR was less than £3000.

I had almost caught up my arrears and all was going swimmingly until my health decided to go south, and that was me, four months of half pay but with the fact that basic pay on light duties or sick pay is £400 less due to operational allowances my arrears have increased to the stage we are at now.

I must admit that i had intended in using my pension lump sum to pay the arrears off, after buying the BI first. Then pay off my secured loan and try to find a part time job to supplement the pension.

However, this offer has come out the blue and if the offer was right i must admit to being tempted.