I need help!! Forged secured loan on my house by my EX :(

holly_hobby

handytips wrote: »

Have any of you ever dealt with Welcome in the past...............? Exactly....I have.
What is more. This sadly happens on a regular basis, and as secured loans are basically unregulated then lots of fraudulent activity went on in this area and the above scenario is the most common one, believe it or not. If the OP can get somewhere with this then great. But as i said above i doubt it. Welcome finance, Provident loans, same people. Please do not ridicule me again, i have a fine understanding on how things work.

Fraud is a criminal act - period. And has the same ramifications regardless to the basis of finance i.e unsecured or secured lending.

Welcome Finance furnished a loan to an applicant on the basis of fraudulent information. (i.e OP was not aware of, nor enjoyed the proceeds of the finance, nor engaged in the application or agreed to be bound by the legal contractual terms).

Welcome have admitted their neglience, accordingly releasing the OP from the contractual terms of the arrangement. (apart from releasing the charge of course)

The charge is part of the contractual terms, which Welcome have absolved the OP of (admitting her signature was fraudulently produced by the actual applicant), accordingly the charge is also improper - as by its very nature it has a direct legal impact on the OP - who as we know, is not legally responsible for the stated finance.

Welcome are not in a legal position to dictate any repayment terms on the OP - their arrangement (which they chose to maintain despite the knowledge of a fraudulent act) lies solely with the OPs ex.

Your position should lend you to be aware of the legal requirements and terms of secured lending - your argument that secured loans (I presume excluding mortgages) are unregulated, apparently leaving Welcome to their own devices with no recourse by the OP, has no merit in this situation - and is clouding the issue for the OP.

Holly

PaulLuke

Handytips,

The OP was not involved in taking out the Welcome Finance loan. As such she cannot be bound by the charge and neither can any property that she owns be bound by such a charge. Welcome might like to believe that the charge stands but the truth is it is not effective against the OP and cannot be enforced against her. The truth is Welcom (like many companies) would like to keep the situtation quiet as they don't like people to realise how easy it has been in the past to obtain credit fradulently!

Unfortunately, even if the OP reports the incident to the police, from experience, the police will take no action unless Welcome also repport the matter as the fraud was committed against Welcome and not against the OP!!

holly_hobby

PaulLuke wrote: »

Unfortunately, even if the OP reports the incident to the police, from experience, the police will take no action unless Welcome also repport the matter as the fraud was committed against Welcome and not against the OP!!

But it was, he applied for finance in the applicants name - the fact that Welcome have revoked their interest against her (which in fact they haven't by retaining the charge) does not alter the initial act. With the OP remaining financially disadvanted by his fraudulent actions (aka charge against property), so really she does have grounds for Police involvement (although it may be percieved as a little late in the day).

I wholly agree with your other comments, I am also unable to comprehend the basis of HTs comments.

Holly

PaulLuke

Holly,

I wish that were the case. However, experience tells me otherwise. A couple of years ago we found out that someone living at a house we had previously owned had fraudulently taken out finance in my wife's name.

Despite reporting the matter to the police no action was taken against the individual concerned as the companies involved were not willing to make a formal complaint to the police. We even had a conversation with their collections department who encouraged us to settle the debt as 'it was more likely they would get money from us than from the person who opened the account'!!

From speaking to the investigating officer, it was his force's (South Wales Police) view that in such situations the fraud was commited against the finance company and not the individual. My view is completely the opposite, particulary given the knock on effect such a situation can have on obtaining credit etc whilst the matter is being resolved!!

holly_hobby

Well it is the provider who has been defrauded of the capital - so yes that makes sense re the lender pressing charges.

Whilst if the individual is directly affected by restiction to credit due to the registration of the debt (they shouldn't be pursued for the fiance if the provider acknowledges the fraudulent activity conducted under the indivudals name).

If the provider elects not to involve the Police, yet refuses to remove the record (in a proven case of fraud of course), against the innocent individuals CR - the matter should be pursued throught the courts. To have the provider instructed to remove their unlawful registration. (again this would be applicable in a proven and accepted case of fraud had occurred, where there are credit issues wrongly impacting on the innocent indvidual as a result of the proven offence).

I tell you what I would be hopping bloody mad, if I couldn't secure finance/credit card etc because of the issues, especially if I needed a new pair of Jimmy Choo's ... :T and I would pursue them till I got the matter rectified ..

You see, nothing like a woman scorned and a need for a pair of Choo's ..... :rotfl:


Holly x

allofushere

Hi there
I cant offer any advice but i am going through a similar thing with my ex, he's shafted me good and proper, wrecked my credit rating etc etc so I just wanted to say, be strong, keep applying the pressure and don't give up. Good luck

vetnurse1

WOW thankyou everyone so much for your replies...i really appreciate you taking the time to sit down and help!! Sorry for the cross-thread...I have never used a forum before and dont really understand how it all works!!

Holly your advice has been great, thanks so much. Welcome basically told me yesterday that the charge still stands, and I had pretty much given up hope of sorting it out. Reading everything you have to say makes me realise that actually yes i CAN do something about it, and I am definately going to find someone to help. Where do you live Holly?? lol. Would I need a solicitor or lawyer to deal with this? I dont really know the difference to be honest :-/ Would I actually need to take them to court to get the charge removed? I am young mum so cannot afford thousands in legal fees

Welcome said last year that they wouldnt be pressing any sort of charges - i guess because they are still getting their money every month!! The police said I could not do anything because even though he forged MY signature, it was the company he commited fraud against as PaulLuke says. Ridiculous really! Makes me wonder how many other things he has forged my signature on!!

Sounds silly but what is OP? Im guessing thats me...? lol.

Thanks again for all the info everyone, I really appreciate it!!

Louise x

PaulLuke

Evening Louise

OP stands for 'Original Poster' i.e. you.

As regard a solicitor or lawyer the distinction is that a lawyer is someone who practices law (so in this country both a solicitor and a barrister are lawyers). However, you generally only get to speak to a barrister via a solicitor (there are certain excemptions relating to professionals (e.g.Planners) who can instruct a barrister directly. So you would need to approach a solicitor.

In truth the process to remove the charge should not be too difficult as given the background to the registration it does not appear to be valid.

I would hope that a solicitor would start by writing to Welcome, including evidence that they have previously acknowledged that the loan was obtained fraudulently, asking Welcome to arrange with the Land Registry to remove the charge. I would also expect them to point out that if it proves necessarry to take court proceeding then you would be looking to Welcome for all your costs due to their unreasonable behaviour

PaulLuke

holly_hobby wrote: »

I tell you what I would be hopping bloody mad, if I couldn't secure finance/credit card etc because of the issues, especially if I needed a new pair of Jimmy Choo's ... :T and I would pursue them till I got the matter rectified ..

You see, nothing like a woman scorned and a need for a pair of Choo's ..... :rotfl:
/QUOTE]

Well it did cause complications with a mortgage application so yes my wife was hopping mad, although I rather suspect she would have been madder if it had prevented her from buying Jimmy Choo's!! As it was the company concerned did remove the entries after we had sent them about a ton of documents proving that we had moved when the finance had been taken out and had declined their kind offer to settle the debt so that they could mark the account as settled!!

holly_hobby

Hi Lou,

Everyone is v happy to help where we can, so don't worry you've lots of moral support and shoulders to lean on here .....

My argument with Welcome is that they can't do one without the other i.e remove you as party to the loan but retain the charge on a jointly owned property - its a contradiction in terms.

The have accepted that they processed a fraudulent application, and in doing so effectively applied an unlawful charge to your property.

The issue in this case, is that :-

• YOU did not sign the application - already proven & wholly accepted by Welcome
• Therefore it is obvious that YOU did not provide your express agreement via the application, to accept a charge on your (albeit jointly owned) property. Of which the express agreement/signature of all mortgagors is required for (IMHO) lawful execution of the charge. Together of course with the permission of 1st charge holder i.e your mge lender.
• Accordingly neither did YOU enter into any financial contract with Welcome, and thereby have not agreed to be bound by any contractual terms of the loan, of which a charge applied to the applicants property is one obvious requirement. Indeed, Welcome have accepted this, in their removal of your name as party to the loan (yet refuse to remove their charge for the full amount on your property. Thereby you in fact remain fully exposed to the liability, in that if your ex fails to maintain the agreement HE entered into, Welcome may apply to the Courts for an order of sale on your property for repayment of the os amount).

In respect of your tele conversation with them, its not unsurprising that Welcome will naturally want to retain their charge, as it means they remain protected (despite their knowledge and admission of processing a fraudulent application).

However, quite how they may present an argument that the charge on your property remains lawful, when it initiated from a fraudulent app that you were not party to, is quite baffling.

I do suspect they know exactly the legality of the situation, and in saying they had removed your name from the loan hoped that would satisfy you, and prevent you from seeking further advice. As without the charge they are left a bit dangling if your ex decides to give them the V sign and run off to Cuba !!

I would hope that a robustly worded complaint or Solicitors letter to their legal department, stating your case should settle this. (your B&C policy may have free legals as one of its benefits, I know that my own with RSA does - inc a free legal helpline. Check your docs out !)

Hope this helps

Holly