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

handytips

I know what has happened is fraud, and the only way as i see it to get them to listen to you is to stop paying the loan payments with them, then you will get access to the Magistrate sooner or later as they will want some sort of judgement against you. However this is a very ropey procedure to take as your credit rating will take a bashing, i am not being funny but Welcome only really used to deal with Sub Prime people and they can get very heavy if they are not getting thier money. I wish all the best of luck with this, but they will be a tough nut to crack. I was actually in an appointment with a couple once and this had happened with them. What do i do, tell the wife there is a charge on the property that she knows nothing about and probably cause a divorce. Believe me these are very difficult situations to broach with clients, often people will have loans, credit cards, Next catalogue etc etc that the other partner knows nothing about, which i find very sad. I can also spot a gambler a mile off. However there is no or little outlet for these scenarios anymore, and lots of them are complaining they were mis sold their mortgages, however if remedial action wasnt taken at the time then they would have lost their house and probably their marriages. The public are fickle when it comes to financial products and it is never their fault that they have picked up CCJ's and Defaults. Although i feel sorry for people who are under a mountain of debt, 9 times out of 10 it is their fault that they were in the mess they got themselves into, l by the way have never had any sort of complaint laid against me, basically because i would tell them the truth about their situation and i didnt really deal with sub prime for obvious reasons. Welcome were one of the worst sub prime lenders and their interest rates extortionate, however they have ceased in the secured loan arena, however Provident are still going strong, we are living in a time of hardship and all of you will see on the TV, Cashconverters, The Money Shop, wonga, payday loans. Who do you think these companies are preying on, yes the vulnerable and the good old FSA doesnt seem to care. I really really hope OP gets her case sorted out and if they want any help then PM me and i will speak to them, however i will in no way advise on what they should do. Be careful people

holly_hobby

Handytips - the OP is not a named as an borrower on the loan - her name was removed following Welcome's admission of processing a fraudulent application. It is the ex who remains party to the application, and resp for maintaining regular contratual payments.

I have no idea how long you have been a "mortgage adviser" or from the content of your posts, what FS quals you hold, but notwithstanding the above, the advice you have given for the OP to "cease payments and in essence wait for it to get to a DJ for an order or sale" , is both highly irresponsible and most unprofessional, and not what I would expect to hear from a cited FS professional.

If it did get before a DJ for non-payment, under the terms of the charge, the DJ irrespective of the background may issue an order of sale (which the OP would need to appeal).

The most productive route is to have the matter rectified before ever reaching that point.

I further do not suggest the OP seek advice through a PM to anyone, all advice should be on the forum so it is both transparent and open to debate and discussion.

I am sorry if this post sounds harsh to you or others, (and its not really my style at all), but I really did feel compelled to post the above for the sake of the OPs benefit.

The OP needs to seek legal guidance from a specalist Solicitor, and pursue through the correct legal channels.

Holly

kingstreet

The speculation about what Welcome can/can't or will/won't do is simply that, speculation.

We've all advised the OP to get specialist legal advice as soon as she can and that's pretty much it for now.

Peace and love comrades.

holly_hobby

Seconded on pursuance through legal channels - the basis of lawful registration of a charge, and Welcome's breach remains.

Holly

handytips

Holly read my post again.
I am not advising the OP to do anything, and i never would i am just trying to point out the dangers of dealing with this kind of company, please do not bring my professional knowledge into question, as i have over a thousand clients on my data base, all of which have never questioned any advice and recomendations i have made to them. The case being discussed is not an odd man out type of case, it happened regularly pre credit crunch, as i said it is a sad reflection on peoples relationships and the hardship debt can cause.

holly_hobby

handytips wrote: »

Holly read my post again.
I am not advising the OP to do anything, and i never would.

Really... Then the following leaves me somewhat confused if its not advice ....

handytips wrote: »

the only way as i see it to get them to listen to you is to stop paying the loan payments with them, then you will get access to the Magistrate sooner or later as they will want some sort of judgement against you.

Further more I wish to comment on the following:-

handytips wrote: »

The case being discussed is not an odd man out type of case, it happened regularly pre credit crunch, as i said it is a sad reflection on peoples relationships and the hardship debt can cause.

So you are saying that before the drying up of finance, you know Welcome regularly processed fraudulent applications, and subsequently upon discovery of the criminal action, further refused to remove 2nd charges registered against property owned by individuals other than the offender, originally registered without either their knowledge or permission to the same ?

If thats the case, what are your sources, and have you reported your experiences to the FSA for their review ?

I find your further comments regarding retention of the charge, to lack any merit or basis. In so far that you appear to suggest Welcome, are a dubious lender, with dubious lending practices, servicing primarily the sub prime market, with the trade off that that they may basically act as they see fit, irrespective of any lawful basis of execution - really rather baffling.

My comments are not intended as a personal argument with you in any form (as I don't believe posters whom operate in such a manner, bring any positivity to the forum or the OPs needs). BUT to basically infer to the OP that although wrong, this is just the way Welcome operate, so just accept it as fact. And that if the OP's complaint does result in the removal or amendment of the charge (with her permission), she is basically a lucky individual - to be fundamentally wrong on so many levels.

HT please accept this post as it is intended, as discussion to assist the OP with their issue.

Holly

DVardysShadow

handytips wrote: »

I know what has happened is fraud, and the only way as i see it to get them to listen to you is to stop paying the loan payments with them, then you will get access to the Magistrate sooner or later as they will want some sort of judgement against you.

Magistrates do not deal with civil debts. It may appear to be a picky point. But the error is again not something you would expect from someone who describes themselves as a Mortgage Advisor. I would expect a professional to stay within the limitations of their knowledge

And OP does not have means to stop paying as the ex is paying at the moment.

DVardysShadow

holly_hobby wrote: »

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

I would agree with this.

Perhaps it is worth thinking about how to make the point to Welcome that if the charge is not lifted, OP will press charges which risk ex taking a custodial sentence which will scupper Welcome's softly softly approach.

vetnurse1: Do keep us informed.

magpiecottage

Handytips is correct in stating that the FSA has no jurisdiction over lending by Welcome as it is not a first mortgage. (Yes it regulates PPI).

However, ALL consumer credit from 6 April 2007 DOES come under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. I recommend, rather than involving (expensive) specialist lawyers at this stage the OP goes back to Welcome Finance and makes a complaint that they have not yet removed their unlawful charge despite the fact that they have known it was unlawful for at least 9 months and this is now jeopardising the sale of your property.

If possible, fax this to 0845 373 3913 so you get proof of receipt and it will be deemed to have arrived on Monday if you do it today. Alternatively you can write and get proof of posting (free from the Post Office) but it will only be deemed to have arrived on Wednesday and will cost more. (If you have a fax modem for your PC it may be free.

This is almost exactly what HollyHobby said immediately after the original post but forces Welcome to deal with it under the FSA's dispute resolution rules. They will have 8 weeks to resolve the problem to your satisfaction which should be ample to get a charge removed.

DVardysShadow

magpiecottage wrote: »

... However, ALL consumer credit from 6 April 2007 DOES come under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. I recommend, rather than involving (expensive) specialist lawyers at this stage the OP goes back to Welcome Finance and makes a complaint that they have not yet removed their unlawful charge despite the fact that they have known it was unlawful for at least 9 months and this is now jeopardising the sale of your property.

Yes, I think this is the way to go.

But it seems to me that there is a potential disappointment here. Welcome may refuse to accept that OP is their customer and therefore wriggle out of FOS jurisdiction on this issue. Not saying this is a cert, the FOS rules may indicate whether this will be an issue.