Is My Mortgage Agreement Unenforceable

bigadaj

I understand that you are desperate but this is extremely unlikely to work. The law is totally different in the US, in relation to mortgages specifically the lender can't pursue the homeowner for any negative equity which is why so many people simply handed back the keys, whereas the debt stays with you in the UK for 12 years.

You need to look at your situation objectively, and look to sell the house and downsize or rent, if you do get re-possessed the house is likely to be sold for way below market value leaving you liable for significant debts.

Angry_Cat

But can a lender pursure a shortfall if it has already been paid in full by a spv, so the lender has not made a loss

Thrugelmir

Angry_Cat wrote: »

But can a lender pursure a shortfall if it has already been paid in full by a spv, so the lender has not made a loss

Don't confuse a cash transaction i.e. a loan with trading activity that creates a profit or loss. The lender has sold your mortgage on, so they owe the SPV the money. There's a debt to repay.

As you pay the lender, the lender pays the SPV.

If you default. The lender will repossess in order to repay the SPV.

Angry_Cat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Don't confuse a cash transaction i.e. a loan with trading activity that creates a profit or loss. The lender has sold your mortgage on, so they owe the SPV the money. There's a debt to repay.

As you pay the lender, the lender pays the SPV.

If you default. The lender will repossess in order to repay the SPV.

I would disagree. You are saying that the lender can seek redress from me to repay a debt, it owes to an SPV.

Where does tort and locus standi fit into that argument ?

opinions4u

Angry_Cat wrote: »

I would disagree. You are saying that the lender can seek redress from me to repay a debt, it owes to an SPV.

Where does tort and locus standi fit into that argument ?

You can disagree all you like.

Your mortgage is enforceable and the lender will, eventually, repossess if you don't pay.

Angry_Cat

I thank you for your straight forward response but what about tort and the locus standi of the lender to bring a claim ?

The_Earl_of_Streatham

Angry_Cat wrote: »

Where does tort and locus standi fit into that argument ?

I fear they may have died in vain.

Angry_Cat

Lol

I know the easy quick response is to say the lender can resposses. However, that ignores all the legalities of the rights to bring a claim for a loss.

The lender sold the debt to a third party. In simple terms the debt I owed to the lender has been paid for by a third party and if anything I now owe that debt to the third party and as it is the third party that I owe it should be the party (if any) to bring a claim.

Hence my previous comments about tort and the locus standi of the lender.

Thrugelmir

Angry_Cat wrote: »

In simple terms the debt I owed to the lender has been paid for by a third party and if anything I now owe that debt to the third party and as it is the third party that I owe it should be the party (if any) to bring a claim.

Suggest you either seek legal advice or attempt to default.

I'm sure that when mortgage securitisation was created in 1998 that all legal aspects were properly covered.

SandC

Just stop paying and see what happens. Geez.