Previous owner appealing reposession after I've exchanged contracts!

Strapped

To add - today the person I was helping has had their possession order and eviction notice set aside. So it does happen. Sorry.

Miss_Marple_2

Strapped wrote: »

To add - today the person I was helping has had their possession order and eviction notice set aside. So it does happen. Sorry.

Pleased for your friend

However, I think we are talking about completely different situations. I'm assuming that your friend was still in their house ? In the OP's case, the occupants had left 3 months. I'm at a loss to know what redress they are wanting after this length of time - presumably compenstion rather than actually regaining possession ?

gadgetmind

As part of appealing a repossession notice, I assume that all arrears need to be paid in full?

hawk30

AnnieO1234 wrote: »

I Swould be taking third party legal advice on this, is it definitely a solicitor you are using and not merely a legal executive or worse a fellow of the ILEX?

Xxx

Err, a legal executive IS a fellow of CILEx. Please don't be rude about chartered legal executives.

AnnieO1234

hawk30 wrote: »

Err, a legal executive IS a fellow of CILEx. Please don't be rude about chartered legal executives.

Might have used the wrong phrase, I was on about the ones who've been practicing for donkeys years but never, ever got a formal qualification.

In any event, the situation calls for something beyond the level of anyone who has simply studied the ilex qualification, that's why their rates aren't that high, you get what you pay for. And you can charge what your worth for a reason.

jamesd

A legal executive may well be a fellow of CILEx but not all legal executives are CILEx fellows [STRIKE]are legal executives and not all CILEx members are legal executives[/STRIKE].

Whatever else they are, solicitors isn't it and that can be a limitation. It's one that may be relevant here if the person providing the advice is outside the scope of their knowledge and not seeking advice or passing on the business to someone better able to handle the situation.

pmlindyloo

I am having difficulty understanding what has happened here. It seems that there has been some massive mistakes made here.

The OP says the property has been empty for some months.

I thought there were specific time limits for appealing repossession orders.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/debt_e/debt_mortgage_problems_ew/eviction_for_mortgage_arrears.htm

Has the bank 'jumped the gun' in selling the property? How has this happened?

hawk30

jamesd wrote: »

A legal executive may well be a fellow of CILEx but not all CILEx fellows are legal executives and not all CILEx members are legal executives.

Whatever else they are, solicitors isn't it and that can be a limitation. It's one that may be relevant here if the person providing the advice is outside the scope of their knowledge and not seeking advice or passing on the business to someone better able to handle the situation.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but only a Fellow can call himself or herself a (chartered) legal executive. It's a protected designation. And being a Fellow means you can be a partner in a law firm or even a judge.

Richard_Webster

OP PM'd me but I hadn't seen the thread when I sent interim reply asking for info.

Your solicitors should tell the lender's solicitors that a notice to compete will follow if completion doesn't take place on the due date.

The lender has either fouled everything up (e.g. not giving notice of repossession proceedings to last known address of borrower) - not very likely or even less likely - borrower wasn't in arrears - or more likely borrower didn't tell lender change of address and has only just found out. In this last infatuation court is unlikely to be sympathetic.

Given the circumstances, it is unlikely that the borrower was actually evicted - he had probably lef tit empty otherwise he would have been doing something about it sooner and lender wouldn't have tried to sell the house so quickly.

I would certainly play hardball with the lender if only to get some costs and compensation from them.

jamesd

Thanks. Indeed, on further reading I find that I was misled a little by something on the CILEx site. So, a double-take:

I agree that AnnieO1234's "merely a legal executive or worse a fellow of the ILEX" is misleading, because a Fellow of ILEx is of higher and not lower professional grade than is necessarily the case to be in the broader legal executive category.

I've also edited my post to correct a word order error that made part of it incorrect, replacing the incorrect struck through order with the corrected italic order.

I've also removed the "not all CILEx members are legal executives" text because from looking again at the CILEx site I'm no longer sure that it's accurate.

While I definitely prefer it not to be necessary, please don't ever hesitate to correct me in any error of fact. I appreciate the learning opportunity that comes from being corrected after a mistake.