ChatterBank1 min ago
one for mustafatickl
hi mustafatickl
just need your opinion/advice again please..... i will try and keep it short (ish)
after another long and intricate discussion with friends regarding my impending tribunal hearing, one friend suggested that i inform my mortgage company regarding the accusations my ex is making towards me ie the letter he is saying i fraudulently composed and signed his signature to, to enable me to obtain a mortgage (thats the letter he actually sent to my mortgage lender informing them that i had rented the property from him for a year and that was why he was selling it me at a discounted price - the building soc requested this letter because i was purchasing the property at less than the current day market value) so basically my ex is saying that i obtained my mortgage by deception. If i was to inform the societ y(as i have done nothing wrong) of his accusasions they may actually inform the police who would then interview my ex and get the truth out of him that he did infact do the letter. I need to prove that he is a lying so and so.
Also before he transfered the property to me would his building society requested confirmation from him that he was relinquishing his mortgage and asked him to sign papers or something. As he is now saying that he cannot understand how his mortgage company relinquished his mortgage without him knowing, he is saying that my solicitor who acted for him deceived him and went behing his back to get the information!!!! At the time of the transfer although i had a solicitor acting for me he chose not to take legal advice although he was advised to by my solicitor on a number of occassions (all by letter, which she has copies of). And one you have paid your mortgage off, don,t you generally get a letter from the society stating that the mortgage is now paid off. Gosh i hope this makes sense to you and once again thanks for reading this, its much appreciated x
just need your opinion/advice again please..... i will try and keep it short (ish)
after another long and intricate discussion with friends regarding my impending tribunal hearing, one friend suggested that i inform my mortgage company regarding the accusations my ex is making towards me ie the letter he is saying i fraudulently composed and signed his signature to, to enable me to obtain a mortgage (thats the letter he actually sent to my mortgage lender informing them that i had rented the property from him for a year and that was why he was selling it me at a discounted price - the building soc requested this letter because i was purchasing the property at less than the current day market value) so basically my ex is saying that i obtained my mortgage by deception. If i was to inform the societ y(as i have done nothing wrong) of his accusasions they may actually inform the police who would then interview my ex and get the truth out of him that he did infact do the letter. I need to prove that he is a lying so and so.
Also before he transfered the property to me would his building society requested confirmation from him that he was relinquishing his mortgage and asked him to sign papers or something. As he is now saying that he cannot understand how his mortgage company relinquished his mortgage without him knowing, he is saying that my solicitor who acted for him deceived him and went behing his back to get the information!!!! At the time of the transfer although i had a solicitor acting for me he chose not to take legal advice although he was advised to by my solicitor on a number of occassions (all by letter, which she has copies of). And one you have paid your mortgage off, don,t you generally get a letter from the society stating that the mortgage is now paid off. Gosh i hope this makes sense to you and once again thanks for reading this, its much appreciated x
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jaycee401. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hello, jaycee. I understand your concern.
(1) It is very unusual for the Land Registry to allow proceedings against a Sole Proprietor in Possession but fraud in the transfer of the Title is one of the very few reasons it can happen
(2) I assume, then, that your ex has instigated proceedings for the rectification of the Register alleging that the Land Registry was misled through forgery by you
(3)When you attend the Tribunal you may very well find that the Adjudicator will listen to both sides and then adjourn the hearing until completion of a criminal court case. The Adjudicator has the power to send the matter to a criminal court, which will in turn trigger a police investigation.
(4)You really are obliged to immediately notify your mortgage lender of the proceedings. This is because the Title upon which his money is secured is in doubt and you must give him opportunity to secure his position until the Adjudicators decision and subsequent action by the Land Registry are known.
(5)Prior to the date of the Tribunal a Stage known as "Discovery and Inspection of Documents" will occur. You should then notify the Adjudicator of your wish to see your ex's mortgage documents, the alleged forged document(s) leading to the transfer of Title, and anything else you wish to see and the Adjudicator will arrange for this.
(6)It is important to understand that both of your case's before the Adjudicator are in no way bound by the case summaries that both of you have prepared for the Registrar. The proceedings before the Adjudicator are in effect started from scratch. The Adjudicator can direct that proceedings be started in court and can direct that the whole matter or any part of it be determined by the court. Sanctions can be applied for failure to comply with his directions. The Adjudicator can hear the whole matter himself and can even make a substantive decision without hearing the matter.
Please feel free to
(1) It is very unusual for the Land Registry to allow proceedings against a Sole Proprietor in Possession but fraud in the transfer of the Title is one of the very few reasons it can happen
(2) I assume, then, that your ex has instigated proceedings for the rectification of the Register alleging that the Land Registry was misled through forgery by you
(3)When you attend the Tribunal you may very well find that the Adjudicator will listen to both sides and then adjourn the hearing until completion of a criminal court case. The Adjudicator has the power to send the matter to a criminal court, which will in turn trigger a police investigation.
(4)You really are obliged to immediately notify your mortgage lender of the proceedings. This is because the Title upon which his money is secured is in doubt and you must give him opportunity to secure his position until the Adjudicators decision and subsequent action by the Land Registry are known.
(5)Prior to the date of the Tribunal a Stage known as "Discovery and Inspection of Documents" will occur. You should then notify the Adjudicator of your wish to see your ex's mortgage documents, the alleged forged document(s) leading to the transfer of Title, and anything else you wish to see and the Adjudicator will arrange for this.
(6)It is important to understand that both of your case's before the Adjudicator are in no way bound by the case summaries that both of you have prepared for the Registrar. The proceedings before the Adjudicator are in effect started from scratch. The Adjudicator can direct that proceedings be started in court and can direct that the whole matter or any part of it be determined by the court. Sanctions can be applied for failure to comply with his directions. The Adjudicator can hear the whole matter himself and can even make a substantive decision without hearing the matter.
Please feel free to
Also, I had meant to include that the discounted price has no bearing on the matter. Anybody can sell anything for any amount that they wish. However this is with the proviso that if the Adjudicator or the police were to come to the conclusion that the real purpose of the discount was to avoid or reduce Stamp Duty Land Tax they might report it and give rise to another headache.
I really hope the police get involved, as he is on record with them anyway regarding domestic violence (towards me-on several occassions, including a caution under the harrassment act). Surley once he realises that the police are involved he wil drop all these allegations, because I know 150% that he signed the letter and the transfer was done legally and above board (the solicitor who did my conveyancing is even acting as a witness at the tribunal for me).
Your right he is trying to do one of two things
1. to have the transfer set aside due to the 'forgery of the letter' and
2. is that fails then he wants a benefical interest in the equity.
I know you say the statements of case are irrelevant but even so, his is so full of holes and contradictions, in one sentence he is saying that he did not know he was even selling me the house and cannot understand why his mortgage lender redeemed him of his mortgage (err if he thought he still had a mtg on the prop why hasnt he been paying the monthly installments for the past 2 years) and in the next sentance he is saying he only sold it to me on the proviso I gave him some more money in 6 months time after the transfer when i was to come into some inheritance (i already had received the inheritance prior to the transfer taking place-it was this inheritance money from my late grandma which enabled me to purchase the property. All the lies he is giving can actually be proved to be lies.
Regarding me informing my mortgage lender am I best phoning or writing to them.
I have actually got copies of all correspondance regarding the transfer including the letter he sent to my mortgage lender. His legal rep wrote to my sol about 6 months ago saying if I did not admit that the letter war a forgery then they would have the signature foresnsically analysed, so my sol wrote back telling them to go ahead - we have not heard anything since!!!
Thanks for letting me waffle on Mustafa,
Your right he is trying to do one of two things
1. to have the transfer set aside due to the 'forgery of the letter' and
2. is that fails then he wants a benefical interest in the equity.
I know you say the statements of case are irrelevant but even so, his is so full of holes and contradictions, in one sentence he is saying that he did not know he was even selling me the house and cannot understand why his mortgage lender redeemed him of his mortgage (err if he thought he still had a mtg on the prop why hasnt he been paying the monthly installments for the past 2 years) and in the next sentance he is saying he only sold it to me on the proviso I gave him some more money in 6 months time after the transfer when i was to come into some inheritance (i already had received the inheritance prior to the transfer taking place-it was this inheritance money from my late grandma which enabled me to purchase the property. All the lies he is giving can actually be proved to be lies.
Regarding me informing my mortgage lender am I best phoning or writing to them.
I have actually got copies of all correspondance regarding the transfer including the letter he sent to my mortgage lender. His legal rep wrote to my sol about 6 months ago saying if I did not admit that the letter war a forgery then they would have the signature foresnsically analysed, so my sol wrote back telling them to go ahead - we have not heard anything since!!!
Thanks for letting me waffle on Mustafa,
Could you explain the significance of the alleged forged letter to which you refer, please. As I understand it the transfer of the title to you would have taken place via a Land Registry form which your ex would have signed "As a Deed" with his signature witnessed. This form supercedes all letters etc. You do not say that he is claiming that the form was forged and the witness false, only that a letter was forged and I cannot at the moment see the importance of this letter.
Perjury is the act of lying or making a false statement on oath or affirmation to a court of law. If the "signed statement of truth" fits into this but is in fact untrue then yes he has perjured. I have defined "beneficial interest" elsewhere and against this it is difficult to see that his claim to a beneficial interest if his claim to the title fails makes much sense.
Perjury is the act of lying or making a false statement on oath or affirmation to a court of law. If the "signed statement of truth" fits into this but is in fact untrue then yes he has perjured. I have defined "beneficial interest" elsewhere and against this it is difficult to see that his claim to a beneficial interest if his claim to the title fails makes much sense.
hi mustafa
this is how ridiculous it all is, he is not denying signing the actual transfer, although he is saying that he did not know what he was signing when he signed it, he says that somehow i intercepted his post (he had moved out of the property by this time and the transfer was sent by my solicitor to his new address) his exact words on his statement are that 'miss x somehow intercepted my post and got hold of the transfer, ripped off the top part of the contract and shoved a piece of paper (the second sheet of the contract) under my nose and said you need to sign this its something to do with the house. He signed it and it was witnessed. There is no dispute on either side that the signatures on the contract are forged. It is his offer letter to my mortgage lender informing them that he is selling me the house for �x that he is disputing.
He seems to think that if he had not given me the letter offering the house for sale then he would be able to either have the transfer set aside or claim a beneficial interest.
this is how ridiculous it all is, he is not denying signing the actual transfer, although he is saying that he did not know what he was signing when he signed it, he says that somehow i intercepted his post (he had moved out of the property by this time and the transfer was sent by my solicitor to his new address) his exact words on his statement are that 'miss x somehow intercepted my post and got hold of the transfer, ripped off the top part of the contract and shoved a piece of paper (the second sheet of the contract) under my nose and said you need to sign this its something to do with the house. He signed it and it was witnessed. There is no dispute on either side that the signatures on the contract are forged. It is his offer letter to my mortgage lender informing them that he is selling me the house for �x that he is disputing.
He seems to think that if he had not given me the letter offering the house for sale then he would be able to either have the transfer set aside or claim a beneficial interest.
Morning, jaycee.
Thanks. His mortgage lender will have placed what is currently called a restriction (sometimes still called a charge) on the title at the Land Registry which in effect stops the property from being sold until the debt owed to the mortgage lender is settled. Before the title could be transferred to you the restriction would have to be lifted. The disputed letter would not in any way be sufficient to effect this, only by the lender consenting to the mortgage and title being transferred to you alone or by passing the money owed through the lender's solicitors or to them would the lender then directly indicate consent to the Land Registry for the restriction's lifting. Presumably you paid your money to your solicitor who then dealt with the matter?
Thanks. His mortgage lender will have placed what is currently called a restriction (sometimes still called a charge) on the title at the Land Registry which in effect stops the property from being sold until the debt owed to the mortgage lender is settled. Before the title could be transferred to you the restriction would have to be lifted. The disputed letter would not in any way be sufficient to effect this, only by the lender consenting to the mortgage and title being transferred to you alone or by passing the money owed through the lender's solicitors or to them would the lender then directly indicate consent to the Land Registry for the restriction's lifting. Presumably you paid your money to your solicitor who then dealt with the matter?
hi mustafa
sorry for appearinga bit thick before, i think i understand a bit more now to what you were saying, my head is absolutley swimming with it all :)
In reply to your last comment my solicitor dealt with everything for me, including settling my ex's mortgage and sending him the settlement cheque.
sorry for appearinga bit thick before, i think i understand a bit more now to what you were saying, my head is absolutley swimming with it all :)
In reply to your last comment my solicitor dealt with everything for me, including settling my ex's mortgage and sending him the settlement cheque.
Hello jaycee. Sorry I have not replied before but for the last week or more I have been unable to log in to Answerbank as every attempt to do so was met by a page saying "Under Construction".
I had hoped when I first replied to you to be able to help a little as I deal with these matters quite a lot. But I am a bit baffled here as I cannot work out why or what the Registrar has sent to the Adjudicator to decide. If you read this and would like to continue with me please acknowledge and I will continue (by accident I have found a funny way to log on to Answerbank avoiding the "Under Construction" page !!).
I had hoped when I first replied to you to be able to help a little as I deal with these matters quite a lot. But I am a bit baffled here as I cannot work out why or what the Registrar has sent to the Adjudicator to decide. If you read this and would like to continue with me please acknowledge and I will continue (by accident I have found a funny way to log on to Answerbank avoiding the "Under Construction" page !!).
1 to 14 of 14
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.