Based on the current information that any mortgage is probably a #VOIDMORTGAGE
What role can a LPA Receiver possibly have to do do with anything?
There are specific undertakings that they should carry out and most of them do no seem to be met.
Please join the conversation over at the VOIDMORTGAGE KNOWLEDGEBASE and extend this info for others in the same position
#VOIDMORTGAGE
Accounting ledgers are great.
They show how books balance.
This is what double entry book keeping is all about.
So where did the “Mortgage” funds come from?
For a “Loan” to take place there must be a draw down in one account to transfer to another.
Also any “Deposit” will increase a ledger.
So please, to all you highly qualified ACCA and CIMA accountants out there with a “Mortgage”…
get your calculators and spreadsheets out and show us the money!!!
When you get to grips with what is really going on you will confirm that YOU are the originating creditor.
#VOIDMORTGAGE
Unconscionability in English law is a field of contract law and the law of trusts, which precludes the enforcement of consent based obligations. “Inequality of bargaining power” is another term used to express essentially the same idea for the same area of law, which can in turn be further broken down into cases on duress, undue influence and exploitation of weakness. In these cases, where someone’s consent to a bargain was only procured through duress, out of undue influence or under severe external pressure that another person exploited, courts have felt it was unconscionable (i.e., contrary to good conscience) to enforce agreements. Any transfers of goods or money may be claimed back in restitution on the basis of unjust enrichment subject to certain defences.
Considerable controversy is still present over whether “iniquitous pressure” must actually be exercised by a defendant in order for a consent based obligation to be voidable. While it seems clear that in cases of undue influence the pressure need not come from the person who may lose the contract[1] it is open to debate whether circumstances exist where an obligation should be voidable simply because the person was pressured by circumstances wholly outside a defendant’s control.
One of the most prominent cases in this area is Lloyds Bank Ltd v Bundy[2] where Lord Denning MR advocated that there be a general principle to govern this entire area. He called the concept “inequality of bargaining power“, while the American case espousing an equivalent doctrine, Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.[3] termed the issue one of “unconscionability”. Note that Lord Denning’s approach was later rejected by the House of Lords in National Westminster Bank v Morgan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability_in_English_law
#VOIDMORTGAGE
Money out of thin air?
Well it would appear they (the banks) cannot just do that.
There must be something to monetise in the first place.
Where can these items be verified?
Bank Of England state as per their quarterly bulletins
Quarterly Bulletin 2008 Q1 Volume 48 No. 1
Steve Baker MP house of commons debate and Hansard
Steve Baker MP at the historic debate in UK Parliament on Money Creation
The full text of the debate is here
and here http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141120/debtext/141120-0002.htm
These are verifiable statements on the record in the public domain.
We need to look at how the equitable arrangements of a mortgage come about.
If it can be proved as a fact that zero loan existed when your freehold was purchased, how can the alleged lender make any claim AT ALL?
What is the most that an alleged lender can claim?
Even using case law that they can take the house back before the ink is dry? (link required)
We would suggest that in “Equity” this figure could be a MAXIMUM of 50% of any alleged loan and then 100% if in fact a loan did actually take place with facts, evidence and full accounting.
This is based on an exchange of items or a swap. Your paperwork for their advance.
Where someone has been in their home for 10 years with a £100,000 “Mortgage” paying £500 per months they may have fallen behind by 2 months payments.
This is enough for the alleged lender to take possession proceedings.
As Loyd Grossman would say…..” Lets have a look at the evidence!”
If NO LOAN takes place, then any “Money” (credit) that came out of thin air because someone wrote something on a piece of paper, who is entitled to make a claim and for what?
This is where we get our 50% from. A swap or exchange of two items having the same value but a different specie of “MONEY”.
Paying the £500 per month soon tots up. That is £6000 per year and after 10 years £60,000.
The £120,000 house is now probably worth £200,000.
The alleged lender now claims that due to the fact you have not paid TWO months of £500, they want “their” house back.
In equity, where are we with this and the accounting?
I’m guessing that you already worked out that you put in quite a bit more than the bank.
Even IF they made any loan at all!
#VOIDMORTGAGE
Which one do you believe you entered into?
What do all your offer documents refer to?
What are the elements of THE contract or YOUR deed?
If all the elements of a contract do exist then the actual content of those documents will form the primae facie case that should be put forward in any claim against you.
What is it therefore that is ACTUALLY being claimed from you?
If you had an offer of a loan where is the evidence of that completion of the contract and the bargaining that took place?
Or were you offered a deed whereby that you may have been misled by your agent which is in fact a contract to be in debt for an amount of money and this is backed up by a security placed on the property.
This being known as a type of disposition called a mortgage.
The paperwork will speak for itself if you can prove produce and identify all the elements.
You see, anyone can do a good deed for another, some may even sign a deed to confirm they will do it …
CONTRACT OR DEED?
#VOIDMORTGAGE
MONEY VS MONIES WORTH?
What does this mean and what were you actually loaned?
It really is as different as apples and pears.
If someone wanted some apples and could only complete the bargain by providing pears then that exchange would be complete. (If accepted of course.)
If you wanted apples but completed the bargain with “Money”(1) then that exchange would be complete.
In both scenarios the person had to have the apples.
If you go to the Post Office to get your Euros you pay over “Money” (1).
That exchange is complete as you agreed to it but the PO took a cut for providing the service of “Exchange” (3).
In this case the PO had to have the Euro’s.
If you wanted “Credit” (2) and the only thing you had access to was a “Promise to pay” (3).
When do you think this transaction completes the bargain?
So what happens when you get a “Mortgage” (4)?
You think that someone is going to lend you the money that they have and you agree to paying this money back with interest because that is how it is in a commercial transaction.
For a contract or agreement to take place there has to be a number of elements.
If you thought that “Money” (1) was being lent, as opposed to be advanced “Credit” (2) would you have had the same intent or could it be argued that “Mutual Intent” (5) never existed in the transaction for the bargain to complete?
(1) Money =
(2) Credit =
(3) Exchange =
(4) Mortgage =
(5) Mutual Intent =
(6) Monies Worth =
Therefore in what circumstances does Money EQUAL Monies worth?
Answers on a postcard …
Many people think that a “mortgage” is a loan of money to buy their house.
This is the problem with presumptions.
Terminology is everything.
A “Hoover” is a tradename for a vacuum cleaner, therefore not all vacuum cleaners are “Hoovers”.
What is a Loan?
A “Loan” is normally one of 2 things.
1) Something you do or supply for free, normally to a friend who will return the thing,money or the favour.
2)The other is a commercial activity where the “Loan” has conditions attached, normally a contract and where you pay a commercial rate for the provision of a “Loan”
A Loan could be described as the particular loss of an asset for a period of time until it is returned, with or without any commercial rates attached.
For a Loan to have taken place therefore:
The amount “Loaned” MUST cause a deficit in the accounting of the “LENDER”
If this simple transaction does not occur it therefore cannot be classified as a “LOAN”