Damages for illegal appointment of receiver

Richie1974

Registered User
Hi Red.

Just one or two points for now and I will get back to you with timeline.

1-I am not sure if they classed myself as not engaging. But in the letter they wrote to LG Asset they said I should now fall within CCMA.

2- there is nothing in my contract that says a receiver can be appointed
 
Last edited:

cremeegg

Frequent Poster
I can usually see both sides to an argument, but not here.

UB appointed a receiver to his home without any legal basis for doing so. This seems to have been admitted by UB.

OP get a really nasty lawyer and take hundreds of thousands off them.

Brendan, if someone, without legal authority put you out of your home, doubt you would be saying.

They were perfectly entitled to sell your mortgage whether it was a home or a buy to let.

The appointment of a Receiver appears to be an error but it's not clear how this actually affected you.
I do understand that the OP was living in England when the receiver took his property, but that does not change the fact that legally he was put out of his home.
 

Dazzler123

Registered User
There is a power to appoint a receiver presuming the mortgage is a pre-2009 mortgage. All of the main bank mortgages contain provisions to that effect.

You are not going to get loads of compo for this as you have not suffered any loss. The property was being rented so youd have had to get the tenants out first. If you made no effort to do so, then you cannot really claim you would have returned to the house but for the receiver.
 

Richie1974

Registered User
Dazzler, Correct me if I am wrong. But when the receiver was appointed it’s pretty much game over, the advice I was given is that if I attempted to remove tenants , take the rent, move back in I could easily of found myself in court.to move back home I had to challenge the appointment of the receiver, which was done but they took no notice.
As for pre 2009 power to appoint a receiver to PDH May be something I need to look more into.
 
Last edited:

Richie1974

Registered User
Maybe I don’t understand this correctly, is it the case that a receiver can be appointed for pre 2009 contracts even if the power to appoint is not in the contract,but the demand for debt had to be called in pre 2009 too ?
Would Vulture funds not be appointing receivers to all 2009 loans if it could to save them going to court
 
Last edited:

TLO

Frequent Poster
There is a power to appoint a receiver presuming the mortgage is a pre-2009 mortgage. All of the main bank mortgages contain provisions to that effect.
Never heard of this before. The power to appoint a receiver only applies to properties that were bought to let. And the power to appoint has to be mentioned in the loan agreement.

As an aside, an invalidly appointed receiver is a bit like a trespasser or a squatter. You can try and persuade them to move on. But if they don't then you need a court order to force them out.
 

Dazzler123

Registered User
Dazzler, Correct me if I am wrong. But when the receiver was appointed it’s pretty much game over, the advice I was given is that if I attempted to remove tenants , take the rent, move back in I could easily of found myself in court.to move back home I had to challenge the appointment of the receiver, which was done but they took no notice.
As for pre 2009 power to appoint a receiver to PDH May be something I need to look more into.
The appointment of the receiver could have been challenged by way of declaratory relief in the courts.

Had you interfered with the receiver in carrying out their duties it is likely that you would have faced an injunction in the high court.
 

Dazzler123

Registered User
Maybe I don’t understand this correctly, is it the case that a receiver can be appointed for pre 2009 contracts even if the power to appoint is not in the contract,but the demand for debt had to be called in pre 2009 too ?
Would Vulture funds not be appointing receivers to all 2009 loans if it could to save them going to court
The power to appoint a receiver is standard in all the major banks mortgage documentation for years. My reference to pre 2009 refers to the 2009 land and conveyancing act which effectively killed receiverships for post 2009 homeloan mortgages.
 

Dazzler123

Registered User
Never heard of this before. The power to appoint a receiver only applies to properties that were bought to let. And the power to appoint has to be mentioned in the loan agreement.
Power to appoint a receiver is not only confined to buy to lets. It applies to pdh's too but most banks will get an order for possesion for a pdh. If its vacant or the borrower is abroad, some will appoint a receiver or agent.

Power to appoint has to be in the mortgage as opposed to the loan agreement.
 
Top