What can be done if a Receiver is appointed unreasonably

Jim Stafford

Registered User
Messages
631
Copied and split from another thread as it's such an interesting issue - Brendan

Whilst the business model of the vulture funds is to "force" the sale of properties as quickly as they can, the business model of the pillar banks has now stabilised in the sense that they now wish to retain their lending books.

Given the protections afforded by the Code of Conduct on Lending to SMEs (a landlord can be categorised as a SME) the pillar banks are very slow to appoint receivers if you can demonstrate that you can repay the loan in full within 15 years. Appeals can be successfully made to the Credit Review Office.

If you cannot demonstrate that you can repay the loan in full within 15 years then you are in difficulty.

Another option would be to try and re-finance the loan.

Depending on your circumstances, one option to consider might be to do a PIA.

Jim Stafford
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Jim

This has come up a few times with people worried about Start appointing Receivers over one missed payment.

Could you explain the Receivership process and practice?

Is the following correct.

The right to appoint a receiver comes from the mortgage agreement.
If the agreement does not have this right in it, then the banks must seek a court order for possession.

What is the typical wording in the contract.

For example, if I have a cheap tracker on a buy to let and I miss one payment, can the lender just appoint a Receiver to get their hands on the property?

If I am with a Pillar Bank I can appeal to the Credit Review Office - that is good to know.
But what if I am with a fund? Can I appeal to the court?

Brendan
 
Do the likes of Start actually appoint rent receivers if they are being paid in full. Or can they do it whenever they want. Or does there have to have been a missed payment. With them, or prior to them buying the loan. Do they have many properties with rent receivers. Is this beneficial to them. And costly to the borrower. With higher interest rates, with no control over expenditure, no control over how much rent is charged and with the added cost of paying the rent receiver.
 
Back
Top