In May I attended a possession hearing for my property. The judge asked if 28 days notice of possession was suitable for me. I stated no as it would only increase the amount owed by another month's payment. He then change it to "Possession Forthwith" to avoid this happening to me. The Building Society's agents at the hearing noted this. Repossession then happened exactly 28 days later! I questioned this delay with the Building Society and they stated that they had sent a request for a warrant to the court bailiffs three days after the hearing but were not able to control when the possession would take place. I have sent a letter to the court manager enquiring what all parties were required to do in the event of it being "Forthwith" but as yet have not received a reply.

Question: Does anybody know what should have happened?

Also at the hearing the building society's solicitors were not able to attend and they appointed a local firm of solicitors to act as their agents. These turned out to be my Ex-wife's solicitor's. They told me not to mention it in court as I wanted the repossession to go ahead didn't I? When I later questioned the Building Society's solicitor's about a possible conflict of interest they stated that the solicitors in question had not received any instructions from my Ex-wife since December 1999 so were quite able to act in this matter. I was in contention with my Ex-wife as I wished to sell the property and she would not agree. She later did a "Runner" from the property.

Question: What if any are the implications of this to their future shortfall claim and does this mean that my Ex-wife cannot use her previous solicitors in connection with this case in the future?

-- Anthony (Lamps@btinternet.com), June 28, 2000