11 years ago I lived with a property developer/estate agent who took out a mortgage in both our names.Bradford and Bingley pursued me 5 years ago for a debt of #36,000 following the repossession of the house which I left in 1989. My solicitor requested documents showing I had applied for a mortgage which they eventually produced. The mortgage application and MIRAS form have my details on them but the signature is definately a forgery. They also gave me a copy of a legal charge document that does have my signature on it(a completly different signature to that on the previous documents). B and B told me to report the forgery as a crime which I did but the police have not pursued. They also wanted me to supply a statement which I agreed to do but was 40 weeks pregnant at the time and they never arranged the appointment.The solicitor who is supposed to have witnessed teh signature was struck off for malpractice and I understand that my ex has been prosecuted for Fraud. I am therefore amazed that I received another letter at the beginning of the week requesting income and expenditure details. My questions are;-1. Can I really be liable for a mortgage I never applied for on the basis of a legal charge document? 2. The letter went to a previous address/previous name - should I ignore it? 3. I have estate agents details advertising the house for 175000- they sold it for an appalling amount of 86000. Surely this is inexcusable? 4. The Building Society knew where I was after I left in 1989 as they had had letters from both me and my solicitor to track down the deeds of the house. They never once told me that the mortgage repayments were in arrears or that they were going to repossess. If I did have this mortgage with them, surely they had a duty to inform me of this information so that I could do something about it ?

-- siobhan walsh (siobhan_walsh_uk@yahoo.com), July 26, 2000

Answers

Their claim is ridiculous. Read the site carefully but it boils down to politely requesting them to send you the files and then waiting for them to summons you.

You need this case to go to court, where, on the facts you have given us, you will walk all over the B&B. Read the site for latest information on Skiptno v Stott and lenders' undervaluing etc.

Lee

-- Lee (repossession@bigfoot.com), August 02, 2000.

Yes she can be Liable,due to a Legal Charge When she presumed ,signed the Deed which was perhaps in Escrow,The solicitor was a Practising Solicitor-he had to be to be Struck Off!

The court then looks at it by way of legal Charge dated ........ and duly signed.......

She admits to Knowing about a Mortgage and admits to knowing her signature on the Deed!!!

So in this Legal System at present she is "Guilty as charged"

Sofar at both District and Circuit Judge level they all tend to concur on this!

please remember i dont make the laws!!

Charles Twford

-- charles twford (charles.twford@lineone.net), August 03, 2000.

Any contract tainted with fraud is unenforcable in English Law. Further, I would refer you to a House of Lords ruling on 26/10/99 in Barclays Bank v Boulter (Mrs), regarding undue influence.

I cannot imagine a Court would enforce the deed. Were you misled as to what you were signing and were you doing this under some duress from your ex - it may well be in your favour if the answer tunrns out to be 'yes'! If this was not in your financial interests to sign such a document this would also be in your favour. Tha'ts of course if you did sign it. Is there any possibility you do not remember siging the deed ? Is the signature really yours, or a copy of your signature ?

Best wishes Vic

-- Vic Harper (victorcharper@aol.com), October 07, 2000.