Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

company's house duty of care to company

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby Voldemort » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:05 pm

atticus wrote:And, if you really want to read more ...

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cg ... 3/475.html

Thanks.
Voldemort
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:28 am

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby preacherman » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:21 pm

none of that answers the question whether the land registry might owe a duty of care by wrongly noting a charge for property A against property B.

so i send a charge to the registry ( agent akin to principle, or maybe not, as they were suppose to annul bankruptcy not register a charge on my behalf) the register should check the charge, and on seeing that it is for another property,and,or is erroneous continues to note it against the wrong property, and does not write back to me, or my agent, saying this cannot be noted or registered against this property because there is an obvious error that needs correcting.

there would have to be proximity.
User avatar
preacherman
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby atticus » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:35 pm

Please look at my question, preachy (the one listing 5 events). If you can't give direct answers, you are in no position to expect direct answers.

And spouting pseudo-legal gobbledegook as in your last post is of no help to man or beast.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19901
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby atticus » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:37 pm

atticus wrote:Where do you say the following is incorrect?

1. You did not own no 10.

2. You did own no 31.

3. You executed a charge.

4. The charge gave the address of the property charged as being no 10, a property you did not own.

5. The charge gave the title number of the property charged as being that of no 31, the property you did own.

Isn't there an obvious mistake in step 4, that could be, should be, and was rectified?
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19901
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby preacherman » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:38 pm

Voldemort wrote:A very sad situation.

Presumably “shark” and particularly “vulture”, would have been regulated by the FSA (PRA/FCA), if they were able to provide bridging finance against a residential property?

Unless they were illegal loan sharks, perhaps there’s a claim against the company/individual and if they’re no longer trading, against the Financial Services Compensation Scheme?


what would i be claiming for though?
User avatar
preacherman
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby preacherman » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:52 pm

atticus wrote:Where do you say the following is incorrect?

1. You did not own no 10.

2. You did own no 31.

3. You executed a charge.

4. The charge gave the address of the property charged as being no 10, a property you did not own.

5. The charge gave the title number of the property charged as being that of no 31, the property you did own.

Isn't there an obvious mistake in step 4, that could be, should be, and was rectified?


1. correct.
2. correct, some mortgage by first charge holder.
3.yes but arguable.
4.correct.
5.correct.

yes obvious mistake to a land registry staff member, or to me particularly, I only had sight of it when they sought possession. There was discussion at possession hearing about rectification,( i forget now without digging out transcript) i.e claimant would have to apply to amend, but that never occurred because the court was convinced that the charge was a registered charge, correctly registered.( when I say that I mean it was correctly registered without any amendments corrections, applications, rectifications being needed).
User avatar
preacherman
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby atticus » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:54 pm

With those answers, I struggle to see any basis of complaint or claim that you may have against the Land Registry.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19901
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby preacherman » Fri Jan 22, 2016 3:58 pm

Voldemort wrote:A very sad situation.

Presumably “shark” and particularly “vulture”, would have been regulated by the FSA (PRA/FCA), if they were able to provide bridging finance against a residential property?

Unless they were illegal loan sharks, perhaps there’s a claim against the company/individual and if they’re no longer trading, against the Financial Services Compensation Scheme?


I just spoke to fsa. apparently, consolidated finance brokers Ltd, and bankruptcy protection fund ( both liquidated) were only representatives of HL Partnership Ltd ( or limited) who are still active. as such they cant help, and any complaint should be lodged against hl partnership limited with financial ombudsmen.

I did have a claim against consolidated but that was set aside when they went into receivership, is that wrong,? in light of this new fact that they were only representatives of HL Partnership which is still active, couldn't the claim have continued against them had this new info been known?
User avatar
preacherman
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby Voldemort » Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:06 pm

preacherman wrote:
Voldemort wrote:A very sad situation.

Presumably “shark” and particularly “vulture”, would have been regulated by the FSA (PRA/FCA), if they were able to provide bridging finance against a residential property?

Unless they were illegal loan sharks, perhaps there’s a claim against the company/individual and if they’re no longer trading, against the Financial Services Compensation Scheme?


what would i be claiming for though?

I haven’t had the opportunity to read all of Atti’s links - and don’t know what avenues you have already pursued nor their outcomes.

The conduct of the companies/individuals described by Atti, would indicate that any regulated financial product (such as first-charge residential bridging loans) would have been miss-sold and / or incorrectly executed in that scenario. The Financial Ombudsman would/should assist in your complaints against these firms.

If you received independent legal advice (a requirement), then the conduct of the firm representing you would also be called into question and should be raised with the SRA.
Voldemort
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:28 am

Re: company's house duty of care to company

Postby preacherman » Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:10 pm

thanks voldemont.

this is interesting atticus:

for me anyway!

I just spoke to fsa. apparently, consolidated finance brokers Ltd, and bankruptcy protection fund ( both liquidated) were only representatives of HL Partnership Ltd ( or limited) who are still active. as such they cant help, and any complaint should be lodged against hl partnership limited with financial ombudsmen.

I did have a claim against consolidated but that was set aside when they went into receivership, is that wrong,? in light of this new fact that they were only representatives of HL Partnership which is still active, couldn't the claim have continued against them had this new info been known?
User avatar
preacherman
 
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Torts - Negligence, Defamation and others

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest