Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

First active ulster bank mortgage has not been securitised against house

Options
  • 21-12-2019 4:15pm
    #1
    the culture of deference
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭


    To anyone dealing with vulture funds or mortgage transfers.


    A client of my colleague has just found out his mortgage loan was not secured against his house during one of the many first active / UB uk / UB irl transfers. The loan is not secured against any asset.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,205 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    What does that mean in reality?


  • Options
    #3
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,871 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    That they'll just seek to make the borrower bankrupt instead.


  • Options
    #4
    whippet
    Registered Users Posts: 7,672 ✭✭✭whippet


    There is a cohort of ‘groups’ who believe this means free houses for all .. and have yet to prove their opinion in a court


  • Options
    #5
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    whippet wrote: »
    There is a cohort of ‘groups’ who believe this means free houses for all .. and have yet to prove their opinion in a court

    And we can read more about it in the Freeman Megamerge thread, but, don't forget the courts are in cahoots with the banks :)


  • Options
    #6
    richieb
    Registered Users Posts: 131 ✭✭richieb


    yes the house may not be secured to the loan, this has happened on numerous occasions in the past, what does it mean,...…..a repossession order is unlikely to be granted as the bank etc has no material interest in the property....but you still owe the money,,,,two options for the bank….go to the court and assign the house to the loan...which they have done before or ask for the money to be paid in full and when you cant they enter a judgement and put a lean on the house. the hub on face book has loads of answers ref this situation... once you accepted the loan of the money in the first case you do owe it, the fact that the house is no longer tied to the loan does not mean a lot


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Credit Checker Moose
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭Credit Checker Moose


    I take it if the bank has no legal hold on the house the scallywags could in theory transfer it?


  • Options
    #8
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,299 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Credit Checker Moose wrote: »
    I take it if the bank has no legal hold on the house the scallywags could in theory transfer it?
    They could yes, but the court could reverse the transfer, if it was seen as an attempt to defraud creditors.


  • Options
    #9
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Children > 12
    adverse possesion...

    Children < 12
    make any reciever's life hell


  • Options
    #10
    the culture of deference
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭the culture of deference


    Credit Checker Moose wrote: »
    I take it if the bank has no legal hold on the house the scallywags could in theory transfer it?


    yes


    and the original transfer was completed in 2011


Advertisement