Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

stopbailiff
Posts: 785
Joined: 11 Dec 2015 14:57

#36 Re: Debt in maiden name

Post by stopbailiff » 17 Oct 2016 10:06

Amy wrote:
stopbailiff wrote:To be fair, in terms of academic law and commercial in practice, not withstanding being university educated in any event, am probably the most academically qualified person on this website which should not be taken lightly.
To be fair, how do you know this?

Simply because you love to preen yourself for all to see, does not mean others are not qualified or have as many qualifications as you claim to have.
The thing is Amy, despite what any of you may think, I don't think I am better than anyone else on here; yes, I am clearly well educated in matters of law and my opinion given the fact I studied relevant subjects should not be taken lightly; but, it's plainly obvious you all know your stuff on bailiff law, and are clearly not stupid. I have said this all along and maintain this position.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4087
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#37 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Amy » 17 Oct 2016 10:21

You said you were "...probably the most academically qualified person on this website which should not be taken lightly."

I asked you how you know this. Simply because nobody mentions it does not make it so.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#38 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Oct 2016 10:56

This board is not about bragging rights. It's about helping people with bailiff problems. I started DWB because I saw an obvious gap in the market. The services available was not up to standard. The methodologies never worked. Have you ever seen Sheila achieve a successful redress for a client? The number of successful clients in all her years trading is a big fat zero.

If you can do it better, then the stage is yours. You don't need to brag about academic smarts to achieve results for your clients.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

stopbailiff
Posts: 785
Joined: 11 Dec 2015 14:57

#39 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by stopbailiff » 17 Oct 2016 11:29

jasonDWB wrote:This board is not about bragging rights. It's about helping people with bailiff problems. I started DWB because I saw an obvious gap in the market. The services available was not up to standard. The methodologies never worked. Have you ever seen Sheila achieve a successful redress for a client? The number of successful clients in all her years trading is a big fat zero.

If you can do it better, then the stage is yours. You don't need to brag about academic smarts to achieve results for your clients.
Am not bragging am just saying I have studied relevant legal subjects besides basic Seller remedies, ie:


download/file.php?mode=view&id=2433


download/file.php?mode=view&id=2434
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4087
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#40 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Amy » 17 Oct 2016 11:37

Christ almighty! We know!

Tony72
Posts: 29
Joined: 11 Sep 2016 21:13

#41 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Tony72 » 17 Oct 2016 11:46

Those screen shots show nothing except, perhaps, and I do mean perhaps, the person signed up for those modules although they do not actually say what the modules are.

It really isn't relevant though, is it?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13227
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#42 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Schedule 12 » 17 Oct 2016 12:04

If you are offering help with bailiff problems then it's welcome.

If you are posting irrelatives then it needs to stop.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Michelle
Moderator
Posts: 1984
Joined: 10 Nov 2014 14:42
Location: Nuvion

#43 Re: Debt in maiden name

Post by Michelle » 17 Oct 2016 12:12

stopbailiff wrote:
Amy wrote:
stopbailiff wrote:To be fair, in terms of academic law and commercial in practice, not withstanding being university educated in any event, am probably the most academically qualified person on this website which should not be taken lightly.
To be fair, how do you know this?

Simply because you love to preen yourself for all to see, does not mean others are not qualified or have as many qualifications as you claim to have.
The thing is Amy, despite what any of you may think, I don't think I am better than anyone else on here; yes, I am clearly well educated in matters of law and my opinion given the fact I studied relevant subjects should not be taken lightly; but, it's plainly obvious you all know your stuff on bailiff law, and are clearly not stupid. I have said this all along and maintain this position.
It's not just bailiff law we have dealt with here, enforcement is the final stage of legal proceedings, and bailiffs are just one form of enforcement.
  • We have discussed court fines which relate to criminal law, not bailiff law, bailiffs are only used when people don't pay their fines, and you said there could be joint liability for a fine, remember?
  • You also asked whether a warrant for recovery of council tax was issued by the county court, that's not bailiff law, it's basic Intro to Law 101 stuff, county courts don't have jurisdiction to issue LOs or warrants for council tax.
  • This thread started life when you said that rent arrears were subject to a 12 year limitation period because they "related to land". I showed you LA 1980 clearly says 6 years for rent arrears. That's nothing to do with bailiff law, rent arrears don't give a landlord the right to obtain a warrant or writ without first obtaining a CCJ, and limitation could be used to defend these proceedings, however, landlords usually obtain a money judgment at the time they go to court to gain possession of the property.
  • We then discussed limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls which have nothing to do with bailiff law, and you didn't know that it was the interest that's subject to a 6 year limitation period, or that, in most cases the shortfall would be for the capital because the arrears of interest will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property before the capital. Despite having studied land law, you were not familiar with this.
  • Then we have CCJ set aside. CCJs are behind writs and warrants for civil debts and most are undefended default judgments. Are you familiar with the procedure for set aside? I think not, because that's the practical side of law you didn't read with the OU.
None of the above points refer to bailiff law, yet they are relevant to the issues dealt with on here, and on most other consumer sites. I didn't need to read commercial law at the OU to know all that. Forums can be full of myths and misinformation, so you need to go back to the legislation to make sure you are giving the right information. One can refer to stories from OPs on other sites but not necessarily what they've been told to do, because it may be incorrect. I always try to quote the relevant legislation so everyone knows where the opinion, advice or whatever you call it, came from. You'll notice Jason, Tuco, etc. tend to do the same. :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:
Listen very carefully, I shall post this only once:
Anything posted by me is from my own knowledge and experience, it is not legal advice or the official views of this forum.

Knowledge is Power.

User avatar
Michelle
Moderator
Posts: 1984
Joined: 10 Nov 2014 14:42
Location: Nuvion

#44 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Michelle » 17 Oct 2016 12:22

Tony72 wrote:Those screen shots show nothing except, perhaps, and I do mean perhaps, the person signed up for those modules although they do not actually say what the modules are.

It really isn't relevant though, is it?
As can be seen from my post above, it isn't relevant at all. Apart from the many practice areas in law, legal issues can be broadly divided into contentious and non contentious. All those subjects may be useful for non contentious legal work, such as drafting contracts, which is what a lot of lawyers do. We don't deal with that side of things here, only with the contentious side of the law, a.k.a. litigation, and our well educated friend doesn't seem to be au fait with this kind of legal issues involving court action. :geek:
Listen very carefully, I shall post this only once:
Anything posted by me is from my own knowledge and experience, it is not legal advice or the official views of this forum.

Knowledge is Power.

stopbailiff
Posts: 785
Joined: 11 Dec 2015 14:57

#45 Re: Debt in maiden name

Post by stopbailiff » 17 Oct 2016 12:26

Michelle wrote:
stopbailiff wrote:
Amy wrote: To be fair, how do you know this?

Simply because you love to preen yourself for all to see, does not mean others are not qualified or have as many qualifications as you claim to have.
The thing is Amy, despite what any of you may think, I don't think I am better than anyone else on here; yes, I am clearly well educated in matters of law and my opinion given the fact I studied relevant subjects should not be taken lightly; but, it's plainly obvious you all know your stuff on bailiff law, and are clearly not stupid. I have said this all along and maintain this position.
It's not just bailiff law we have dealt with here, enforcement is the final stage of legal proceedings, and bailiffs are just one form of enforcement.
  • We have discussed court fines which relate to criminal law, not bailiff law, bailiffs are only used when people don't pay their fines, and you said there could be joint liability for a fine, remember?
  • You also asked whether a warrant for recovery of council tax was issued by the county court, that's not bailiff law, it's basic Intro to Law 101 stuff, county courts don't have jurisdiction to issue LOs or warrants for council tax.
  • This thread started life when you said that rent arrears were subject to a 12 year limitation period because they "related to land". I showed you LA 1980 clearly says 6 years for rent arrears. That's nothing to do with bailiff law, rent arrears don't give a landlord the right to obtain a warrant or writ without first obtaining a CCJ, and limitation could be used to defend these proceedings, however, landlords usually obtain a money judgment at the time they go to court to gain possession of the property.
  • We then discussed limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls which have nothing to do with bailiff law, and you didn't know that it was the interest that's subject to a 6 year limitation period, or that, in most cases the shortfall would be for the capital because the arrears of interest will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property before the capital. Despite having studied land law, you were not familiar with this.
  • Then we have CCJ set aside. CCJs are behind writs and warrants for civil debts and most are undefended default judgments. Are you familiar with the procedure for set aside? I think not, because that's the practical side of law you didn't read with the OU.
None of the above points refer to bailiff law, yet they are relevant to the issues dealt with on here, and on most other consumer sites. I didn't need to read commercial law at the OU to know all that. Forums can be full of myths and misinformation, so you need to go back to the legislation to make sure you are giving the right information. One can refer to stories from OPs on other sites but not necessarily what they've been told to do, because it may be incorrect. I always try to quote the relevant legislation so everyone knows where the opinion, advice or whatever you call it, came from. You'll notice Jason, Tuco, etc. tend to do the same. :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:
Land law is property law (compulsory for law degree) - limit periods is pursuant to the statute of limitation, an all together different law. People are affected in property matters, ie the bailiff can get a charge on their land or a floating charge on their business. Limitation can be used at the point of breach but it must be more than default on a payment. You additionally said the statute of limitation (LA 1980) does not define 'cause of action.' However cause of action is distinguished to defence: Denning on Estoppels, in that a defence is a shield whereas a cause of action is metaphorically, a sword. In other words, cause of action is a positive form of action, ie bring proceedings. So, clearly and obviously a CCJ is already a judgement which in effect is a cause of action, so the limitation defence cannot apply. You need to recognise the difference between an omission, an express statement and an acknowledgement wherever I chose one or the other, or none.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4087
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#46 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Amy » 17 Oct 2016 13:20

Bored shitless of this now and it is going to stop.

Any more of this constant barrage of subjects you have studied and I will moderate you.

User avatar
Michelle
Moderator
Posts: 1984
Joined: 10 Nov 2014 14:42
Location: Nuvion

#47 Re: Debt in maiden name

Post by Michelle » 17 Oct 2016 13:24

stopbailiff wrote:
Michelle wrote:
stopbailiff wrote:
The thing is Amy, despite what any of you may think, I don't think I am better than anyone else on here; yes, I am clearly well educated in matters of law and my opinion given the fact I studied relevant subjects should not be taken lightly; but, it's plainly obvious you all know your stuff on bailiff law, and are clearly not stupid. I have said this all along and maintain this position.
It's not just bailiff law we have dealt with here, enforcement is the final stage of legal proceedings, and bailiffs are just one form of enforcement.
  • We have discussed court fines which relate to criminal law, not bailiff law, bailiffs are only used when people don't pay their fines, and you said there could be joint liability for a fine, remember?
  • You also asked whether a warrant for recovery of council tax was issued by the county court, that's not bailiff law, it's basic Intro to Law 101 stuff, county courts don't have jurisdiction to issue LOs or warrants for council tax.
  • This thread started life when you said that rent arrears were subject to a 12 year limitation period because they "related to land". I showed you LA 1980 clearly says 6 years for rent arrears. That's nothing to do with bailiff law, rent arrears don't give a landlord the right to obtain a warrant or writ without first obtaining a CCJ, and limitation could be used to defend these proceedings, however, landlords usually obtain a money judgment at the time they go to court to gain possession of the property.
  • We then discussed limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls which have nothing to do with bailiff law, and you didn't know that it was the interest that's subject to a 6 year limitation period, or that, in most cases the shortfall would be for the capital because the arrears of interest will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property before the capital. Despite having studied land law, you were not familiar with this.
  • Then we have CCJ set aside. CCJs are behind writs and warrants for civil debts and most are undefended default judgments. Are you familiar with the procedure for set aside? I think not, because that's the practical side of law you didn't read with the OU.
None of the above points refer to bailiff law, yet they are relevant to the issues dealt with on here, and on most other consumer sites. I didn't need to read commercial law at the OU to know all that. Forums can be full of myths and misinformation, so you need to go back to the legislation to make sure you are giving the right information. One can refer to stories from OPs on other sites but not necessarily what they've been told to do, because it may be incorrect. I always try to quote the relevant legislation so everyone knows where the opinion, advice or whatever you call it, came from. You'll notice Jason, Tuco, etc. tend to do the same. :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:
Land law is property law (compulsory for law degree) - limit periods is pursuant to the statute of limitation, an all together different law. People are affected in property matters, ie the bailiff can get a charge on their land or a floating charge on their business. Limitation can be used at the point of breach but it must be more than default on a payment. You additionally said the statute of limitation (LA 1980) does not define 'cause of action.' However cause of action is distinguished to defence: Denning on Estoppels, in that a defence is a shield whereas a cause of action is metaphorically, a sword. In other words, cause of action is a positive form of action, ie bring proceedings. So, clearly and obviously a CCJ is already a judgement which in effect is a cause of action, so the limitation defence cannot apply. You need to recognise the difference between an omission, an express statement and an acknowledgement wherever I chose one or the other, or none.
Your responses are always so predictable. Where you have been shown to have got it wrong, despite all your legal studies, you attempt to blind us all with your academic knowledge. I am aware that land law and limitation are different laws, but they are interlinked, otherwise you couldn't argue that a mortgage shortfall is SBd. :geek:

I didn't just say that the LA 1980 does not define cause of action, if you look at it, you'll see, or, more accurately, won't see it, because it's not there. The cause of action is not bringing proceedings, it can be defined as a valid reason to bring proceedings, and it doesn't have to be a breach (as in breach of contract), proceedings can also be brought in tort where there is no contract, trust me, I know about this, and not from the OU course materials. :mrgreen:

I wouldn't say a CCJ is a cause of action, it is the result of the action. It's a court order and, like all court orders, can be enforced, as can costs orders, liability orders and fines which are also a kind of court order, albeit of a different kind (criminal as opposed to civil). I don't need to recite snippets from legal texts to make a point. Nobody needs to know the theory behind court orders to be able to deal with them any more than you need to be a washing machine engineer to get clean clothes. A solicitor won't mention all that legal theory when you go and consult him/her with a legal problem, in fact, they tend not to mention the legislation they are basing their advice on, just the course of action that can be followed. I also know about that from real life experience. :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:

I'm sure when they get together, solicitors discuss all these principles between them, when trying to find an angle they can use for a tricky case, but they don't quote them back to their clients, nor do they refer to them when dealing with day-to-day matters. :geek:
Listen very carefully, I shall post this only once:
Anything posted by me is from my own knowledge and experience, it is not legal advice or the official views of this forum.

Knowledge is Power.

stopbailiff
Posts: 785
Joined: 11 Dec 2015 14:57

#48 Re: Debt in maiden name

Post by stopbailiff » 17 Oct 2016 14:01

Michelle wrote:
stopbailiff wrote:
Michelle wrote: It's not just bailiff law we have dealt with here, enforcement is the final stage of legal proceedings, and bailiffs are just one form of enforcement.
  • We have discussed court fines which relate to criminal law, not bailiff law, bailiffs are only used when people don't pay their fines, and you said there could be joint liability for a fine, remember?
  • You also asked whether a warrant for recovery of council tax was issued by the county court, that's not bailiff law, it's basic Intro to Law 101 stuff, county courts don't have jurisdiction to issue LOs or warrants for council tax.
  • This thread started life when you said that rent arrears were subject to a 12 year limitation period because they "related to land". I showed you LA 1980 clearly says 6 years for rent arrears. That's nothing to do with bailiff law, rent arrears don't give a landlord the right to obtain a warrant or writ without first obtaining a CCJ, and limitation could be used to defend these proceedings, however, landlords usually obtain a money judgment at the time they go to court to gain possession of the property.
  • We then discussed limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls which have nothing to do with bailiff law, and you didn't know that it was the interest that's subject to a 6 year limitation period, or that, in most cases the shortfall would be for the capital because the arrears of interest will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property before the capital. Despite having studied land law, you were not familiar with this.
  • Then we have CCJ set aside. CCJs are behind writs and warrants for civil debts and most are undefended default judgments. Are you familiar with the procedure for set aside? I think not, because that's the practical side of law you didn't read with the OU.
None of the above points refer to bailiff law, yet they are relevant to the issues dealt with on here, and on most other consumer sites. I didn't need to read commercial law at the OU to know all that. Forums can be full of myths and misinformation, so you need to go back to the legislation to make sure you are giving the right information. One can refer to stories from OPs on other sites but not necessarily what they've been told to do, because it may be incorrect. I always try to quote the relevant legislation so everyone knows where the opinion, advice or whatever you call it, came from. You'll notice Jason, Tuco, etc. tend to do the same. :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:
Land law is property law (compulsory for law degree) - limit periods is pursuant to the statute of limitation, an all together different law. People are affected in property matters, ie the bailiff can get a charge on their land or a floating charge on their business. Limitation can be used at the point of breach but it must be more than default on a payment. You additionally said the statute of limitation (LA 1980) does not define 'cause of action.' However cause of action is distinguished to defence: Denning on Estoppels, in that a defence is a shield whereas a cause of action is metaphorically, a sword. In other words, cause of action is a positive form of action, ie bring proceedings. So, clearly and obviously a CCJ is already a judgement which in effect is a cause of action, so the limitation defence cannot apply. You need to recognise the difference between an omission, an express statement and an acknowledgement wherever I chose one or the other, or none.
"Your responses are always so predictable. Where you have been shown to have got it wrong, despite all your legal studies, you attempt to blind us all with your academic knowledge. I am aware that land law and limitation are different laws, but they are interlinked, otherwise you couldn't argue that a mortgage shortfall is SBd". :geek:

Predictable you say? Michelle, I am trained to limit my answer to the hypothetical question, used to debating points of law with academic commentators.

"I didn't just say that the LA 1980 does not define cause of action, if you look at it, you'll see, or, more accurately, won't see it, because it's not there. The cause of action is not bringing proceedings, it can be defined as a valid reason to bring proceedings, and it doesn't have to be a breach (as in breach of contract), proceedings can also be brought in tort where there is no contract, trust me, I know about this, and not from the OU course materials". :mrgreen:

Tort and Contract do in fact run parallel in that tort starts where contract finishes and vice versa. Tort is independent of contract and vice versa, therefore. Yes, of course you can bring a claim in tort (French for wrong) without there being a contract, in that whomever crosses your path with a wrong against is compensatory.

"I wouldn't say a CCJ is a cause of action, it is the result of the action. It's a court order and, like all court orders, can be enforced, as can costs orders, liability orders and fines which are also a kind of court order, albeit of a different kind (criminal as opposed to civil). I don't need to recite snippets from legal texts to make a point. Nobody needs to know the theory behind court orders to be able to deal with them any more than you need to be a washing machine engineer to get clean clothes. A solicitor won't mention all that legal theory when you go and consult him/her with a legal problem, in fact, they tend not to mention the legislation they are basing their advice on, just the course of action that can be followed. I also know about that from real life experience." :ugeek: :ugeek: :ugeek:

A cause of action means any form of court related proceedings in the narrow sense of the terms. So, where a creditor bring an action this is in itself a cause of action, whether or not the cause of action results in CJJ remedy or default judgement. Where the cause of action relate to a CCJ, Liability Order, and or Fines, is in consequential to those same being causes of action, whether in the civil or criminal jurisdiction. The limit clock starts again from the last cause of action save there were any unreasonable pauses where it would have been equitable to bring them within the applicable statutory limitation period (ie laches), for its type. On the contrary, a solicitor will mention the available remedies based on the common law or statutory authorities

"I'm sure when they get together, solicitors discuss all these principles between them, when trying to find an angle they can use for a tricky case, but they don't quote them back to their clients, nor do they refer to them when dealing with day-to-day matters." :geek:
On the contrary, the solicitor has to provide legal advice in terms of 'the law' in general terms then apply them to the client's facts, but a barrister will likely be appointed where the issue is more complex for instance, medical negligence (tort) or a prescriptive easement (a legal interest to use land).

User avatar
Michelle
Moderator
Posts: 1984
Joined: 10 Nov 2014 14:42
Location: Nuvion

#49 Re: Discussion on limitation periods for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans

Post by Michelle » 17 Oct 2016 14:31

The difference between yourself and the rest of us is not the qualifications but the general approach. You keep resorting to academic theory while we refer to real world situations. I am well aware of the different roles played by solicitors and barristers, although the distinction isn't always as clear cut.
Solicitors advise in accordance to the law but they don't quote the theory behind their advice, they explain it in lay terms.

I'm sorry to say that you are wrong with regards to when solicitors and barristers are used, I know quite a few cases where a legally represented party instructed a barrister to appear in court, and not necessarily for a difficult case, just ordinary money claims, a costs order and a charging order.

I've better things to do than argue with you 24/7, so it's time for my closing argument:

Please stop looking at your academic knowledge and start looking at the real world. It serves no purpose to write a dissertation about a subject as you always do, maybe it does within the academic sphere, but not when dealing with people who have real world problems as opposed to essays and fictional situations used as classroom examples.

We don't need to know the theory behind the law, just what the law says and how to apply it to the real world. We already know you have studied a lot but probably not got much out of it in practical terms. I doubt you would last very long working as a paralegal if you started rambling on about what you studied at the OU instead of focusing on the firm's client's issues when your work is being billed by the firm at £100+ an hour.
Listen very carefully, I shall post this only once:
Anything posted by me is from my own knowledge and experience, it is not legal advice or the official views of this forum.

Knowledge is Power.

Post Reply