Viral Facebook Eviction - Wales

[Boll Weevil]

Has anyone seen the recent "illegal" eviction video and accompanying Freemanish justifications for defaulting on a mortgage doing the rounds? Try doing a Facebook search for Sadie Cox, Darren Purcell or Kathryn Watkins in Cwmbran Wales.

As you'd gather the videos show less than a tenth of the story, but a child is being neglected as a result of the parent's idiocy and wilful neglect, and a gofundme has been set up to help the family "during this stressful time".

I'm not sure how often people get to see videos of such evictions but it's aggravating. And not for the reasons the posters intended.

[Angolvagyok]

The eviction itself:

Part One:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 852652701/
2:
https://www.facebook.com/sadie.cox.393/ ... 503169970/
3:
https://www.facebook.com/sadie.cox.393/ ... 369829750/

Something about the warrant:
1:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 545827701/
2:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 667617701/
3:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 679392701/

The guy in the video below is, I guess, the guy who's lost his house.

Standard Mortgage Fraud, securitisation stuff:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 181577701/

Figures about warrants, evcitions:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 026752701/

Discrepancies on the mortgage deeds:
https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 957257701/

Not sure how long these will be up for, and I can't seem to download and put on YT.

[Wakeman52]

There are comments about stopping mortgage payments, in & made about Darren's videos filmed post eviction. Kathryn's FB page has a lot of anti-vax woo posts, amongst other incoherence. Reading those reduced my sympathy for their plight asymptotically to zero.

[Pox]

I have watched the eviction videos.
I'm glad the dog is OK.
Parents should not use that type of language in hearing of a 7 year old.
The police, for once, did the right thing by not engaging with the mob.

[Siegfried Shrink]

At the time the mortgage was granted a lot of brokers were playing fast and loose with the rules to get mortgage loans for people who on the face of it did not qualify for them. The tricks included inflating income and property valuations to make the loan equity ratios seem safer and the income to payment ratio seem more affordable.
In a rising market who could lose?

Well, lots of people as it turned out. This was part of the genesis of the whole sub-prime mortgage scandal, and the guilty parties ran from the brokers arranging the loans to the heads of the companies turning a blind eye to the malpractices (they were hardly a secret)
When the music stopped, everyone rushed for a chair and there were not enough chairs to go round. That was our British version of the US sub-prime rout.
Securitisation of the mortgages certainly became a big part of the problem, it was a massive task to actually place a value that would stand up to scrutiny on the bundled mortgages because some were viable and safe and others were bobbing along on a hairsbreadth of income from default, and some were already in default.

However, and it is a big however, I'd like to make two points. The first is that the folk who got what in some cases amounted to 110% loans based on a ficticious earnings multiple must have known at the time that that facts were being fudged a bit, even though they may have been told, it's just a technicality, eveypne is doing it, do you want the loan or not because this is the only way you will get it. That is why I have my doubts about the indignation over the application form. It is arguable that that broker was criminlly liable, similar cases have been prosecuted, and it is possible that some claim for mis-selling the product may be available to the motgage borrowers though I supect this is now time-barred.
My second point is that they managed to keep afloat for some 10 years. What happened to cause them to fall into arrears? And what happened when they did. Something like illness or unemployment could probably have been negotiated with the lender, but a sudden enthusiasm for mortgage fraud woo could have made the default deliberate based on stuff off the internet, and that landed them in the usual place.

This should be clarified. I do not do Facebook so am limited to the links helpfully posted.
The stuff about the securitisation is simply misunderstood finance (lord knows it is pretty obscure), really it all boils down to did you stop paying, did you try to deal sensibly with this or did you somehow see a chance to boost the disposable income?

[Boll Weevil]

I gather Purcell was a postman, and Watkins a trained accountant. They jacked both in because jobs are slavery and money doesn't exist, in favour of a "business" (I can't find any Companies House listing) of selling tat via eBay - coasters and placemats with your photos on etc. Watkins jacked that in as "researching" the mortgage stuff consumed her life.

She also advised others to stop paying their mortgage, which was advice wisely not followed.

They appear to think that pursuing a personal criminal prosecution of the mortgage broker will somehow invalidate the mortgage. It is possible that they will "win" that case but they think it trumps the civil courts ruling regarding the repossession etc.

There was another video of the start of the eviction, where Purcell and Watkins shout down from a landing window to the agents, demanding that they produce this and that document, each of which is then calmly produced. Purcell says they could be fake, so they are told to come down and take a look. "I'm not falling for that mate!"

[Boll Weevil]

Oh. The seven year old was pulled out of school for "home schooling" (read: playing, watching conspiracy docs and maybe the occasional bit of maths)

[ArthurWankspittle]

They appear to think that pursuing a personal criminal prosecution of the mortgage broker will somehow invalidate the mortgage. It is possible that they will "win" that case but they think it trumps the civil courts ruling regarding the repossession etc.

Ah I wondered what that was about. As Siegfried Shrink said

It is arguable that that broker was criminally liable, similar cases have been prosecuted, and it is possible that some claim for mis-selling the product may be available to the mortgage borrowers though I suspect this is now time-barred.

It's all very Tom Crawford isn't it. If you don't produce my mortgage statement at my criminal trial for trespass then I must be innocent.
For anyone outside of Quatloos regulars reading this, let me make it clear. Some criminal prosecution for something to do with your mortgage has absolutely no relevance (I nearly said something rude there) to the civil case that has brought about the repossession of your house.
As has also been suggested, you can hardly bring a case based on we all agreed on the figures on the application ten years ago but the only broker was committing an offence. If there is a criminal case the CPS will take it over and drop it.
The guy with beard in the one video I watched reminded me of Ceylon. The system will break down in 6-12 months and you'll all be out of work. Only thing is Ceylon was saying it two years ago.

[ArthurWankspittle]

I gather Purcell was a postman, and Watkins a trained accountant. They jacked both in because jobs are slavery and money doesn't exist, in favour of a "business" (I can't find any Companies House listing) of selling tat via eBay - coasters and placemats with your photos on etc.

Companies House only lists limited companies. Business name registration disappeared years ago. If money doesn't exist what were they getting paid off Ebay in?

[Boll Weevil]

I gather Purcell was a postman, and Watkins a trained accountant. They jacked both in because jobs are slavery and money doesn't exist, in favour of a "business" (I can't find any Companies House listing) of selling tat via eBay - coasters and placemats with your photos on etc.

Companies House only lists limited companies. Business name registration disappeared years ago. If money doesn't exist what were they getting paid off Ebay in?

And what is the gofundme receiving? Logic is not going to be found no matter how hard you look for it.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Thanks for the further details, I will not waste any more sympathy on what appears to be a self inflicted injury. Apart from sympathy for the child, who deserves better.

[King Lud]

As has also been suggested, you can hardly bring a case based on we all agreed on the figures on the application ten years ago but the only broker was committing an offence.

Why not? Besides it being time barred of course.

I find the one weakness of Quatloos is the seeming belief that it must automatically be the fault of the debtor. Of course, in most of the cases discussed here it absolutely is but the default position seems to be that the lender is home and dry. however, as we all know, the lenders' pure greed is the reason the world's finances were brought to their knees and thousands of people the world over were ruined as a consequence.

A lot of people were lied to and persuaded that what they were signing was legitimate. It's easy to say "You signed it, tough luck." when you are talking about complicated financial matters. Trust is what was involved and a hell of a lot of people didn't get it.

[exiledscouser]

If they paid for ten years then they probably bought at the top of the market, right before the wheels came off property values.

Whilst some mortgage applicants undoubtedly told a few porkies to get their loans, equally culpable in my eyes were the sub prime lenders with their "liar loan" products where they simply didn't care what income was put on the form. Even those few who did try some due diligence, it wasn't just dodgy brokers, there was a whole industry out there knocking out wage slips, accounts and job references.

Worse, the sub prime lenders knew full well what they and their industry was supporting. They themselves were just the high risk face of major "respectable" building societies and banks.

It was a cynical marketing exercise really; "hmmm, we've cornered and saturated the honest sector, we need to achieve full market penetration of the dishonest community". They were all at it too and their toothless regulators watched it happen without action.

The real time bomb is the tens of 1,000's of interest only mortgage loans out there for which there is no repayment vehicle (the lender not bothering to establish whether there was even one in the first place) and which will start maturing in droves.

That said, when the cyclic nature of property finance trends leads to the wheels once again coming off in about 2025 house prices might just devalue to the point where my children can afford to buy their own place.

[exiledscouser]

Just read King Lud's comment above. I do find, generally, that Q posters are on the whole quite balanced.

As for finance companies, they are not all angels although the lender in TC's case offered every assistance but was ignored. I utterly detest the payday lending industry with their four figure interest rates.

Those with their own threads in the UK section were and are largely the authors of their own misfortune.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Why not? Besides it being time barred of course.

I find the one weakness of Quatloos is the seeming belief that it must automatically be the fault of the debtor.

I don't see what dubious action the broker has taken that the borrower is not complicit or equally guilty of. Yes there were cases where the borrower was "stitched up" by brokers/solicitors/estate agents, but even then they were looking to buy somewhere and didn't care about the details. Here the case seems to be that they have stopped paying the mortgage or had to stop paying the mortgage because they have stopped working, Therefore the repossession must be the fault of someone else. It doesn't work like that.

[Wakeman52]

Selling tat via eBay - coasters and placemats with your photos on etc. Watkins jacked that in as "researching" the mortgage stuff consumed her life.

Just a quick search on eBay reveals that such items are listed at & sell from about 50p each. At that price level it can only be barely profitable and just be a supplement to other income.

Those with their own threads in the UK section were and are largely the authors of their own misfortune.

I agree. Burying your head in the sand or similar is no substitute for approaching the lender when, for example, payment difficulties start, before matters have got to the extreme of repossession.

[Boll Weevil]

Update: Watkins is refunding all her eBay customers (holding to some contracts I see) after leaving all her business stuff in the house, despite knowing full well that the repossession was coming - neighbours were asked to watch for a "white van" pulling up in the car park that day.

Also their car is now buggered...

[Angolvagyok]

Update: Watkins is refunding all her eBay customers (holding to some contracts I see) after leaving all her business stuff in the house, despite knowing full well that the repossession was coming - neighbours were asked to watch for a "white van" pulling up in the car park that day.

Also their car is now buggered...

It's all gone a bit Crawford...........

Something about the Deed. Seems like the deed is invalid if it's altered, then we get a mention of Lord Denning, but not the usual quote about promissory notes, this one's about signatures. The guy in the video has signed one thing but not another thing, uuuuuuurrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhh I can't watch it he's so boring.

https://www.facebook.com/kathryn.watkin ... 185907701/

[AndyPandy]

This is the bizarre explanation to it all...

right ok i think lots of people have seen what happened today so i just want to make everyone aware if i can about what its about, bear with me though, my head is mashed, its been an ordeal to say the least.........................this has been going on since march 2015 and i dont even know where to start, but i will try and keep it short as much as i can, we "defaulted" on our mortgage because we found out that the mortgage was fraudulent, they have forged the deed................anyway we have the material evidence of BOTH copies of the same deed, one with a date, and the other with tippex on and another date.................went through the civil courts and they ignored it so we got an SAR (subject access request) and up jumped out the even bigger fraud...................................darren was a postman at the time and he gave all his payslips to prove it, as you do, but in the SAR was a document that was filled out by the broker saying that darren had his own business DJR business services and he had tripled darrens income and forged his signature, along with another 3 documents including the DD mandate, he didnt even try, its a shit attempt...................................some background work into the broker company and it turns out that the CEO of it had served 3 years for fraud against his bank (obtaining property by deception & a money transfer by deception) but he failed to tell the FSA when he applied for his licences......................................the FSA found out and questioned him......he lied again, and then they further investigated, found out he had lied and stripped him from his licence, never to work in finance again, this is a public document, anyone can read it - so we brought a private criminal prosecution which is still ongoing, proceedings havent even ended and also being investigated by action fraud.......................but they stole it in between.................this is a really shit explanation and im sorry lol, i cant think straight and im a bit overwhelmed so i will try again later, the 3 of us and bingo are fine, we are fighters and this is wrong, massively wrong and it effects us all, or it will do at some point, thanks so much for all the messages of support, everyone is being amazing we are so lucky <3 <3 <3 love you all so much, i say we stop this fraud now, enough is enough xxxxx

The thing is, they talk about THEIR mortgage, they signed the flaming contract and must have known that their income was being inflated.

Why did they buy the house and sign the mortgage contract if they knew they couldn't afford it? No one told them to go and find a home on which they clearly couldn't afford the repayments, a mortgage application usually comes after a house is found.

I think the word of the day here is COLLUSION.

[exiledscouser]

What an interesting situation.

The broker apparently falsified their application, tailoring the income and employment details to fit with the lending criteria demanded by the mortgage provider.

They either knew this was the case or they did not.

However the mortgage advance was arrived at, the applicants were happy enough to secure and move into the house and happy enough with the monthly repayments. It can't be argued that they didn't know how much they were borrowing or how much a month it was going to cost them or that they bought the property in question.

Sometime later it emerged that income levels were inflated and employment invented, probably by the broker.

The applicants decide to stop repaying although it isn't clear why or where exactly on the road to discovering the facts they did so.

Now in many cases those who have been a "bit economical with the truth" in their mortgage applications are given the opportunity to "regularise" their relationship with their lender. It happens all the time. OK, I'm not really a nuclear scientist but I've made the payments on time says the borrower and the lender is content to allow things to continue just as they were.

But you don't get free money or a free property by simply stopping repayments- that is provoking the lender to take the action they clearly did in his case. And why should they benefit from the (apparent) dishonesty of others?

Accepting for a moment that as far as these applicants knew their broker had put their correct details down in the application they were not really disadvantaged either way; the loan would have been advanced and repayments commenced shortly afterwards.

Perhaps it is their case that they could never have obtained a mortgage of the size they did based on joint incomes at the time.

No, on balance based upon what we know and the version advanced I smell a something for nothing merchant at work. I may be wrong but time will tell.