2. The decision shows that, in fact and at law, no mortgage, whether legal or equitable, can arise without a deed and a contract which comply with sections 1 and 2 of the LPMPA 1989Zeek wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 9:14 am Think your going to choke on the amount of humble pie you will be eating
Land Registry Confirms That No Mortgage Arises Without Legally Valid Documents
It has now been confirmed that the Land Registry has altered the register to show that my sister is the owner of her family home, free and clear of the void mortgage which was cancelled earlier this year.
This is highly significant for the following reasons:
1. There was no attempt to create another illegal mortgage over the property by Bank of Scotland, which means that HHJ Behrens’ 2014 declaration that they are still owed £1.85 M is now held to be void and unenforceable by the Land Registry.
2. The decision shows that, in fact and at law, no mortgage, whether legal or equitable, can arise without a deed and a contract which comply with sections 1 and 2 of the LPMPA 1989.
3. It guarantees that the monies my family paid to the bank during the entire term of the fraudulent overdraft facility are due to be paid back in compensation from the Chief Land Registrar, on the ground that the losses were incurred as a direct result of the registration of illegal and void mortgages.
Whilst the compensation is yet to be confirmed, receiving it is the only step left before we can truly say that the dispute that has raged for almost a decade is finally settled and closed.
For all those who have joined or intend to join the class actions later this month, that is what victory for Britain’s 11.2 million illegal mortgagors will look like.
Devastating Consequence For The Banks
However, the devastating consequence of this for the banks is that they can no longer rely upon the void aspects of Behrens’ 2014 judgment, in which he declared that an equitable mortgage arises, even when the mortgage documents do not comply with the 1989 Act.
To put this into perspective, simply consider that it was this very decision that was used by the Land Registry several times to refuse to cancel the very mortgage which Bank of Scotland successfully applied to cancel in February this year.
Moreover, virtually every legal blog featuring our case over the past few years has been illegally reassuring the banksters and their legal representatives that, even if a mortgage deed is held be void for failing to comply with section 1(3) of the 1989 Act, the mortgagee will be still be entitled to an equitable mortgage that is capable of registration.
Therefore, if you are currently fighting fraudulent mortgage possession proceedings and the bank’s lawyers present you with that argument, you can inform them that the Land Registry is now treating that part of Behrens’ decision as void and legally unenforceable, after the bank gave up its fraudulent claim against the Trustees of Nelson Trust and cancelled the mortgage over my sister’s home.
Unless you’ve enjoyed the property and it was signed off by property solicitors. Than you’re pretty much screwed. Like arguing the old “contract is invalid because need sight of the deeds” with the freemen. He was in the property, he thought he’d purchased it legitimately and he made payments.
Not a leg to stand on.- https://hmlandregistry.blog.gov.uk/2018 ... tle-deeds/
“Our Land Register is the definitive record of land and property ownership in England and Wales. So, if your property is registered with us, you don’t need the deeds to confirm your ownership”
So how did Mike originally buy the property, live in the property and make a claim that his property was stolen
