Tampilkan postingan dengan label RBS v McConnell. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label RBS v McConnell. Tampilkan semua postingan

Sabtu, 29 Desember 2012

GLC campaign for lenders to reimburse unfair mortgage fees in Scotland

Banks are facing compensation claims of up to £30m from Scottish mortgage customers hit by "unfair, immoral and unethical' fees and charges added to their mortgages after court actions were dismissed by lenders for technical reasons. Govan Law Centre's (GLC) campaign to stop Scottish consumers being 'double charged' for mortgage expenses has been reported in The Herald (Sat, 29 December 2012).

GLC believes that the issue here is fairness, and that incompetent or defective proceedings cannot be the fault of consumers; rather it is the responsibility of lenders and their Scottish solicitors. GLC considers it to be unfair, immoral, and unethical for Scottish solicitors and UK lenders to profit twice by 'double-charging' Scottish consumers who are in financial difficulties.

GLC has set up a simple self-help website for affected customers or their advisors to seek free refunds.

The Council of Mortgage Lenders told The Herald that if costs were not added to mortgage accounts "then all customers would effectively end up paying for them, which many would regard as unfair and inappropriate". The Herald's own editorial has argued that this approach "fails to recognise the only fair and appropriate way for the charge to be borne is by the institutions whose incompetence caused the actions to fail". The Herald goes on to argue that:

"Mike Dailly of Govan Law Centre, the solicitor who is leading the campaign to recover the charges levied for failed actions, is entirely justified in condemning the lenders and criticising their solicitors as "unfair, immoral, and unethical" in double-charging Scottish consumers who are in financial difficulties".
Repossession cases which were dismissed in Scotland centre on two significant legal rulings in the UK Supreme Court and the sheriff court that resulted in thousands of repossession cases being aborted: RBS v. Wilson; and NRAM v. Millar & RBS v. McConnell, respectively (GLC represented the defenders in NRAM v. Millar and RBS v. McConnell). 

Sabtu, 21 Januari 2012

Further hearing in Scottish repossession test cases on pre-action requirements

The court has appointed parties be heard further in the Scottish repossession test cases of RBS plc v. McConnell and NRAM plc v. Millar next week. Sheriff AF Deutsch has given parties an opportunity to be heard on a new point in relation to the Interpretation Act 1978.

Since the Scottish Government's Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010, a lender must now give certain information to a debtor upon entering into 'default' before a repossession action is raised in court. This is known as the 'pre-action requirement' and failure to comply with this requirement can render the court action incompetent.

Many lenders and law firms in Scotland have interpreted 'default' to mean merely a failure to pay sums due under a mortgage, whereas Govan Law Centre has argued that 'default' is a technical term which means the failure to comply with a calling-up notice.

The cases of RBS plc v. McConnell and NRAM plc v. Millar look set to provide clarity on this point. Many repossession actions across Scotland have been continued or sisted (stayed) pending the court's judgment in these cases.

Selasa, 10 Januari 2012

Free know-how on Scottish repossession competency arguments disseminated by GLC

In response to requests, having regard to our public legal education ethos, and considering the wider potential public interest and the need for advisers to consider the potential need to protect the interests of their own clients, Govan Law Centre (GLC) is making its competency arguments in the test cases of NRAM v. Millar and RBS plc v. McConnell publicly available for free (see below).

The decision of Sheriff Deutsch in the said test cases is expected sometime in February 2012, and advisers will need to consider what steps, if any, they may wish to take to safeguard the interests of their own clients pending the outcome of that judgment, and any implications and developments that may arise following thereon.

GLC's arguments are presented in the format of an illustrative set of Defences (known as 'Answers' as repossession procedure in Scotland is now by way of summary application procedure).  Please note the disclaimer, namely that this document contains information only and does not constitute legal advice; you should obtain your own independent qualified legal advice from a Scots law practitioner and must not rely upon this document which is illustrative only.

View as a WEBPAGE or download as a WORD DOCUMENT

.