Word reaches us (via the Garden Court North website) of what appears to be a fascinating piece of litigation in the High Court (Leeds District Registry) concerning sale and rent back schemes (as to which, see our earlier piece, here). A number of former home-owners sold their homes (generally at a substantial discount) to sale and rent back companies who, in turn, (a) funded the purchase with a mortgage and (b) promised the former owners that they could remain living in the property (on terms, I presume). The sale and rent back companies defaulted on their mortgages and the lenders have sought possession. The argument, I presume, is that the mortgage is subject to the rights of the former owners to remain in occupation.
I suspect that this is being set up to go further than the High Court. James Stark, a friend of this blog, is acting (led by Jonathan Small QC, who I doubt reads this blog) for the former owners. The trial started on October 19. James – any more information? Any chance we could read the skeleton arguments?
Keep an eye out for this – something tells me it’ll be quite important.
See also
http://www.estatesgazette.com/blogs/property-law/2010/10/massive-alleged-mortgage-fraud-leads-to-test-case.html
There are also allegations of extensive mortgage fraud against the sale and rent back company NEPB, with 20 arrests so far.
If your smooth-talking works on James Stark, it would be great to hear what is in that skeleton.
Judgment in these cases will be handed down on 19th November.
Now that judgement has been handed down, with permission granted for appeal, are there any comments from legal experts that can help a lay person such as myself understand the reasoning behind the judgement.
Not until we’ve seen a copy! If you’ve got one, do send it.