There has been yet another twist in the tale of my family’s seven year war of attrition with Bank of Scotland and its LPA receivers.
We have just discovered that, on 02/07/2015, the Chief Land Registrar registered an altered version of an illegal and void mortgage deed over Ashquorn House, which the same man canceled as illegal and void upon the order of the Property Chamber in February of the same year, following the establishment of the section 1(3) point in the high court on 21/07/2014:
Bank of Scotland plc v Waugh & Others 2014 – a mortgage deed will be void under section 52(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, if the mortgagor’s signature was not validly attested to by an independent witness at the moment of execution, in breach of section 1(3) of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.
Not only do these unequivocal facts render the registration illegal and void; they also prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the bank and its receivers, who have already illegally sold nine of my family’s properties at fire-sale prices, have been engaged in a conspiracy to fraudulently register an amended version of a mortgage which never actually existed, at law or in equity, which they have no mitigating excuse for not knowing.
Since the Property Chamber is on the brink of ordering that the receivers’ latest attempt to sell the property is illegal, on the ground that they have not been validly appointed by the bank to act in the names of the trustees, under a legally valid and enforceable Power of Attorney Deed –
Bank of Scotland plc v Waugh & Others  – no powers of attorney are conferred upon a mortgagee by its standard mortgage conditions, without a stand-alone Power of Attorney Deed, which must be executed by the mortgagor and made in accordance with the Power of Attorney Act 1971.
– which will almost certainly result in every entry by the receivers since July 2010, including the nine illegal fire-sales, being canceled as fraudulent; we have more reasons to be cheerful now than we have had since the outset of the dispute, despite the considerable losses incurred.
Imagine our very pleasant surprise when we discovered that, despite HHJ Behrens ordering that Bank of Scotland were entitled to another legal charge over Ashquorn House, following the cancellation of the first void mortgage over it; the bank then instructed its lawyers to take that void instrument, cross a few things out in marker pen, have it signed it in the names of the trustees by a district judge and a retired trustee, then register it at the Land Registry on 02/07/2015, as an alteration to the original application, made on 08/08/2003!!!
This is little different from taking an expired passport, altering its date and signature, then trying to use it to cross an international border, which would result in immediate arrest and criminal prosecution.
Whilst that eventuality will not meet the banksters involved in our case for at least a few months yet, the Land Registry and the Property Chamber have already indicated that Judge Behrens’ order did not authorise the alteration and re-registration of the void mortgage deed and that the trustees do not have to pay for an application to remove it from the register, on the basis that it should never have been registered in the first place.
In other words, the third attempt by the receivers to fire-sale Ashquorn House is now completely dead in the water, on two emphatic grounds:
1. There is no valid Power of Attorney Deed, under which they were appointed to sell the property in the names of the trustees; and
2. There is no legally valid and enforceable mortgage deed or contract in existence, so the right of the bank to appoint receivers when mortgage money becomes due and outstanding, pursuant to section 52(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, has not arisen.
This means that is it now virtually guaranteed that every entry made by the receivers in the Charges Register in the names of the trustees will be removed retrospectively on the same grounds; and the Land Registry will be statute bound to compensate the trustees for the losses incurred by nine illegal fire-sales of the trust’s properties.
On the basis that solicitors for the banksters are arguing that a mortgage deed does not need to be dated when it is signed, it is necessary to fully comprehend the simple reason why is a mortgage deed different to most other types of deed, which can be signed and dated on different dates, without rendering the instrument void:
Because the mortgagor is not legally or equitably entitled to grant a mortgage by signing a deed until they have either bought the property concerned or they have been registered at the Land Registry as its proprietor, under section 24 of the Land Registration Act 2002; so a mortgage deed must be dated at the moment of execution to ascertain whether that was the case when the legal charge was granted over the property.
Since the vast majority of more than eleven million UK mortgages were granted before either of those things had transpired, every one is illegal and void; and can be canceled by AP1 applications to rectify the Charges Register, in the event the law is not applied selectively.
On the basis that it is always a war of attrition to grind out a just result in the rigged courts system, let the Land Registry rectification avalanche begin at the earliest opportunity.