fbpx

Under Financial Pressure? Don't Fall Into Dodgy Lenders' Arms!

15th June 2018 By Arman Khosravi

Financial pressure can easily lead the unwary into the arms of unscrupulous lenders. One High Court case, in which numerous borrowers found themselves in legal limbo, shows how unwise it is to enter into such transactions without professional advice.

A businessman had, through his company, operated as what he described as a ‘lender of last resort’, offering high-interest loans to those in financial difficulties. Many of the loans were secured by way of mortgages on borrowers’ homes. In fact, neither the businessman nor his company was properly licensed to lend money and most of the loans were likely to have been invalid.

Once his activities were uncovered, the businessman was, amongst other things, sentenced to three and a half years’ imprisonment for various offences under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. He was also disqualified from acting as a director for 15 years and, after his release, would for five years be subject to a Serious Crime Prevention Order, forbidding him from conducting any business in the credit sphere.

His company had been placed in liquidation and two of the other corporate vehicles through which he operated had been placed under the management of the Official Receiver. Difficulties arose, however, because of the businessman’s purported assignment of the company’s loan book to the corporate vehicles.

Depending on the validity or otherwise of the assignment, it was either the Official Receiver or the liquidators who bore responsibility for dealing with the fallout from the debacle, including the release of mortgages in respect of invalid or fully paid loans. In the meantime, a number of borrowers remained unable to deal with their properties because of the mortgages registered against them.

In resolving the matter, the Court found that the assignment was invalid, having been entered into after the date on which a petition to wind up the company was presented. It was in any event void, having been entered into at an undervalue with the intention of defrauding the company’s creditors. In the circumstances, the loan book remained with the company and it was for the liquidators to take all necessary steps to protect the interests of the borrowers and the company’s creditors.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Retired Businessman's Final Will Ruled Invalid

2nd May, 2024 By

Having your will drawn up professionally by a qualified solicitor is always a sensible precaution, especially in later life. In a recent case, the High Court ruled that a retired businessman lacked testamentary capacity when he made a will less than three and a half years before he died at the age of 87. The man and his first wife were married for nearly 40 years and had four children. After her death he married again. In October 2015 he made a new will, revoking in most respects a will...

Company Owner's Negligible Value Claim Unsuccessful

29th April, 2024 By

When an asset falls in value to the point that it is almost worthless, it may be possible to make a negligible value claim under Section 24 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. The asset will then be treated as if it had been sold and immediately acquired again, so that the loss can be set off against other income. For a claim to succeed, however, the asset must have become of negligible value during the time the claimant owned it. On 30 September 2017, a woman who...

Court Sanctions Leg Amputation for Man Lacking Mental Capacity

24th April, 2024 By

The courts are often called upon to sanction treatment for patients whose ability to make decisions for themselves is impaired. In a recent case on point, the Court of Protection had to decide whether it was in the best interests of a man with mental health issues to have his right leg amputated above the knee. The man, aged 60, was taken to hospital by his niece. He was found to have an ulcerated leg. He had a history of paranoid schizophrenia, and believed that the sores on his leg...

High Court Grants Parental Order Despite Previous Adoption

18th April, 2024 By

In law, adopted children are regarded as having been born to their adoptive parents. The Family Division of the High Court recently considered whether that fact precluded a parental order being granted under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA) in respect of a child born via surrogacy. A couple who lived in the USA had entered into a surrogacy arrangement with another woman. An adoption order naming the couple as the child's parents had been made by a US court and was automatically recognised under UK law. However,...