Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

longdog
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1987
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby longdog » Wed Jan 31, 2018 8:53 pm

King Lud wrote:It doesn't sound like this guy is an actual letting agent but rather just a crony of White's. Not sure if that makes it easier or harder for the Receiver.


I wouldn't think the receiver would care very much one way or the other. I suppose 'Joe The Letting Agent' always has the option of deciding he no longer wishes to act as letting agent for the properties and who could blame him. He would of course still be obliged to hand over all the relevant paperwork and accounts to the proper authorities... Not his 'good friend' Bob.
JULIAN: I recommend we try Per verulium ad camphorum actus injuria linctus est.
SANDY: That's your actual Latin.
HORNE: What does it mean?
JULIAN: I dunno - I got it off a bottle of horse rub, but it sounds good, doesn't it?

ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 2852
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby ArthurWankspittle » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:49 pm

The only think that compounds the issue which hasn't been mentioned, is that the lenders have charges against the rental properties. If they aren't being paid they can repossess, bankruptcy or no bankruptcy. I can see the entire portfolio disappearing in mortgages, fees, costs and bankruptcy fees.
Going to Tibet now and deleting Facebook you have my email address

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 11067
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby notorial dissent » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:38 pm

If our little quail's comment is true about "got rid of the mortgages" then I would suspect that the properties will all soon be in foreclosure.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

mufc1959
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2015 3:47 pm
Location: Manchester by day, Slaithwaite by night

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby mufc1959 » Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:35 am

notorial dissent wrote:If our little quail's comment is true about "got rid of the mortgages" then I would suspect that the properties will all soon be in foreclosure.


I'm guessing that what has happened is this. In Crabby's tiny mind, he thinks he's "got rid of the mortgages". The Trustee has probably told all the lenders that the mortgages are now part of the bankruptcy debts, and the lenders will have written to Crabby to confirm this too. As they're secured debts, they don't get written off. Presumably the Trustee was expecting the tenants to pay the rent to him while he decides what to do with the bankrupt estate, which assets to liquidate, which to retain in the expectation of returning them to Crabby once the debt is paid. But as we know, Crabby's got his mate to act as 'letting agent' and collect the rents for him. So he thinks he's got no mortgages, but free rental income. All he's actually got is a rude awakening coming his way.

https://www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk/nd ... ankruptcy/

The bankrupt’s estate vests in the trustee immediately on his appointment taking effect or in the case of the official receiver, on his becoming trustee. The trustee can disclaim any onerous property and any property in significant negative equity would be regarded as onerous property.

Property with equity of up to £1,000 – deemed de minimis – can usually be bought back from the trustee for a nominal sum. It is not uncommon for the family of a bankrupt to buy back such a property on payment of £1 plus the official receiver’s costs of £211.

If the equity in the property is in the range of £1,000 to £5,000 then the trustee may seek to register a charge on the property rather than trying to realize this equity by having the property sold, with the risk that the sales price might not reach market value and that the equity realized might not cover the cost of sales.

If the equity in the property exceeds £5,000, the trustee may seek to sell the property and to realize the equity for the benefit of creditors and to pay the costs of bankruptcy. The bankruptcy laws deal in great detail with the rights and duties of the trustee and the bankrupt and the rights of other parties such as the bankrupt’s family and of creditors.

Where a bankrupt owns one or more ‘Buy to Let’ properties it appears that there has been a relatively recent change in the attitude of some trustees to the treatment of such properties. Historically where there was little or no equity in such a property, trustees allowed the bankrupt’s family to ‘buy back’ the property and allowed the bankrupt to manage the letting of the property and the servicing of the mortgage. Any surplus income thus generated would constitute part of the bankrupt’s disposable income and be subject to an income payments order. Thus the trustee would receive payments from the bankrupt for up to three years.

More recently, it appears that some trustees seek to seize control of such ‘Buy to Let’ properties and to assume all responsibility for them: receive all rental income; pay the mortgage and all associated insurance & maintenance costs; deal with all letting and tenant issues and take all the day to day decisions relating to the properties. Should the properties go into significant positive equity in the first three years of the bankruptcy, the trustee would also be in a position to realize the equity prior to the property re-vesting in the bankrupt debtor. The motivation for this change in approach by trustees is unclear unless they expect to improve the returns for creditors by taking such action.

Juisarian
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:00 pm

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby Juisarian » Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:09 pm

Hercule Parrot wrote:And thus the Trustee can sue the Letting Agent for the rent which should have been surrendered, obtain a third party debt order to seize the owed sums from the Letting Agent's bank, or other orders against his assets, send Bailiffs in etc. The letting agent will be in trouble with his regulator and insurers, and a CCJ won't help his business to thrive. (Best of all, all of the legal costs will be paid from Crabby's estate)


And if Joe the Letting Agent doesn't have any rent money to pay the Trustee, because he already gave it all to Bob the Bankrupt, could he end up bankrupt too?

Siegfried Shrink
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 10:29 pm
Location: West Midlands, England

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby Siegfried Shrink » Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:11 pm

Interesting details, thanks for posting them.

Good to see that Quatloos is back to cover the UK wierdos, Fogbow did a good job on US events but there is no substitute for the coverage of our home grown disaster areas.

Siegfried Shrink
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 10:29 pm
Location: West Midlands, England

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby Siegfried Shrink » Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:20 pm

Juisarian wrote:
Hercule Parrot wrote:And if Joe the Letting Agent doesn't have any rent money to pay the Trustee, because he already gave it all to Bob the Bankrupt, could he end up bankrupt too?


This is exactly what could happen, although it would depend on Joe being a man of substance, someone with enough assets to be worth the costs of bankruptcy. If he is a man of straw (not a strawman, please note), in simpler terms someone without a pot to piss in and a window to throw it out of, he be laughing. He'd still be liable to other civil recovery procedures including deduction form any income.

User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 4532
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby Gregg » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:30 am

Over here, they'd both be guilty of criminal bankruptcy fraud.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.

AndyPandy
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1194
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:29 pm

Re: Robert 'Crab Bait' White consents to losing his houses

Postby AndyPandy » Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:15 pm

Gregg wrote:Over here, they'd both be guilty of criminal bankruptcy fraud.

I don't know enough about bankruptcy law but I'd be very surprised if it's not similar here, at the very least it'd be contempt of court which carries a custodial sentence.


Return to “United Kingdom”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Common Crawl [Bot], DotBot [Bot] and 0 guests