Very Quick House Sale

Due to house repossessions or bank foreclosures in Scotland, it is easy to lose your house and home. There are many people who don’t wish to lose their home but find themselves in a situation outside their control. This is where a sell and rent back scotland option can work well.

While selling and renting back in scotland is a good option for most, it is not free of risk. But, the risks can be minimised just by choosing the right sell and rent back company in scotland. The best company will always try to help rather than taking advantage of your situation. Although it is a fact that they have to get their profit otherwise they would be thrown out of the business but they must never take undue advantage of situation. Also, they will have no problems in letting you use your home in the way you want. What it means is that you will never have to live or feel like a tenant.

Even if you believe that you have found a right company, you must never overlook the importance of checking all legal documents. But, apart from paying attention to the quality of a company to get aforementioned benefits, you must keep your eye on some other benefits. For instance, on some occasions you can qualify for Housing Benefit.

Housing Benefit can help you to deal with your problems in a slightly better way. Basically, you can qualify for it if you think you will not be in a position to afford the rent after selling your entire home. Here, you must keep in mind that several conditions apply to this entire concept. Also, you will have to provide several evidences showing that you are left with no choice but to sell your home. For instance, letters from mortgage lenders, proof of your income and evidence of other specific factors creating an impact on your decision should be given to the council.

The fact of the matter is that if you are interested in getting some money to deal with mortgage payments, it is better to use the option of sell and rent back your property. But, you must understand that there are other benefits that can be obtained in specific situations. You must however try to educate yourself about those situations by consulting with a professional so that you may know if you can qualify for Housing Benefit or not.

Do keep in mind that researching is the only way to learn all details pertaining to benefits associated with selling your properties.

POLICE investigating an alleged sell and rent back scam which has hit 2,000 struggling families in the Northumbria region suspect it could be the largest fraud of its kind.

Northumbria Police are probing North East Property Buyers and Newcastle Home Loans after after a referral from the Financial Services Authority.

The Gateshead firms buy homes from people across the region who are struggling to pay their mortgages and allow them to rent them back.

However, the firms have allegedly defaulted on repayments which has led to hundreds of repossession orders.

On Thursday, police made five arrests on suspicion of money laundering and conspiracy to defraud.

It is understood those arrested include Grace and David Purdie, of Darras Hall, Northumberland, each a director of one of the companies.

Grace Purdie’s business partner, Michael Foster, of Houghton-le-Spring, Wearside, is also understood to have been arrested.

The investigation is continuing into the partners of Darlingtonbased David Oliver Estate Agents, including the Purdies’ son, Craig David Purdie.

Mr Purdie is a former appointed representative of Newcastle Home Loans. His business partner, Andrew Oliver Bellwood, was arrested on suspicion of money laundering, in March, after £34,000 was found in his home in Newton Aycliffe, County Durham.

Detective Chief Inspector Jim McAll, of Northumbria Police’s economic crime unit, said: “What is alleged is a very serious and complex fraud. If proven, and if it is on the scale alleged, it will probably be one of the biggest property frauds in the country.

“It is certainly the biggest one we have ever dealt with.”

Det Chief Insp McAll said the inquiry could take years as detectives search through thousands of documents connected with the companies’ mortgage deals.

As officers continue to investigate the criminal allegations, tenants facing repossession must fight to stay in their homes through the County Courts.

Kelly Bushby, housing specialist for Clark Willis Solicitors, in Darlington, said she was dealing with 20 clients in the area, but suspects there could be more.

She is preparing to fight repossessions using an as yet untested legal argument, and plans to instruct a leading barrister.

Mrs Bushby said: “We argue that tenants have an overriding interest and should therefore be allowed to stay in their homes.

Perhaps if they had been given an assured shorthold tenancy things would be different, but, usually, they have been told they could stay for ten years or even life.

“There is also a possibility of a negligence claim against the solicitors who handled the sales which could see the ownership of the property revert to the tenants as if the house was never sold.

“In either event, it will take time and I would advise anyone who thinks they could be affected to get in touch with us.”

Clark Willis has offered to represent clients through the first stages of the proceedings free.

For details, call 01325-745687.

Measures will offer protection until full regulation is introduced next year, says the FSA

Homeowners who fall victim to rogue sale and rent back companies may be able to claim compensation from 1 July in the first step towards full regulation of the schemes by the Financial Services Authority (FSA).

Full regulation will be introduced on 30 June next year, but it was announced today that the watchdog would introduce interim steps to tackle immediate consumer problems.

From the start of next month, people who lose money or their homes through these controversial schemes will be able to take their cases to the Financial Ombudsman Service if complaints to the companies themselves are not handled in a satisfactory way.

Sale and rent back companies, which usually advertise in the back of tabloid newspapers and online, target struggling homeowners by offering to buy their homes and allowing them to continue living in them as tenants, usually on an assured shorthold tenancy lasting six to 12 months.

Homeowners often stump up the cost of a valuation typically about £500  only to find the price being offered falls far short of the market value.

Up until now the companies have been unregulated and some homeowners who have gone ahead with the deals have found themselves facing eviction because the new owner wants to sell the property on or has failed to keep up with mortgage payments.

Under the interim regime, firms will have to apply for permission from the FSA to continue trading: they must comply with the FSA’s principles for businesses and will be required to have adequate resources and be run by fit and proper people. The watchdog will be able to stop, ban or fine firms that break the rules.

The move follows Office of Fair Trading (OFT) research last year which identified a number of risks to homeowners entering into these arrangements. The OFT made three recommendations to the government including compulsory regulation, increased consumer awareness and improved information about housing benefits.

A recent FSA survey found that only 42% of people questioned knew that sale and rent back is unregulated, although 58% thought that it should be. The majority also thought they would be entitled to stay in their home for more than five years, while the typical contract is six to 12 months.

Ed Harley, the FSA’s head of mortgage policy, said: “We know that some consumers enter into sale and rent back arrangements without understanding the costs and risks involved. This can be a source of real distress for people in already difficult circumstances.

“Firms entering our regime will need to run their business in a way that means customers are treated fairly. This includes making clear to customers important details, such as the length of time they can stay in the property, before they enter into the arrangement.”

Homeowner victims

The Observer has been highlighting the plight of those who have already fallen victim to sale and rent back schemes for several years. Unfortunately, the rule changes will not allow those who have suffered from rogue firms to claim compensation retrospectively.

Jean Turner and her husband sold their Norwich home to a sale and rent back company after falling three months into arrears on their mortgage. Although they only owed ?1,500 they had been taken to court by their lender and faced repossession.

Jean, now aged 53 and on disability benefits, approached the local council for advice and was given the number of a sale and rent back firm called Home Assured. Its representative visited the Turners and agreed to buy their home; the firm paid off the outstanding mortgage and arrears. The Turners then paid £500 a month in rent to stay in their home, the same amount they had been paying for their mortgage, but had no tenancy agreement or rent book.

Jean, who has since split up from her partner, discovered that although she was still paying rent to Home Assured it had subsequently sold her home to another owner. She received a court summons because the new owner failed to keep up with the mortgage payments, and the final straw came when he tried to raise the rent from £500 to £650, saying that all she had to do was ask the council for more money.

Jean refused and instead went to Shelter for help and now lives in local authority housing. “It was a horrible experience,” she said. “It is about time someone did something about these schemes. I wouldn’t want anyone to go through what I have over the past few years.”

The danger of people falling prey to unscrupulous firms should also be reduced by the introduction of the government’s £285m mortgage rescue scheme in January. Although only two households had been officially rescued by the end of April, government officials said more will be helped with 70 cases in the pipeline.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2009

It is estimated that 2,000 such firms, some of which are “one-man bands”, have sprung up to operate the controversial schemes in the past three years and that up to 20,000 homeowners have sold their properties to resolve debt problems.

The FSA said it wanted “to offer some protection to vulnerable homeowners as soon as possible” and aimed to introduce an interim regulatory regime on July 1. A more comprehensive system would start in June 2010, it added.

Ed Harley, the FSA’s head of mortgage policy, said: “We know that some consumers enter into [these] sell and rent back arrangements without understanding the costs and risks. This can be a source of real distress for people in difficult circumstances.”

Firms entering the FSA regime would “need to run their business in a way that means customers are treated fairly”, he added. “This includes making clear important details, such as the length of time customers can stay in the property, before they enter into the arrangement.”

Ship, the equity release trade body, welcomed the development, which it said was urgently needed. “Our main concern has been over the lack of information given to customers about the risks,” it said. “This new regulation addresses this issue.”