Hi Jon S With regard to your problem with Eagle Star with the deeds not signed, the first question is did you take out the mortgage before or after 27th September 1989 (date on Deed? or Mortgage) if it was before this date it does not have to be signed by the lender and all the terms and conditions do not have to be contained in one document, BUT! if it was after the magic date in 1989 when the new Statute governed by Parliament became law:- The Law of Property (Miscellaneous) Act 1989, unfortunatly for lenders, not a lot of people knew about that (or so they all say) or if they did, they did not bother to put their own signatures on the contract, they just carried on with custom and practice and not comply with what the statute required by law, Get a copy of the Law of Property Act 1925 and also a copy of the 1989 Act off the internet (any good search engine will find them I used www.excite.co.uk)by reading these you can see how the law radically changed in September 1989, in Halsbury`s Law Books and in the case of Quarrel - v - Beckford 1816 it says that a Mortgage is a "Disposition" which is correct, in the statute of the 1989 act (S2(1) and in the case of United Bank of Kuwait - v -Sahib 1996 it says that all dispositions and mortgages in what ever form have to be signed by both parties, At the Court of Appeal last week Lord Justice Mummery told me that although our mortgage is the disposition, our contract, (maybe like yours) is actually within the Mortgage Deed itself, therefore section 2 of the 1989 act does not apply, as section 2 is for contracts, but as our contract is within the Mortgage Deed it has to comply with section 1 (2) of the 1989 which deals with Deeds, which says: "it is validly executed as a deed by that person or, as the case may be, one or more of those parties" Our argument is that The "Mortgage Deed" "Contract" "Disposition" whatever label it is given, has to contain ALL the terms and conditions in ONE document and should be signed by BOTH Parties as stipulated by section 2(1) of the new 1989 Act.(posted 8281 days ago)If you follow what Mr Mummery LJ says that it applys to section 1 of the 1989 act, then our argument still applies it still has to be signed by both parties for the following simple reason:-
As mentioned above the Mortgage Deed, Contract, Disposition, contains terms and conditions, agreements and covenants which both parties have agreed to abide to, so if one or the other party did NOT sign, the opposing party could not bring them to justice in a court of law as there would be no signature to say that they had agreed to those terms and conditions in the first place i.e. the document is not a full legal document therefore it has only been a part perfomance on the part of the lender, which means that they cannot enforce the agreement and repossess your property. (although you may still owe the money)which is a completely different issue. We hope to be going back to the Court of Appeal as our hearing was only part heard and we hope to give some good news soon to a lot of people in the same situation as we find ourselves. Perhaps you could let me know who you are dealing with at eagle Star? Is it Cheltenham? Is it Phil Rice? Which Solicitors did Eagle Star use was it Charles Russell in Cheltenham or have they refused to let you see any of your documents? Hope some of the above is useful. Regards Nigel.