The Australian Property Market - An Indication of What is To Come
The Financial Services Operations in many countries has badly let down the people in those countries manipulating contracts and hoping to ruin local and national economies as part of a larger strategy to unsteady the markets.. Problem Reaction Solution..
A mentor of mine who taught solutions to this issue has recently been fined $18Million Australian dollars for writing a book on How to buy Property For a $1.
Solution :
Is It Legal? Yes..
Reference:
Law Of Property Act 1925 s.95
95 Obligation to transfer instead of re-conveying, and as to right to take possession.
(1)Where a mortgagor is entitled to redeem, then subject to compliance with the terms on compliance with which he would be entitled to require a reconveyance or surrender, he shall be entitled to require the mortgagee, instead of re-conveying or surrendering, to assign the mortgage debt and convey the mortgaged property to any third person, as the mortgagor directs; and the mortgagee shall be bound to assign and convey accordingly.
(2)The rights conferred by this section belong to and are capable of being enforced by each incumbrancer, or by the mortgagor, notwithstanding any intermediate incumbrance; but a requisition of an incumbrancer prevails over a requisition of the mortgagor, and, as between incumbrancers, a requisition of a prior incumbrancer prevails over a requisition of a subsequent incumbrancer.
(3)The foregoing provisions of this section do not apply in the case of a mortgagee being or having been in possession.
(4)Nothing in this Act affects prejudicially the right of a mortgagee of land whether or not his charge is secured by a legal term of years absolute to take possession of the land, but the taking of possession by the mortgagee does not convert any legal estate of the mortgagor into an equitable interest.
(5)This section applies to mortgages made either before or after the commencement of this Act, and takes effect notwithstanding any stipulation to the contrary.
86. The Law of Property Act 1925 s.95 contains a provision: "Where a mortgagor is entitled to redeem, then subject to compliance with the terms on compliance with which he would be entitled to require a re-conveyance or surrender, he shall be entitled to require the mortgagee, instead of re-conveying or surrendering, to assign the mortgage debt and convey the mortgaged property to any third person, as the mortgagor directs; and the mortgagee shall be bound to assign and convey accordingly" Emphasis added.
87. This means that the borrowers have a statutory right to assign the mortgage debt to a buyer. The loan already exists. No new lending is required. The borrower can assign the debt to the buyer as part of the property sale. The SPVs have made use of their statutory rights to assign. It is now time to give life and real effect to the borrower's right to assign. The Government does not need the bankers, the funding is already available. The Government can revive the housing market without the acquiescence of the bankers. If nothing else, the threat of facilitating the public's use of this provision would add weighty negotiation leverage to effect the Government's aspirations. The Government has given the golden carrot to the bankers who have coveted that carrot to the exclusion of all. It is perhaps time to use the stick.
88. Implementation of this provision is simple. H.M. Land Registry could create a new Transfer Form to facilitate the mortgage assignment. For example, the TR1, transfer of the property and TR4, transfer of mortgage charge, could be used as the basis to create a new form to simultaneously transfer and assign both the property and the mortgage debt to the buyer. Additionally, the HIP pack could be amended to include disclosure of the mortgage product.
89. The Government has supported the minority, the bankers to the absolute detriment of the majority, the public. The Government should re-focus its perspective and support the majority. Consumers only need the Government commitment to enforce the rule of law to empower the ordinary public.
The reason they wanted to discredit him is that he has a solution to the rigged Australian, US, UK markets and they don't want others to use it?
This is totally legal but they dont want you to know that it is. They would rather bankrupt the individual repossess the property even though it usually has been paid off.
Another solution can be found in Crowdfunding:
Impact101 Mobile Landing Page
Impact101 Replicated Website