Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Liar loans
Pensioner squatting in her own £2m home says she will 'fight to stay'
Aged 71 and the daughter of a millionaire property tycoon, she's not your average squatter. But Rosalie Reeves-Fisher says she has no choice. The spinster, who has never had a job, inherited her £2.2million home from her mother. But a mortgage company evicted her when she was unable to maintain payments on a £1.2million loan. Miss Mason, who was a joint borrower on the self-certification mortgage, listed her income as £1million. But although an accompanying note made it clear that she had not earned anything in the previous two years, this was not questioned by lenders. At the height of the property boom, in 2005, lenders were prepared to overlook her lack of steady income. Miss Reeves-Fisher has vowed not to leave and plans to sue the mortgage firm for reckless lending.
Posted by little professor @ 08:49 AM (5136 views)
29 thoughts on “Liar loans”
Add a comment
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
Sharpe says:
hopefully there will be detention camps for this kind of illegal behaviour. she might be old, but that does not stop her being a crook
mark wadsworth says:
Let her sue and be damned. The bank can just counter claim for mortgage fraud.
will says:
Where has the rest of her father’s wealth gone? Spent it all and forgot about a pension.
Eastleighfan says:
Amazes me that these people try to blame anyone but themselves .
I lost £10 at the bookies on Saturday , should I blame the bookie for allowing me to gamble , or should I just blame myself for making a bad selection ?
when asked your income , it means PRESENT income, not what you earned in the past !!!
These people really do annoy me
a saver says:
The thing that bugs me about these repossession sob stories is that people can always rent – like many would-be FTBs who are still priced out of the market and can only dream of owning a house. This particular story, although sad, sounds like money mismanagement gone mad. She could always have downsized before things got too out of hand.
The Baldman says:
This is a typical story of the decade- over priced houses-mewing-liar loans
last_days_of_disco says:
She can keep her double barrelled name, everything else must go.
Haf haf haf, jolly good.
The worst kind of victim, pretentious and snobby. Is this supposed to make us laugh or cry?
timmy t says:
mark wadsworth said…Let her sue and be damned. The bank can just counter claim for mortgage fraud.
Exactly. Reminds me of the guy in the US who bought a load of very valuable cigars, insured them, smoked them all and then claimed on the insurance because they were ‘burned’. The insurance company then did him for arson and he went to prison! Ha feckin Ha!
51ck-6-51x says:
I’d say that she should not be signing things she cannot read (“partially-sighted…”) and she should not have written that she had an income of £1m, or indeed that she should have placed so much trust in Sheila Mason.
However, it does appear that the company that provided the loan should not have done so, and courts will err on her side I feel – whether this is against Miss Mason, the lender, or the legal advisor if, as the lender insists, she used.
last_days_of_disco – I think it’s meant to make you laugh and cry at the same time.
growler says:
I think there is a HUGE missed point here – especially comment 5
I hope she succeeds in her defence that the LENDER bears responsibility for knowingly allowing such a mortgage to be approved. This isn’t unique and would open the gates to an awful lot of action – which the lenders sorely deserve. Right now, they can completely hide behind the “client” signature
bluebeach says:
@5…. Shoot her in the head an ditch her corpse….. Now that has brightened my day…. pi$$ed my sides laughing :O)…
shining wit says:
Inbreda @ 5….
Can I join your revolution please…..
The HPC thought police might have something to say about you austere attitude though
I Want A House says:
My heart bleeds rocks for this woman. Yet again, Greedy Britain at its best.
Robertpaulson says:
I would love to see the slant the mail would put on this if, for example, the subject was a young asian man who had never worked, living off the wealth of his family and ‘fraudulently’ taking out a 1.2mln pound loan to speculate with. Probably wouldn’t get the ‘poor nice old middle class woman taken advantage of by nasty bankers’ write up. This credit crunch is not totally the fault of the banks, there needed to be greed on the part of the borrower also to take the otherside of these loans – at what point did she think it was a good idea to borrow 1.2mln on a £124pw state pension (and why the hell do we as tax payers give someone who has never worked a day in their life and lives in a 2mln home a state pension). A fool and their money are lucky enough to get together in the first place.
magnifico says:
@ growler (9)
Let me understand you are one of those who think’s it’s always the “Institution”‘s fault. A society is made not only by Government, Banks, Factories etc…
People have been faking Self-Cert forms left right and centre. They were part of the problem, why do they expect to get away with it?
I Want A House says:
@9
I agree with you that court action will happen but I find this a massive problem as it will be us, the tax payers who will end up paying again for the banks mess. Also it makes victims out of criminals. Yes, she is a criminal. Lock her up and throw away the key, use the pension to pay for her “food and lodging” in prison. I guarantee she’ll have a roof then.
I feel no pity for this woman.
plato says:
A pretty clear case here of a naive lender and a parasitic crook.
last_days_of_disco says:
She represents the attitude which seems to have become OK in our society. In order to succeed and make money you have to be a dishonest, dishonourable SOB who does not give a stuff for broader society (i.e. anyone else). The idea that the wealthy are above the rules while the rest have to tow the line and be good little boys and girls.
Now I am not saying being good and honest is at all a bad thing, in fact its *essential* to prevent this nonsense. I think the simple reality is our liberal attitude towards the criminal behaviour of the “so called” elite is screwing the little guy. We need to apply strict rules about debt to the rich. Based on that, lots of the “heroes” on TV like Donald Trump, etc, would be in jail! And guess what, all their so called contribution to our financial system is being shown up for the chimera it actually is. Its a big fat lie. They just take, they don’t give and the people they employ are just jumping on the band wagon of screwing the rest of us. What does their rent-seeking behaviour benefit us? I can’t think of a single thing that Donald Trump has actually produced that I need. I could name a long list of these celebrities. Compare them say to Linus Torvalds whose software is probably hosting this web page. Compared to him they are not even in the same universe. They are just selfish idiots.
I am tired of seeing these so called rich folks who have built everything on debt and the worship of money prancing around. Its time to apply strict and simple rules to them. The same ones the banks so vigorously apply to us little guys when we miss a payment. No more bankruptcy protection for them, time to bring back debtor’s prison for those who run up too much. Its good, the bogo-rich deserve to go down. It will focus people’s minds. They will always make sure they have the money to back their promissory notes.
Banksrgangstas says:
Jeez – how callous are (some of) you people? (And your jealousy makes you fools!) She’s just a slightly dopey old lady who has been sorely ripped off by a ‘property developer’ and the bankstas.
Wake up – do you really think the ‘government’ and the ‘banks’ have your best interests at heart? Don’t you guys see that *they* are our enemies – not some old bird with a nice house.
Do you really think the bank actually lent her any real money???
Do the research! Money is created out of thin air – by the banks – as bookkeeping entries! It’s a scam. The whole system is a scam – from the Queen down.
Miss Reeves-Fisher’s mortgage company may not be lawfully entitled to reposess her home… She should ask her mortgage company to prove that the morgage contract is valid.
For a contract to be lawful (under common law) there have to be a number of criteria met – including equal *consideration* – which actually means *value*…
As the bank would have effectively created the money it lent her from nothing – as a book-keeping entry – it offered no consideration in the contract. It did not lend her any of it’s money – it created new money based on her promise to pay, and backed by the security of her house.
She should ask for proof that the lender offered equal *consideration* in the contract, and refuse to move until they provide it. And there’s a fair chance they will not be able to – so she could keep her home…
This applies to anyone who is facing foreclosure. If you are, or you know someone who is – check out this link, and follow the trail:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRzHDwQUJa0
It’s time for us to take back control of our money, and our lives!
Everything your are told about the world by the ‘mainstream’ press is a lie. The world is run by criminals. Do the research – you’ll see.
mdmick says:
Do I detect ageism here? Are you lot making prejudiced assumptions about a person because of their age?
It’s lucky she probably doesn’t know how to use the internet or she might be able to read these unkind observations!!
last_days_of_disco says:
ageism????
No, way, its a nothing to do with her age. There are loads of young people who have learned this attitude works in our consumer society.
Unkind remark??? She has blown more with less talent than Foxtons. Where to start?! I am spluttering, ageism!
Yeah, better become a victim quick, then we can be a “poor thing” and the nanny state can come to our rescue. The problem is this “compassionate” lefty state is reaching into my and my children’s wallets for decades to come to be all generous. Its just unadulterated moral weakness. A complete inability to make any hard choices. I makes we want to vomit.
Willit says:
“Exactly. Reminds me of the guy in the US who bought a load of very valuable cigars, insured them, smoked them all and then claimed on the insurance because they were ‘burned’. The insurance company then did him for arson and he went to prison! Ha feckin Ha!”
No true – urban myth.
bob1 says:
Right on last days of disco. This old cun* wants it both ways. She is an elitist old bag one minute and then turns into a whining old sponger when it suits her. In the above sentence, the use of old is purely factual. The cun* and sponger are the words you should be concentrating on mdmick
Incidentally I had a look on rightmove. Its not bad value at 2.2 million. It’s got 8 beds and 22 acres. If that could be had for 1.5 million it’s a serious bargain. I’m sure it would have gone for almost 3 million a year ago
inbreda says:
@9 growler…
Yes the institutions should pay. I agree. However the precedent has been set that when the dodgy institution gets in trouble, the taxpayer bails them out.
Correct me if I am mistaken but this old hag doesn’t work. It won’t be her taxes bailing out the dodgy organisations, it will be mine. All to save her skin cos she is a liar and thief.
Basically the honest prudent people are – by hook or by crook – bailing out the selfish arrogant blah blah.
I maintain that blowing her brains out is the quickest and fairest solution all round.
magnifico says:
Can’t see why she’s a spinster… she look a pretty good catch to me…
bob1 says:
How about starting the UK ‘s first economic protest riot. Why don’t a bunch of HPCers get on down to her gaff. We could serve her with a ‘peoples restitution order’ and then empty the place. It’s my idea, so I bagsy the sofas and artwork. Make sure we shoot her in the head outside though, because I’m willing to bet the carpets are worth a fortune
shining wit says:
inbreda @ 19…
“I maintain that blowing her brains out is the quickest and fairest solution all round…..”
Surely bullets, guns, gun licence cost. Isn’t there a moree environmentally friendly way?
Death by composting – Interesting concept! Tie her down and just let nature take it’s course!
growler says:
Magnifico/enbreda: Noooooooo. I don’t sympathise with her at all, but I can see that lenders hide behind the clients signature citing “he said he could afford it, I made no enquiries and therefore agreed to risk MY banks money on the sayso of an interested party”. It’s a bit like expecting people to believe “of course I love you darling” on the first night.
I see it as a SHARED responsibility.
The banks don’t perform due diligence – and that’s the issue here. The view right now is that if the punter signs, we’re in the clear. They don’t advise people either. In the old days, your bank manager would say “you can’t afford this”. Now its a call centre and they MAYBE think the same but say “of course, sign here”.
If this lady can PROVE that the banks knowlingly lent to a declared extreme risk, then they should suffer the consequences of their negligence.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m against ANY self-cert. We spend our lives trying to avoid conflict of interest, yet our supine government designs our lending system around the biggest self-interested conflict of interest there is.
The Raven says:
She should go and live in the other house she owns–not mentioned by the BBC
She’s made a fool of everybody and especially the BBC reporter