ROOF Blog

A subprime lender has agreed not to repossess for at least six years the home of a man who fell into arrears in what is believed to be the first legally binding deal of its kind in the UK.

Blemain Finance, an arm of the Blemain Group, reached the agreement in a High Court case with Peter Bentley, a carpenter from Bridgend who had lost wages as he cared for his sick father.

The deal is the latest victory by aggressive personal claims companies that are taking on companies responsible for a spate of lending during the credit boom to households that are now struggling to repay.

Personal insolvencies continue to rise, with almost 100,000 in the year to September.

Carl Wright, of Cartel Client Review, the Manchester-based personal claims company, which took Mr Bentley’s case, has been using a clause in the 1974 Consumer Credit Act to argue that many lenders have an ‘unfair relationship’ with uninformed consumers, who often sign up for loans they can ill-afford and which carry heavy penalty charges.

Guidance on renegotiating section 106 agreements is to be released by the Homes and Communities Agency later this month. The guidance for local authorities and developers is needed following a High Court ruling last year that quashed Blythe Valley borough council’s 30 per cent affordable housing policy and a similar High Court challenge currently against Wakefield Metropolitan district council.

A test case is being heard in the High Court to decide the legality of renewal fees charged to landlords when tenants stay on after their assured shorthold tenancy comes to an end. The challenge by the Office of Fair Trading against Foxtons will affect how future letting agency agreements are drawn up and whether agents will be able to enforce renewal fees in current contracts with landlords.

A couple who tried to rely on a legal loophole which allows a property to evade planning permission if it has been lived in for more than four years are facing eviction, after the High Court called their scheme a ‘fraud’. The couple were granted planning permission to build a barn for agricultural use, but transformed the interior into a three-bedroom house with a gym, and applied for a certificate of lawfulness that would make their home legal after four years. The High Court’s decision overturned an earlier decision by the government planning inspector which ruled the couple were entitled to stay in the property. They plan on appealing.

A Suffolk man has won a high court challenge to defend a stretch of coast from erosion after he spent as much as £400,000 building barriers to shore up the cliff face below his house to stop it falling into the sea. Natural England had argued his defences were unlawful after designating the stretch of coastline a site of special interest and said it was in the interests of science to allow the ground to erode naturally. Although the High Court decision was decided on a technicality and Natural England can appeal, Peter Boggis said it was a victory for everyone who lives on the coast.