House Reposession 'Rescue' - Is This Legal and Sensible?

Depends on who values the house in three years and who is allowed to buy it! They might well find that the small print says that the company will value it and give them only eg 66% of valuation - so they will get nothing!

Which suggests that it's perhaps a tad dodgy....

And in the meantime, they've paid nearly 20k interest and will have a 'completion fee' of 6k on top. If none of you can understand the deal, I'd guess it's unlikely to be a good one...

I wonder what the Land Registry entries say, as to ownership and charges on the property. Of course, for a very small fee, you could find out online.

So how come they can afford 550 per month to this company, but can't clear the arrears owed on the existing mortgage? One would have expected the existing mortgagees to have accepted repayments gradually and to have wanted to keep the business. And one would expect any company who bail you out of such a situation, to charge really inflated rates of interest on the principle of "beggars can't be choosers".

Whether or not it is a good deal depends on the small print. Is the 550 per month going to reduce the mortgage debt or (by the sound of it) not reduce it at all and count as a sort of rent? What is happening to the debt - does it remain level at 103k or is it increasing? It might actually be increasing and at a terrifying rate. What happens if they fall behind with the payments - what interest is charged on late payments, and how quickly can they expect to be evicted? Maybe they haven't looked and would rather not know, but if they have fallen behind once, they could fall behind again.

Their best bet is to see a financial advisor and find out what the cheapest mortgage is and how they can pay off these people (if indeed the agreement allows them to pay off these people) and improve their position.

I guess this might be a good bet for Housing Benefit - they will pay towards rent, but not towards mortgages - so the £550 will be covered by the social (ie you and me!)

I suspect the mortgagee has memories of the previous housing debacle of late

So, repossess asap while the property has some equity left in a falling market.

Perhaps, the mortgagors did not attend the Court Hearing (most don't, apparently) or were unable to convince the court that the arrears could be settled quickly.

If it was legally a rent could they then be entitled to housing benefit which wasn't available to them while they were paying mortgage interest ? Could that be the crux of this scheme?

DG