Is this a scam?

In message , SteveR writes

Definitely a scam - who is the mortgage lender?

I would've said so but for the fact that the alleged scammer waited for the landlord, unless that's who he wanted to talk to.

Weird.

I wonder what will happen on Monday.

Daytona

I don't know - it's not my mortgage. The guy said he was from a company called New Trade. I've searched on Google but I haven't found anything about it.

The alleged scammer waiting for the landlord is the part that is puzzling me as well.

Hopefully, my landlord will ring me to let me know what his mortgage lender said. If not, I'll ring him.

A brave Scammer!

An alleged scammer waiting for the landlord is still a scam. Think about it - why run off? The landlord is not going to know who the scammer is and the scammer waiting for the landlord just adds weight to his 'case' and normally increases his chances of getting into the property.

As the person knew who the landlord was, he would presumably know that the landlord was not a 'Rachman' type with a heavy gang.

The Companies House lists three companies with that name:

Name Number Incorporated Dissolved

NEWTRADE LIMITED 04198930 11/04/2001 22/07/2003 NEWTRADE LIMITED 05010570 08/01/2004 11/10/2005 NEWTRADE LTD 05590582 12/10/2005 Active

in all probability he was a surveyor/buyer, if this is the case your landlord could be looking to remortgage or if a buyer, he was attempting to ascertain the likely selling price of the flat/portfolio as well.

This strengthens the case that it could have been the buyer, and he was sussing you out as a tenant and the block as a whole. Hence the unannounced visit in order to see how you live and treat the property

If you were not privy to the conversation then you are no further ahead on what was said, and the above seems to be more likely than to what you first considered as a scam

They might be looking for unauthorised alterations and then try and screw you for breaches of the lease (), there have been a few high profile cases near me where people have added conservatories etc. and the new freeholders have demanded hundreds of pounds.

The other possibility is that the freehold has been sold, but the records of lessees and ground rent payments have been lost. It will be cheaper to ask than get the info from the land registry.

Depending on the lease it is normal for the landlord to have to give notice in writing for routine visits. OTOH in a block of flats the landlord / management company will have right of [forcible even] entry in an emergency to trace escaping water etc..

Are you suggesting that management company agents would walk around with water pistols to squirt through letterboxes or keyholes, in order to be able to claim, truthfully, that they observed water seeping out through the crack under the door, which gave them just cause to effect an "emergency" entry?

Obviously the scam was his "New Trade" ;)

I heard of a couple of similar experiences of late, it seems these bastards are pretty brazen now, I presume they're mostly looking for car keys?

I called the landlord today. He was out, but I spoke to his wife, and she said that the landlord had given their home phone number to the alleged auditor, and they were going to call the mortgage lender tomorrow if he had not called them.

She said not to worry, because she said that she thought that the guy was indeed just checking up to make sure that there were real tenants in the place. It was interesting that the landlord didn't tell me that he had given his number to the alleged auditor when he spoke to him on Saturday.

Out of curiosity at this point, I decided to check with the Land Registry to see if I could find out who the mortgage lender was, and anything else useful. The leasehold, it turns out, is in the landlady's

*maiden* name (my lease is with a limited company that they run together). The mortgage lender is Mortgage Express which is a specialist arm of Bradford & Bingley, specialising in mortgages, especially buy-to-let.

This whole affair suggests to me that buy-to-let mortgages (Mortgage Express's main business) are given subject to terms specifying that the borrower must let the property rather than live in it, and that the lenders check up on the borrowers.

Of course, I'm only making an assumption here, and I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has dealt with Mortgage Express, and who has experience one way or the other about this type of checking-up.

In message , SteveR writes

It is often the case that a buy to let borrower may not live in the property. Having said that, I have never heard of a lender checking a situation, either in this way, or any other. In the same way, I have never heard of a lender checking work subject to an undertaking, (e.g. I promise to have a new damp proof course within 12 months of completion of the loan).

I've just completed a mortgage with Mortgage Express, but I doubt whether I will ever find out, as I dont live there. If I do, I'll report back.

Maybe he paid his pound[1] to find out who owned the flat?

[1] Actually I think it might be two pounds? Can't remember, but I did do it once on the land registry website.

In message , Ronald Raygun writes

I'll have to remember that one!

£2.00 is the current fee unless Stu or Francis care to disagree :-P