the Property Law website

Maintained by Gary Webber, barrister

Home Page > Property law > Property Law Library > Mortgages > Sale by mortgagee / receiver

Home Page
Property law
Contact


Bank all monies charge
Consumer Credit Act 2006
Clog on the equity of redemeption
Extortionate lending
Interest
Limitation and shortfall
Misrepresentation and affirmation
Money claim
Mortgage indemnity policies
Mortgage possession
Order for sale
Priorities
Proving the loan
Regulation
Sale by mortgagee / receiver
Subrogation
Undue influence
Unfair contract terms

Current page

Site Editors

Gary Webber
(General Editor)
John Martin
(Deputy editor)
Nigel Clayton
(Mortgages)
Peta Dollar
(Property transactions)
Daniel Dovar
(Residential tenancies)
Michael Garson
(Home information packs)
Piers Harrison
(Long leases)
Saira Sheikh
(Planning)
Sarah Thompson-Copsey
(Landlord and tenant - General)



Sale by mortgagee / receiver


This page deals with a number of cases and issues arising out of the duty of a mortgagee or receiver to obtain a proper price when selling the property.


Duty to obtain best price

Michael v Miller
[2004] EWCA Civ 282

Facts

The Millers sold a Gloucestershire Estate to Michael and others and took a charge to secure the balance of the purchase price. Michael planted out thousands of lavender and other herbal plants with a view to selling essential oils. They defaulted on repayment of the loan and Miller repossessed, appointing John D Wood & Co as selling agents. They achieved a sale at £1.625M which was subsequently challenged on a number of grounds. After a two-week trial HHJ Weeks QC held, amongst other things, that while the price fell short of the market value of the property it was within the bracket of non-negligent valuations. The mortgagors appealed, contending that the mortgagees were in breach of their duty to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable. They ran a fairly simple but compelling argument that since best price meant market price, the mortgagees were necessarily liable for the shortfall, and that the concept of the bracket was therefore inappropriate.

Decision

Jonathan Parker LJ, giving the judgment of the Court made some useful comments about th ... THIS IS AN EXTRACT OF THE FULL TEXT. TO GET THE FULL TEXT, SEE BELOW

Purchase options
Buy this page £10 + VAT (1 year)
Buy whole site £99 + VAT (1 year)
Existing members, to login click => here