{"title":"在行动中失踪?1974年《消费者信贷法》第126条规定的抵押执行","authors":"Lisa Whitehouse, Cecily Crampin","doi":"10.1017/lst.2023.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper sets out the true ambit of section 126 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, noting that it requires virtually all residential mortgage agreements to be enforced by court order. Despite this, numerous commentaries on the English law of mortgage omit reference to section 126. The implications of our findings are profound. Not least, many accounts of the law of mortgage will require substantial revision, including recognition of the fact that cases such as Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc and Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark were reversed as long ago as 2008. More significant is the need to ensure that accurate knowledge of section 126 is conveyed to those who advise mortgagors at risk of possession. This is particularly the case given the ‘cost of living crisis’ and the backlog of possession claims arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic. Any mortgagees tempted to expedite recovery of mortgaged property by enforcing the mortgage extra-judicially should be directed to section 126 and the requirement it imposes to obtain a court order.","PeriodicalId":46121,"journal":{"name":"Legal Studies","volume":"43 1","pages":"543 - 561"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Missing in action? Mortgage enforcement under section 126 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Whitehouse, Cecily Crampin\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/lst.2023.14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper sets out the true ambit of section 126 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, noting that it requires virtually all residential mortgage agreements to be enforced by court order. Despite this, numerous commentaries on the English law of mortgage omit reference to section 126. The implications of our findings are profound. Not least, many accounts of the law of mortgage will require substantial revision, including recognition of the fact that cases such as Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc and Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark were reversed as long ago as 2008. More significant is the need to ensure that accurate knowledge of section 126 is conveyed to those who advise mortgagors at risk of possession. This is particularly the case given the ‘cost of living crisis’ and the backlog of possession claims arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic. Any mortgagees tempted to expedite recovery of mortgaged property by enforcing the mortgage extra-judicially should be directed to section 126 and the requirement it imposes to obtain a court order.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46121,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"543 - 561\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2023.14\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2023.14","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文列出了1974年消费者信贷法案第126条的真正范围,注意到它要求几乎所有的住宅抵押贷款协议都必须由法院命令执行。尽管如此,许多关于英国抵押法的评论忽略了第126条。我们的发现意义深远。尤其重要的是,抵押贷款法的许多条款将需要大幅修订,包括承认Ropaigealach诉巴克莱银行(Barclays Bank plc)和Horsham Properties Group Ltd诉Clark等案件早在2008年就被推翻了。更重要的是,必须确保向有管有风险的按揭人提供意见的人士,准确了解第126条。考虑到“生活成本危机”和Covid-19大流行引起的财产索赔积压,情况尤其如此。任何想要通过司法外强制执行抵押而加快收回抵押财产的承按人,都应参考第126条及该条所规定的取得法院命令的规定。
Missing in action? Mortgage enforcement under section 126 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974
Abstract This paper sets out the true ambit of section 126 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, noting that it requires virtually all residential mortgage agreements to be enforced by court order. Despite this, numerous commentaries on the English law of mortgage omit reference to section 126. The implications of our findings are profound. Not least, many accounts of the law of mortgage will require substantial revision, including recognition of the fact that cases such as Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc and Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark were reversed as long ago as 2008. More significant is the need to ensure that accurate knowledge of section 126 is conveyed to those who advise mortgagors at risk of possession. This is particularly the case given the ‘cost of living crisis’ and the backlog of possession claims arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic. Any mortgagees tempted to expedite recovery of mortgaged property by enforcing the mortgage extra-judicially should be directed to section 126 and the requirement it imposes to obtain a court order.