MORTGAGE ADJUSTMENTS

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22196, 13 September 1937, Page 6

MORTGAGE ADJUSTMENTS

TO TU* EDITOR OT TUX PRESS. Sir, —“Mortgagor II,” in his letter in ‘‘The Press - ' of September 8. seems very much concerned, and because the Mortgagors Relief Act is open to so much suspicion, he puts the blame on to the previous Conservative Government as being responsible for the Mortgagors Relief Act, admitting the incompetence and inability of the present Labour Government to remedy its defects. He says the commission has Supreme Court status. If the present Government wanted to deal honestly and fairly with all parties why docs it exclude the press? It has had plenty of time to amend these defects. I will put it straight to “Mortgagor II.” An individual has, say, £BOO in his pocket for investment. What would be the fate of anyone reducing this amount by taking £2OO at this stage? Money is invested in a mortgage approved by a valuer. As time goes on the mortgagor can apply to a court having Supreme Court status to have the £BOO reduced. Does “Mortgagor II” call it honest? It is a wonder to me that some of the cases have not been taken to a higher Court. With satisfactory prices ruling for our primary products for the last two years, making farming a paying proposition, I would ask “Mortgagor II” if the previous Conservative Government would have allowed the mortgagee to be harassed, possibly for the benefit of a section of inefficient farmers, or others evading their responsibilities? I doubt if the last Conservative Government would have gone for popularity at the expense of the mortgagee. Whatever its shortcomings were, this was not one of I them.—Yours, etc., ' j H. BLISS. P.S.—Might I be permitted to put I “Mortgagor II" correct in his reference to the last Government as Conservative. It was really a Coalition Government with a Liberal leader. ! Henthcote. September 11. 1937 j to TBB EDITOR Or THE EASES. Sir, —In reply to "Interested." who quotes from a letter written by me aver a year ago, I desire to say that [ have never written, in these columns, anything which was not either an expression of what I believed to be the truth or of what I believed to be an accurate forecast of coming events. The case under review was a forecast, half of which proved to be right and the other half proved to be wrong. In short, I made a mistake, and I am quite prepared to admit it. "Interested” will, I think, admit that the Government's policy regarding "arm mortgages will cost it many a second mortgagee’s vote, and so it seems that this Government is prepared to sacrifice votes rather than permit what it considers an injustice to be done to the whole community. Had my forecast proved to be entirely accurate, then* the mortgagee’s loss would have been shouldered by the whole community, whereas the present methods share the loss, caused py the fall in all land values, between he mortgagee and the mortgagor. The nortgagee loses some of his invested capital, and the mortgagor loses the noney which he paid as deposit and ilso any sums subsequently paid off srincipal. "Interested’s’’ suggestion that I am n the confidence of the Government s an entirely unwarranted and incor•ect assumption. It is, however, cnirely correct to assume that I have

every confidence in the Government —Yours etc.. F. G. THOMAS. September 10, 1937. TO THI SOITJJt or TBJR rB*3S. Sir. —Will you please inform me whether it is the business of a mortgagor to approach a mortgagee in regard to a private settlement of a case awaiting hearing under the Adjustment Commission, or should it be left to the solicitor who drew up the application papers?— Yours, etc., INQUIRER. September 3, 1937. [With reference to the sj-rangcmcnt of voluntary adjustments respecting applications awaiting hearing by the Adjustment Commission, it is usual for the solicitors representing the different parties to endeavour to arrange terms of settlement suitable to all parties. There is nothing to prevent the mortgagor and the mortgagee making suitable arrangements themselves, but such arrangements may not be in accordance with the provisions of the Mortgagors and Lessees Rehabilitation Act, 1936. and before the matter could be finalised it would be necesj sary to consult a solicitor to prepare I the' necessary documents.] j