Effect of non-disclosure

Bradford and Bingley plc v Ross CA TLR 2 May

The claimant mortgagee sold the defendant’s property when he defaulted with his payments and obtained judgment for some £43,000 in respect of the shortfall on the sale. However, the claimant did not inform the judge that it had sold the property to a closely connected company and had therefore failed to comply with the strict requirements to show that it had made the sale in good faith and had taken reasonable precautions to obtain the best price. Had the trial judge been informed that the sale was between connected companies, the result might have been different. The judge approached the case on a false basis and his decision could not stand. However, the court did not accede to the defendant’s contention that the building society’s behaviour was so abusive that its action should be struck out. The defendant should not be denied the opportunity for a retrial, but to treat the building society’s conduct as amounting to an abuse of process and thus preventing it from recovering any shortfall would be disproportionate.