You still haven't shown me where I supposedly said this, your just asserting it one again. Asking you to evidence your assertions has become too tiresome, so I'm leaving this debate here. Farewell.(Original post by Democracy2013)
I originally said that bankrupt's families suffer indirectly by losing their family home. You said this wasn't the case under Insolvency Act c/o ToLATA (Trust of Land). I then pointed out to you the reality is that OR/ Trustee/ Mortgagees powers will likely result in the loss of the family home in one way or another, whether through land charge or possession/ sale orders.
Rather than addressing these points you gravitated to an almost pro bank/ OR stance.
What are your thoughts?