The sheriff mortgaged Gunn-Saimi’s house without saying anything – E24

– I was rejected when I looked for the bailiff. They said that I am not part of my husband’s loans, says Gunn-Saimi Laakso (48).

The sheriff confirms the routines.

– The co-owner of a shared house is not considered a party to the case, says Gry Elisabeth Røhr in Namsfogden inland.

Soon after, the property ended in a forced auction.

More than four million

Gunn-Saimi Laakso and her husband Tony had been cohabitants and wives for 25 years when she was shocked at her life a year ago. Knowing nothing, for many years she has raised several million in consumer loans.

– They took me out of here at home one morning, I sat down and said I wanted to talk to him, says Gunn-Saimi when E24 meets her at her home in Vingnes in Lillehammer.

Instead of the couple having just over $ 600,000 on the mortgage, as she thought, it turned out they had a debt of nearly $ 5 million. Her husband had raised over NOK 4 million in unsecured debt in the past six years.

Eventually, he was unable to repay the debt. The banks sent the claims to the debt collection companies, which also did not receive the money. Then they went to the bailiff.

– Several have asked me. But he knew nothing about his consumer loans, says Gunn-Saimi.

Gunn-Saimi’s ex-husband Tony Lien Antonsen knows Gunn-Saimi is on E24. He has also accepted that he is mentioned by name.

– He was rejected

But with a short time in advance he had had his little suspicions that it might be something. Suddenly she discovered that her husband had created an account in her name.

When, a few weeks after the conversation with her husband, she sought help from the sheriff, she says she was denied the cash.

By then, the sheriff was already in full swing working on the extensive debt case. Almost a month before, the bailiff had three outlets in one day. Creditors’ requests came a while earlier.

In a disbursement business, it is decided whether the amount owed should be collected by deduction, disbursement, or both.

In an effort to raise money for the banks, it was decided at these points of sale that a promise should be made in the couple’s joint home for a total of more than NOK 600,000.

A few days after Gunn-Saimi searched for the sheriff’s name for help and access, 10 new out-of-pocket stores were held, where the sheriff promised another NOK 2.3 million to the couple’s home.

The Green Paper transcript shows that 8 of the 10 outlay stores were registered the same day between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m.

– It is not a party

Still, Gunn-Saimi was unable to meet any of the authorities.

– She was told that she was unable to obtain information because it was not part of her husband’s loan, confirms Gunn-Saimi’s attorney, attorney Marianne Berg of Lillehammer’s attorneys.

The bailiff refers to the duty of confidentiality and does not wish to provide information on specific matters. But they confirm their routines.

– The proportion of a property that the defendant owns can be promised. So, other owners are not informed due to the duty of confidentiality, writes the section manager Gry Elisabeth Røhr in Namsfogden inland in an email to E24.

Gunn-Saimi and her husband have done the same as most people. They each own their ideal half of shared housing, and have had joint ownership, not separate ownership. The mortgage was taken by half of the husband.

– The co-owners of shared houses are not considered part. There is no provision requiring third parties to be notified, Røhr writes in Namsfogden inside.

The Namsfogden in Oslo, Alexander Dey, explains, in general, the reason why:

– It is a violation of our duty of confidentiality to report debt problems with one of the co-owners, says Dey.

The district court requested

Only after the District Court asked the sheriff to consider whether Gunn-Saimi should be informed, was the sheriff summoned.

In a letter that the Sør-Gudbrandsdal District Court sent to the bailiff in Lillehammer, the district court requests that “the bailiff be asked to bring clean if there are persons entitled to notification” of the forced recovery.

The letter was sent on August 12, four months after the sheriff promised NOK 600,000, and approx. three months after they pledged an additional 2.3 million NOK in guarantee. Two weeks later, in late August, Gunn-Saimi Laakso was called to the bailiff.

In the following weeks and months, 15 additional disbursement transactions will be made, so that the couple’s home is committed for a total of NOK 4.1 million at the sheriff’s decision.

The property is valued in half – NOK 2.1 million.

The lawyer is critical

Attorney Marianne Berg, who helps Gunn-Saimi, responds strongly to routines of the same name.

– The sheriff should have informed Gunn-Saimi the first time they were asked for a disbursement at the couple’s home. Then their interests would be better protected, and in many cases, one can avoid more loans, Berg says.

She also responds to the routine of not notifying the spouse.

– You cannot take out a mortgage with a mortgage on the house without the approval of your spouse. Berg asks: why should the sheriff be able to commit to a common home when the consumer’s debt is in default?

As it stands now, both the prosecutor and the district court are helping banks that have lent excessively high amounts and at high interest rates with the collection of money.

Half of the house for forced sale

Gunn-Saimi Laakso ended her lifelong marriage with her husband the day she understood the loan amount.

He moved, while living with the homeless children, into what is the children’s home for children. The couple has four children, all over the age of 18.

Last fall, half of the property, which is Tony’s ideal half, was put up for sale. The special sale was discussed by E24 this winter.

Gunn-Saimi must not repay the ex-husband’s loan. But that half of your home and homeless children are now out of forced sales creates many challenges.

– It is absurd to think that you only have a small loan left in the house. But then large consumer loans were taken, before the house suddenly ends in forced sales, says Gunn-Saimi’s attorney, attorney Marianne Berg.

Can not move

In the worst case scenario, some wild strangers can bid on the property and move out. So Gunn-Saimi and the children must agree with the new owner of half the ex-husband on how to dispose of the property and land.

– But I hope I can buy half of Tony myself. I have made an offer that I hope will be accepted.

– Why don’t you move to another place?

– It does not work Then I will also be considered as a default on the mortgage.

– With the promises she cannot simply move and sell her part. No one wants to buy a home valued at $ 2.1 million when they pledged nearly $ 5 million, including the rest of the mortgage, their lawyer says.