The Issue
An LPA receiver's authority to act derives from the security instrument under which they are appointed. Statutory mortgagee powers under LPA 1925 ss.101 and 109 arise only from a valid legal charge. If the charge is disputed — as to authenticity, execution, delivery and escrow release — the receiver's authority cannot be assumed. It must be proved. Enforcement consequences that flow from assumed receiver authority — possession, sale, management, registration — cannot be treated as lawful if the authority itself has not been established.
The Law: How It Should Operate
LPA 1925 ss.101, 109 — receiver powers and mortgagee powers are statutory, not contractual. They depend on a valid legal charge. Medforth v Blake [2000] Ch 86 — a receiver owes duties and must act within authority; breach gives rise to independent liability. Silven Properties Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland [2003] EWCA Civ 1409 — a receiver's powers depend on the validity of the appointment. Where the foundation of appointment is challenged, the receiver's acts do not acquire authority simply because they have been performed.
How It Operated in Lawrence v HNW Lending Ltd
The receiver was treated as validly appointed without requiring HNW to prove that the underlying charge was authentic, properly executed and delivered. Properties were entered, controlled, sold and registered under the assumed appointment. The receiver conflict — an undisclosed matrimonial connection between CRG and HNW's portfolio manager — was not investigated. The enforcement chain was treated as lawful without proving the statutory foundation on which it depended.
"The question is not whether one court reached one adverse result. It is that the same failure of protection recurred across courts, tribunals, administration, policing and oversight — making the pattern visible only because the case passed through so many forums."
— Open Letter to the Lord Chancellor, 15 May 2026