My Partner has a foreclosure notice on a property in Spain. She lives in the UK

So what happens to me (and people like me) when I can't pay my rent from my savings because someone bought a house they coud not in the end afford ?

If investors have to subsidise unwise buyers,  who commited themselves beyond their means, there will be no money to lend to wise buyers.

I'm not referring to unwise buyers, I'm referring to innocent wise buyers and the hypocrisy of Banks! I'm also referring to Banks who use the rule of law to their own ends but refuse to recognise their own legal obligations.

Banks should never consider themselves above the rule of law..

Johnzx,

If its not the banks money and is as you say the Investors, why aren't all the profits returned to the Investors, If you buy shares your liability is capped at the amount you Invest and the shares you buy. If the company subsequently goes bust the shareholders lose their Investment they aren't liable for any additional losses not covered by by the assets of the business its called Limited Liability.

Why should a Bank be able to secure a loan and then if the asset doesn't covered the outstanding liability be able to pursue beyond the asset, its a ridiculous scenario that has encouraged banks to lend at levels they shouldn't have agreed, overvaluing houses to increase profits via larger interest payments safe in the knowledge if the debtor can't pay they can add costs additional interest and still chase the debtor till their dying day.

Theres's not an Investment in the world that's completely risk free so why should the Banks expect the debtor to carry all the risk, if the market fluctuates surely the bank should carry some of the risk therefore only be able to reclaim the ASSET IT SECURED THE DEBT AGAINST!.

You need to bear in mind its the Bank that values the asset not the debtor, also before anyone points out what happens if the property increases in value only the debtor benefits simply isn't true, as this then presents the Banks with a further opportunity to lend again to the next purchaser with a larger loan and therefore incresed costs and Interests. 

If the bank loses money blame those managing the business as we would in any other walk of life not the customer.

If the bank secures a loan to any commercial entity it secures against assets and can't go beyond those assets if the business fails, so why one rule for one, a different rule for others! 

Johnzx, it seemed to be in reply to my posting that you asked "why on earth would the Spanish bank not take action in the UK ? "

I don't think anyone has suggested the Spanish bank would not take action in the UK. To the contrary, everyone has confirmed that they would.

But as littlehelper has written, "she has little or no equity in her uk property". So, it would be folly for a Spanish bank  to spend thousands forcing a sale, particularly if there was a possibility that if the proceeds did not satisfy the original mortgagee's claim, because then the Spanish bank would have to make up the shortfall. But, it is a cheap and easy procedure for the Spanish bank to register a claim against the title deeds. Then, if ever the owner wants to sell the house they will be unable to do so until the charge is cleared.

The law most certainly implies that one should pay one's debts. Unless one declares bankruptcy, in which case not only does the law say that the debt is forgiven but also says that any further effort by the lender to recover their money - even a phone call or email - is illegal and unlawful. As you wisely say, we cannot cherry pick which laws we like.

Johnnie1uk,

Very simplistic and naive not everyone can live via that principle how does anyone buy there first property without borrowing simply isn't feasible unless you have a very rich Mammy and Daddy.

Also on your basis every bank would be bust!!