text:
'Looking' Fine: The Good, The Bad & The Beards
Posted on January 20, 2014 August 23, 2014 by Real Nobody
Hey dude.
Looking?
That's the 21st century equivalent of wandering into a bathhouse or the obfuscating brush of a city park at night. Most gay men I know have never gone to either of these places trolling for sex — the word "cruising" is more likely to bring to mind poolside piña coladas and possibly a host of costumed Disney princess than it is a sexual encounter. It's 2014 now, and gay life isn't relegated only to the dankest, shadiest corners of the world anymore — nobody has to go "looking" in such places anymore, though some small segment of the population still chooses to (mostly leftovers from previous generations).
HBO's Looking begins with its protagonist, Patrick, fumbling through the beginnings of a hookup in a public park, which is a winking method of making its audience roll their eyes and murmur, "Ohhh, dear." Moments later, without fanfare, the encounter ends, and Patrick is laughing it off as a joke, an experiment, and we can relax. At least Looking is smart enough to know that this brand of dalliance is a thing of the past.
The show focuses on a trio of gay men in San Francisco — yes, San Francisco, which already feels a little on-the-nose. But so would New York, and so would Los Angeles, so let's set that aside for now. Patrick is a level designer for video games whose longest relationship clocked in at under six months; Agustín (Frankie J. Avarez) is an artist who is about to move in with his boyfriend Frank (O-T Fagbenle); Dom (Murray Bartlett) is a server rapidly approaching his forties who still lives with his ex-girlfriend Doris (Lauren Weedman) and is still hung up on his psycho ex-boyfriend, so clearly he has issues with moving on. The pilot, "Looking For Now," introduces minor complications for each of them, but mostly it's just a slice of gay life in San Francisco, without aspiring to make any grand, sweeping statements or bold revelations. It's apolitical, which is the shrewdest political stance to take at this moment in time.
Looking has an understandably high level of buzz, given that it's premiering on HBO, which is still the cream of the crop as TV networks go. It's no sudden miracle that the premium cable outlet that brought us The Sopranos and The Wire is gay-friendly; HBO has had a long line of shows prominently featuring gay characters, from Sex & The City to Six Feet Under to Game Of Thrones, and let's not forget last year's uber-gay TV event, Behind The Candelabra. Still, an all-gay show from television's most prestigious taste maker is still a vote of confidence in gay audiences — it's not an insignificant endorsement. Looking signals the normalization of gay culture in the TV space without literally calling that out, a la Ryan Murphy's nobly-intentioned but failed The New Normal, which was the network sitcom equivalent of a screeching queen in cutoff jean shorts shirking, "We're here! We're queer! Get used to it!" in people's faces. Looking isn't trying nearly so hard, and it shouldn't have to. The new normal doesn't have to announce itself, because it's just normal.
Two comparisons most immediately spring to mind as Looking makes its debut. The gay soap Queer As Folk bowed on Showtime nearly fifteen years ago, so in a way it's surprising that it took this long for HBO to catch up to its premium cable competitor (which also gave us The L Word). And of course, it's easy to look at Looking as HBO's gay answer to Girls — until you examine the differences. Last night's Girls saw Lena Dunham's Hannah celebrating her 25th birthday; I've often wondered why the show is even called Girls, since it places a fair amount of focus on male characters, too, but the girls of Girls are absolutely girls, in the sense that they're immature and not even close to grown-up. Looking is not just HBO's Boys, then — Patrick is 29, Agustín is 31, Dom is 39, and they're all somehow supporting themselves in one of America's priciest cities. If anything, Looking is HBO's Men — and it has the facial hair to prove it.
One episode in, Looking is already a lock for Hairiest Show On Television. (There's an Emmy for that, right?) As beard after beard whizzed by on my TV screen, I felt like I was witnessing Sons Of Anarchy coming out of the closet. Either HBO is trying to keep costs of the show down by banning razor blades on set or Looking is the first TV show in history attempting to appeal exclusively to users of the Scruff app. (It worked.) And yeah, I get that this show is set in San Francisco, and that even if it wasn't, facial hair is kind of a thing right now, but seriously — there are so many beards! Aside from Jonathan Groff's clean-shaven Patrick, everyone on this show is hidden under layers of fur. Thus I think my favorite character is Lauren Weedman's Doris, mainly because I can see her face when she's talking.
Curious as to why Looking seemed to have such a thing against shaving, I stumbled across a photo of series creator Michael Lannan, which suddenly explained everything.
So, yes, the facial hair on parade is my problem, we can agree. In its initial outing, Looking does get a few things right. It isn't as drenched in sex as we might have expected from the network that airs Girls and Game Of Thrones. Gay men have enough sex thrown at them as it is, because sex sells. Title aside, it's nice that Looking doesn't immediately feel the urge to appeal to the lowest common denominator — there are not really any cheap thrills to be found here (though there likely will be at some point, let's be real). We had the shallow and soapy Queer As Folk for that. Looking is a little more now, a little more contemporary — it's a much more diverse cast than Queer As Folk's lily white ensemble, though star Jonathan Groff is about as white bread as they come. As in last year's film C.O.G. (based on a David Sedaris story), he's a smart but socially awkward guy who hails from the upper crust, unable to shed the shackles of parental expectation. In C.O.G., Groff's character was condescending and abrasive; here, he's just kind of… there.
That's the main problem I had with Looking (besides the beards). It doesn't do anything too wrong, but by the end of the episode, I wasn't sure I liked or even connected with any of these characters. Granted, this is a half-hour long pilot, and you can only expect so much. Agustín and Frank have a spontaneous threesome, which is a predictable and unexciting development for a gay couple that is moving toward making a larger commitment to one another. I guess that's fine, but so far we have zero investment in them as a couple, so it doesn't seem to matter either way. Meanwhile, Dom is nearing forty and growing frustrated with the fact that he's still a waiter and the gap between himself and his intended sexual partners is widening to the point that a cute co-worker shrugs off his advances. Looking might eventually use Dom's character to explore the arrested development of many gay men — what happens when middle age finally hits and you find yourself still living the same life you had at 25. But it isn't there yet.
And what can we make of Patrick? One episode in, he's still a bit of an anomaly. It's not quite clear why he's even hanging around Agustín or Dom, since their friendship is the least-explored aspect of the show. None of these guys seem to have much in common, but surely we'll see more of that in future episodes. (By and large, though, gays of a feather flock together.) Patrick half-seriously attempts a hookup in a public park, scours OKCupid for his next true love (if he has one lazy eye, that might be okay), attends the engagement party of an ex he probably still has some feelings for, and goes on a bad first date with a high-on-his-horse oncologist.
Patrick's date ends up dismissing him because he's immature and not serious enough about a relationship, and maybe we're supposed to read that as Patrick's shortcoming — he did unwisely mention that cruising incident in the park — but the guy he's out with is such a bore, we certainly don't feel like Patrick's missing out on anything. Who asks if someone is "driving disease-free" within the first few minutes of a conversation? (Or at all, using those words?) Who expects a 29-year-old to be ready to commit before the first date's even over? Some wonder at how Patrick could be attractive, educated, and reasonably successful without ever finding himself in a serious relationship that outlasted a season of RuPaul's Drag Race, but this is actually quite common for a young gay man in an urban location.
Through a chance encounter via public transportation with an aspiring hairdresser (please, let him eventually trim away some of Looking's excess hair!), we learn that Patrick has likely spent his time "looking" in the wrong places — he's gone after guys who are just like him, when apparently he should have been looking on BART in a rougher part of town. Richie, played by Raúl Castillo, will be in every episode of Looking's first season, so we know this relationship is heading somewhere, but I wish the interplay between them had had a little more chemistry. So Patrick takes a chance on a scruffy Latino — so what? He's already friends with one. From the title, we might assume that Looking is attempting to explore the brave new world of online dating and hookups, but it doesn't really. We don't actually get a sense of what any of these guys are "looking" for. Dom Facebook stalks his supposedly violent ex-boyfriend; Agustín and Frank have a threeway and then wonder if they're one of "those" couples, with a shrug; Patrick meets a dull, rich jerk on OKCupid and then has a chance encounter in the real world with the flirtatious Richie.
I'm glad that Looking isn't all about quick and meaningless sex, because we've seen enough of that elsewhere, and it's about time other aspects of gay life were explored with the casual attitude of a show like Girls. It's about time for a show that doesn't try too hard to be "that splashy new gay show" or position itself as a political statement. No AIDS, no DOMA, no questioning, no coming out of the closet. This is a show about people — people who are gay, that's all — and though they probably look just fine naked (I'm sure we'll find out before season's end), we do not have a poster full of abs as our primary motivation for watching it. All that is admirable, and it's the reason why I'll continue watching Looking for the foreseeable future. For now, though, these characters are not the reason I'll continue watching, maybe because in trying to make these gay men so relatable, Lannan really just made them ordinary. To Dom I want to say, "Grow up and stop talking to your ex!" To Agustín and Frank I want to say, "Maybe try the commitment first without having a threesome?" Patrick I was to shake and say, "Why are you out with this lame guy if he's not even buying your wine? Can't you do better?!" These are not particularly compelling conflicts, and the show is not funny or unique enough to get away with its characters being such obstacles to themselves in the way that Girls pulls this off. Groff is a fine actor, but both here and in C.O.G., he's come off a little too smug and self-satisfied for me to really feel any sympathy for him. I'm not really on Patrick's side yet, and that's a bit of a problem.
Looking is sometimes written and directed by Andrew Haigh, who brought us the fantastic film Weekend, which is what gave me higher-than-expected hopes for a show called Looking. (Because I guess HBO's Wanna Fuck? seemed a little too forward?) That movie explored a casual encounter between two (scruffy) men that, in a short amount of time, quickly developed into something more — and that "something more" is sorely missing from Looking thus far. As of now, Looking hasn't said anything particularly new or novel about gay relationships in the 21st century; it's fine, but I wouldn't call it funny or moving or all that much fun. Every episode contains the word "looking" — future episode titles hint at a mixed bag, including "Looking For Uncut," "Looking For $220/Hour," and "Looking In The Mirror." I hope that it goes further toward developing these characters and strays away from the salacious. I hope that it avoids the expected pitfalls and predictable tropes of so much gay entertainment. And I really hope that, in an episode not too far from now, someone decides to pick up a razor.
"Looking" is just an updated term for "cruising," after all, and it'd be nice if not every gay show had to be about that. Some gay men may use "looking?" as shorthand for sex, but like a wham-bam-thank-you-man in the park, such crude encounters are growing antiquated. Which is not to say that casual sex itself is a thing of the past — just that it's no longer relegated to back corners of dark clubs and steamy saunas. We can use our words — more than just one — to find whatever we're "looking" for. Not everyone does, I know.
So last night, I had a casual encounter with a new HBO series. He was decent-looking, if a little too hairy for my taste, but I was willing to overlook that. The conversation was fine, less scintillating than I'd like, but not as stilted and forced as it could be. He had an okay personality, but unremarkable. I saw some potential, but not a whole lot to get excited about. I think I'll see him again at least once, just to see if it gets at any better. I'm definitely not ready to commit yet. I'm intrigued and open to possibilities, but not fully satisfied — as usual, I'm "looking" for more.
Tags: Andrew Haigh, C.O.G., Frankie J. Avarez, Girls, HBO, Jonathan Groff, Lauren Weedman, Looking, Michael Lannan, Murray Bartlett, O-T Fagbenle, Raúl Castillo, WeekendCategories: TV
PreviousThe Not-Oscars 2013
Next'Looking' Again: "Looking For Uncut"


text:
require 'spec_helper'

include TwitterCldr::Utils

describe RangeSet do
  describe "rangify" do
    it "should identify runs in an array of integers and return an array of ranges" do
      expect(RangeSet.rangify([1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19])).
        to eq([1..3, 6..8, 11..11, 14..14, 17..19])
    end

    it "should not rangify zero-length values when told to compress" do
      expect(RangeSet.rangify([1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 11, 12], true)).
        to eq([1..3, 5, 8, 11..12])
    end
  end

  describe "#to_a" do
    it "should return a copy of the ranges in the set" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10])
      expect(set.to_a.object_id).not_to eq(set.ranges.object_id)
    end

    it "should return compressed ranges when asked" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([1..10, 12..12]).to_a(true)).to eq([1..10, 12])
    end
  end

  describe "#to_full_a" do
    it "expands all ranges" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([1..5]).to_full_a).to eq([1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
    end
  end

  describe "#new" do
    it "should flatten leading overlapping ranges" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([3..10, 1..8]).to_a).to eq([1..10])
    end

    it "should flatten trailing overlapping ranges" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([1..10, 8..12]).to_a).to eq([1..12])
    end

    it "should flatten completely overlapping ranges" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([2..3, 1..10]).to_a).to eq([1..10])
    end

    it "should join ranges that are within 1 of each other" do
      expect(RangeSet.new([1..10, 11..15]).to_a).to eq([1..15])
    end
  end

  describe "#union" do
    it "should aggregate the ranges and flatten when necessary" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).union(
        RangeSet.new([9..11, 1..2, 2..3, 14..18])
      )

      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..11, 14..18])
    end

    it "should aggregate the ranges correctly even if they're given in reverse order" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).union(RangeSet.new([1..4]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..10])

      set = RangeSet.new([1..4]).union(RangeSet.new([3..10]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..10])
    end
  end

  describe "#intersection" do
    it "computes the intersection for leading overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).intersection(RangeSet.new([1..7]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([3..7])
    end

    it "computes the intersection for trailing overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10]).intersection(RangeSet.new([5..15]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([5..10])
    end

    it "computes the intersection for two completely overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10]).intersection(RangeSet.new([3..6]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([3..6])
    end

    it "returns an empty intersection if no elements exist in both ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10]).intersection(RangeSet.new([15..20]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([])
    end

    it "returns partial intersections when the range set contains multiple matching ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..5, 7..10]).intersection(RangeSet.new([3..8]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([3..5, 7..8])
    end

    it "doesn't matter what order the ranges are compared in" do
      set = RangeSet.new([2..3]).intersection(RangeSet.new([1..4]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([2..3])

      set = RangeSet.new([1..4]).intersection(RangeSet.new([2..3]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([2..3])
    end
  end

  describe "#subtract" do
    it "subtracts the intersection for leading overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).subtract(RangeSet.new([1..5]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([6..10])
    end

    it "subtracts the intersection for trailing overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..7]).subtract(RangeSet.new([3..9]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..2])
    end

    it "subtracts the intersection for completely overlapping ranges (generates two ranges)" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10]).subtract(RangeSet.new([4..6]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..3, 7..10])
    end

    it "results in an empty set if the deducted range entirely overlaps the existing ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).subtract(RangeSet.new([1..15]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([])
    end

    it "subtracts the intersection when the range set contians multiple matching ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..5, 7..10]).subtract(RangeSet.new([3..8]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..2, 9..10])
    end

    it "does not change object when subtracting an empty set" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..5]).subtract(RangeSet.new([]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..5])
    end
  end

  describe "#difference" do
    it "returns the symmetric difference (union - intersection) between completely overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..10]).difference(RangeSet.new([3..8]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..2, 9..10])
    end

    it "returns the symmetric difference between leading overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([3..10]).difference(RangeSet.new([1..5]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..2, 6..10])
    end

    it "returns the symmetric difference between trailing overlapping ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.new([1..5]).difference(RangeSet.new([3..8]))
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..2, 6..8])
    end
  end

  describe "#include?" do
    let(:set) { RangeSet.new([1..5, 9..16]) }

    it "returns true if the set completely includes the range, false otherwise" do
      expect(set.include?(10..15)).to eq(true)
      expect(set.include?(3..8)).to eq(false)
      expect(set.include?(8..14)).to eq(false)
    end

    it "returns true if the set contains the value, false otherwise" do
      expect(set.include?(3)).to eq(true)
      expect(set.include?(10)).to eq(true)
      expect(set.include?(6)).to eq(false)
      expect(set.include?(8)).to eq(false)
    end
  end

  describe '#<<' do
    let(:set) { RangeSet.new([5..10]) }

    it "adds a new range to the set when nothing overlaps" do
      set << (1..3)
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..3, 5..10])
    end

    it "adds a new range to the set and handles overlapping" do
      set << (3..6)
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([3..10])
    end

    it "adds a new range to the set and handles full overlapping" do
      set << (1..15)
      expect(set.to_a).to eq([1..15])
    end
  end

  describe "#each_range" do
    let(:set) { RangeSet.new([5..10, 15..20]) }

    it "yields each individual range to the block" do
      expect(set.each_range.to_a).to eq([5..10, 15..20])
    end
  end

  describe "#each" do
    let(:set) { RangeSet.new([5..10]) }

    it "yields each number the set contains (as opposed to each range)" do
      expect(set.each.to_a).to eq([5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10])
    end
  end

  describe "#size" do
    it "returns the number of items in the set" do
      set = RangeSet.from_array([1, 3, 5])
      expect(set.size).to eq(3)
    end

    it "includes all elements in ranges" do
      set = RangeSet.from_array([1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7])
      expect(set.size).to eq(6)
    end
  end
end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


This video is all about, where the volunteers NGO shammesh spent a pleasant and rewarding day with children's of exodus house orphanage. Drawing workshops, board games and English lessons were held at that sessions. You can participate in mision humanitaire with shammesh and gain rich experience in humanity.


In addition to our on-going redevelopment project at Chiltonian Industrial Estate, we've recently completed refurbishment works to extend the life of the roofs to several of the occupied units.
Undertaking a complete roof replacement programme would have proved expensive and disruptive and so with our partners Giromax, we used various solutions to remedy the different areas of disrepair.
To restore the 3000m2 area of roofing showing severe signs of coating delamination, we applied the Giromax Girosil Roofcoat RC system. This coating provides outstanding resistance to weathering and maintains lasting flexibility and adhesion without cracking or peeling.
The 400m of cut edge corrosion was treated using Giromax Girosil Edge RC-E system, which treats both the top and reverse side of the cut edge through advanced corrosion treatment and encapsulation. To re-line the Gutters we used the Giromax Girosil gutter RC-G system which provides a protective, watertight solution.
The £150k project which has left the roofs in a fully maintained condition took 4 weeks to complete.


text:
Ampere Computing raises new round of capital, including new investor Arm
Santa Clara, CA. -- April 11, 2019 -- Today, Ampere announced a new round of funding including participation from new investor Arm, a subsidiary of SoftBank Group. Current investor The Carlyle Group led the round with participation from other existing investors. This marks the second major investment round for Ampere, which was launched in 2017. The companies did not disclose the amount of new capital or valuation.
"This significant investment from Arm and our initial investors signals their confidence in the future of Ampere and allows us to continue to accelerate and deliver our robust roadmap," said Renee James, Ampere founder, CEO and Chair. The company announced its first product, eMAG™, in October 2018.
"A robust ecosystem is critical to advance the Arm® architecture as the foundation for transforming the modern cloud to edge infrastructure," said Rene Haas, president Arm IP Products Group. "Investing in Ampere underscores Arm's commitment to accelerating both our ecosystem and availability of diverse Arm-based silicon solutions for an infrastructure market long deprived of choice and flexibility."
Patrick McCarter, Managing Director at The Carlyle Group said, "We are thrilled with the progress Ampere has made over the past 18 months and are excited to continue supporting the team as they work to transform the market for server processors that power modern cloud workloads."
About Ampere
Ampere is designing the future of hyperscale cloud and edge computing with its 64-bit Arm server processor architecture. Born in and built for the cloud with a modern architecture, Ampere gives customers the freedom to accelerate the delivery of the most memory-intensive applications such as artificial intelligence, big data, machine learning and databases in the cloud. The Ampere eMAG™ family of products delivers the highest memory throughput and lowest TCO tailored for the emerging growth of cloud computing and next-generation data centers. For more information, visit www.amperecomputing.com
About Arm
Arm technology is at the heart of a computing and connectivity revolution that is transforming the way people live and businesses operate. Our advanced, energy-efficient processor designs have enabled intelligent computing in more than 130 billion chips. More than 70% of the world's population are using Arm technology, which is securely powering products from the sensor to the smartphone to the supercomputer. This technology, combined with our IoT software and end-to-end connectivity, device and data management platform, enables customers to derive real business value from their connected devices and data. Together with our 1,000+ technology partners we are at the forefront of designing, securing and managing all areas of compute from the chip to the cloud.
About The Carlyle Group
The Carlyle Group (NASDAQ: CG) is a global investment firm with deep industry expertise that deploys private capital across four business segments: Corporate Private Equity, Real Assets, Global Credit and Investment Solutions. With $216 billion of assets under management as of December 31, 2018, Carlyle's purpose is to invest wisely and create value on behalf of our investors, portfolio companies and the communities in which we live and invest. The Carlyle Group employs more than 1,650 people in 31 offices across six continents.
Web: www.carlyle.com
Contact Ampere Computing
Fill out this form for contacting a Ampere Computing representative.
Wave Computing Raises $86M in Oversubscribed Series E Round To Fuel Global Expansion and Further Accelerate Wave's Cloud-to-Edge Strategy
Discretix Announces $20 Million Third Round Funding; Sequoia Capital Becomes Newest Discretix Investor
Atmosic Technologies Raises $28.5 Million in Latest Round of Funding
Blu Wireless raises $16.6 million in growth funding round for 5G applications
Movellus Closes Second Round of Intel Capital Funding
See Ampere Computing Latest News >>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Tag: Norges Bank
Several Funds Acquire/Increase their Stakes in Hispania in the Midst of Blackstone's Takeover Bid
11 June 2018 – Expansión
Blackstone's takeover bid for Hispania has placed the Socimi firmly on the radar of investment funds. Since April when Blackstone announced its intention to launch a public share acquisition offer (OPA) for the Spanish Socimi, there have been continuous changes in the shareholding structure.
In terms of the funds who have been active, Fidelity has continued to back the company and has strengthened its stake to 9.64%. Prior to the takeover bid, the company's stake remained at just over 7%.
Fidelity is the second largest shareholder of Hispania, behind Blackstone, which, after purchasing the stake owned by the Hungarian-born magnate George Soros, leads Hispania's shareholder ranking, with a 16.56% stake.
Another one of the Socimi's shareholders that has strengthened its weight since the takeover is Axa Investment Group, which now controls 4.14% compared to 3% before the takeover bid, and Bank of Montreal and BlackRock, which currently hold stakes of around 4.1% each, compared with 3.01% and 3.3%, respectively, that they used to control.
These shareholders constitute the hardcore nucleus of the company's owners, together with the Mexican firm Canepa, which holds almost 6% through Tamerlane, and the Brazilian family office BW Gestao de Investimentos (BWG) with 3.7%.
New shareholders
In addition to the reference shareholders who have taken positions, Blackstone's interest in Hispania has led to new interest from other shareholders.
The Norwegian fund, through its manager Norges Bank, has appeared to acquire 1.09% of the Socimi; Man Group, one of the largest hedge funds in the world, has bought 1.27%; and Kite Lake Capital Management has purchased 1.56%.
Blackstone's takeover bid for 100% of Hispania at a price of €17.54 per share means that it is valuing the Socimi at €1,905 million. Hispania used to have a market capitalisation of €1,903 million and its shares closed trading on Friday at a price of €17.68 per share, slightly above the takeover price.
After Blackstone launched its takeover, Hispania's Board of Directors engaged Goldman Sachs, UBS and JPMorgan as financial advisors and Freshfields and Uría Menéndez, as legal advisors, to analyse the terms of the offer and look for alternatives.
In a conversation with analysts in May, during the presentation of the group's results, Cristina García-Peri, Director-General of Hispania, classified Blackstone as a "plausible" buyer, but she emphasised that other investors have been "very interested" in the Socimi and its hotel portfolio.
The American investment fund's offer, whose brochure is pending approval by Spain's National Securities and Markets Commission (CNMV) is conditional upon obtaining at least 50% plus one of the shares in Hispania. Moreover, the takeover is subject to a clause that prevents the sale of assets for an aggregated transaction value of more than 5% of the NAV (net asset value) (…).
Original story: Expansión (by Rebeca Arroyo)
Author Carmel DrakePosted on June 11, 2018 Categories Hospitality, Real Estate NewsTags alternatives, Axa Investment Group, Bank of Montreal, BlackRock, Blackstone, CNMV, Fidelity, financial advisors, freshfields, George Soros, Goldman Sachs, Hispania, JPMorgan, Kite Lake Capital Management, legal advisors, Man Group, market capitalisation, NAV, Norges Bank, share price, Socimi, stake, takeover bid, Tamerlane, UBS, Uría Menéndez
US Fund King Street Capital Acquires 3.92% of Neinor Homes
5 April 2018 – Eje Prime
King Street Capital is knocking at the door of Neinor Homes. The US fund has purchased a 3.92% stake in the Spanish property developer, a percentage that, at current market prices, is worth €45.6 million, according to the records held by Spain's National Securities and Exchange Commission (CNMV).
The US investment fund is acquiring a stake in the listed real estate company at a time when the company led by Juan Velayos is undergoing significant changes. In a shareholding dominated by overseas institutional investors, Adar Capital stands out with 27.8% of the share capital. The Israeli fund increased its stake in Neinor from 5.2% to almost 30% in a matter of weeks, the threshold that would oblige the company to launch a takeover bid for the entire firm.
In the last week, another foreign fund, in this case from Luxembourg, Alken Fund, has acquired 3.11% of the property developer, whose main secondary shareholders are Bank of Montreal, with a 5.20% stake; Invesco, which also controls 5.2%; Wellington Management Group, which holds 4.9%; and Norges Bank, owner of 4.5%.
Currently, Neinor Homes has 71 housing developments underway in Spain, comprising 5,470 homes, after launching five new developments with 528 homes in the third quarter of last year. The property developer's plans involve investing more than €1.5 billion over the next five years to hand over up to 15,000 homes.
Author Carmel DrakePosted on April 9, 2018 Categories Real Estate News, Real Estate Transactions, ResidentialTags Adar Capital, Alken Fund, Bank of Montreal, homes, house builder, housing developments, Invesco, Juan Velayos, King Street Capital, Neinor Homes, new homes, Norges Bank, property developer, takeover bid, Wellington Management Group
Israeli Fund Adar Asks for Two Seats on Neinor's Board
15 March 2018 – Expansión
The Israeli fund Adar is claiming its space at the table of Neinor's most senior executive body. After taking ownership of 24% of the property developer and buying almost 18% of the real estate company's shares in just one month, Adar has requested two seats on the Board of Directors.
To this end, Adar has asked that its request be included on the agenda of the next meeting, which is scheduled for 17 April at the first call, or, if the necessary quorum is not reached, for 18 April.
Adar has proposed the appointment of Jorge Pepa and Francis Btesh as proprietary directors. In this way, the group's Board of Directors would comprise nine members, up from the current number, seven.
The last change in Neinor's Board of Directors took place with the departure of Dominique Cressot, a Director who represented the fund Lone Star, which sold the last remaining share package that it owned in the company last January.
In his place, the shareholders appointed Alberto Prieta, Managing Partner of the Real Estate team at BDO, as an independent director.
Adar, which first acquired shares in Neinor when the firm made its stock market debut almost a year ago, is now the real estate company's largest shareholder, ahead of the Bank of Montreal (5.2%), Norges Bank (5.06%), Invesco (5.02%), Wellington Management Group (4.96%) and Ksac Europe (4.2%). The fund controls a package worth €296 million.
Original story: Expansión (by R. Arroyo)
Author Carmel DrakePosted on March 15, 2018 Categories Real Estate News, ResidentialTags Adar, agenda, Bank of Montreal, BDO, Board of Directors, departure, directors, exit, Francis Btesh, independent director, Invesco, IPO, Israeli fund, Jorge Pepa, KSAC Europe, Lone Star, Neinor, Norges Bank, proprietary director, shareholders, shares, Wellington Management Group
Israeli Fund Adar Increases its Stake in Neinor to 9.2%
15 February 2018 – Eje Prime
Adar has taken more power in Neinor Homes. The Israeli fund manager Adar Capital Partners has increased its stake in the real estate firm to 9.2% from the 5.2% that it had held until now, whereby becoming the property developer's largest shareholder.
What's more, if we add the 2.6% stake that Adar controls indirectly through derivatives, then the percentage held by the fund in the company increases to 11.88%, which is worth €168 million at current prices, according to the registers of the National Securities and Exchange Commission (CNMV).
In this way, Adar Capital Partners has taken over Lone Star's role as the largest shareholder of Neinor, after the US fund sold its stake in the real estate company that it had constituted, and exited its share capital.
Besides the Israeli manager, Neinor's other reference shareholders include several other overseas institutional investors. In this way, Wellington Management Group holds an 8.6% stake, Fidelity owns 6.8%, Norges Bank holds 4.9% and Bank of Montreal has 3%.
Neinor currently has 71 housing developments underway across Spain, totalling 5,470 homes, after launching five new developments containing 528 homes during the third quarter of last year.
Author Carmel DrakePosted on February 19, 2018 Categories Real Estate News, Real Estate Transactions, ResidentialTags Adar Capital Partners, Bank of Montreal, CNMV, Fidelity, housing development, Lone Star, Neinor, Neinor Homes, new homes, Norges Bank, property developer, shareholders, stake, Wellington Management Group
Metrovacesa To Capitalise €730M To Reduce Its Debt
6 April 2015 – Expansión
Metrovacesa is continuing its debt reduction process. After generating income of €1,546 million from (the sale of) its 27% stake in Gecina last summer, the real estate company will propose a capital increase of almost €730 million at its next shareholders' meeting.
The aim of the capital increase is to convert some of the group's liabilities into shares, according to an announcement made by the real estate company regarding the agenda for its general shareholders' meeting. At the meeting, which will take place on 28 April at its headquarters in Las Tablas (Madrid), the leaders of the real estate company will present the results for 2014. In 2013, the most recent year for which figures have been presented, Metrovacesa recorded losses of €349 million, i.e. 29% more than in the previous year.
In that year, the group's financial debt exceeded €5,088 million, a liability that it has managed to reduce following the sale of its stake in the French real estate company Gecina. In June, Metrovacesa agreed the sale of its 26.7% stake in the French company to Norges Bank, Crédit Agricole, Blackstone and Ivanhoe Cambridge for €1,546 million. These funds were mainly used to repay a syndicated loan amounting to €1,600 million.
The debt for equity exchange will be accompanied by a capital increase through a cash contribution, with preferential subscription rights. The objective is to allow the 4,000 smaller shareholders to maintain their minority stakes, if they so wish, without any dilution of their ownership.
The main shareholder of Metrovacesa is the Santander group. The financial entity holds 55.8% of the (real estate company's) capital, after it acquired the 19% stake that Bankia held in December (2014). Santander paid €100 million in that transaction.
The bank, chaired by Ana Botín, first invested in Metrovacesa's share capital in 2008, when the real estate company was unable to pay its debts to its then largest shareholder, Román Sanahuja. Other banks also participated in that transaction (and still hold stakes today), namely: BBVA, which holds a 18.31% stake; Sabadell, which holds a 13.04% stake; and Popular, which owns 12.64%.
In 2013, these entities approved the de-listing of the real estate company from the stock exchange and, since then, they have focused on restructuring the debt.
New directors
At the shareholders' meeting, Metrovacesa will also propose the appointment of four new directors: Rodrigo Echenique, Vice-President and Executive Director of Santander; Abel Matutes, Chairman of the Matutues business group; Juan Ignacio Ruiz de Alda, Director at Santander; and Manuel Castro; Director of Global Risk Management at BBVA.
Original story: Expansión (by Rocío Ruiz)
Author Carmel DrakePosted on April 6, 2015 Categories Real Estate NewsTags Ana Botin, Bankia, BBVA, Blackstone, Credit Agricole, dilution, Gecina, general shareholders' meeting, income, ivanhoe cambridge, major shareholders, Metrovacesa, minority shareholders, Norges Bank, Popular, results, sabadell, santander, stakeLeave a comment on Metrovacesa To Capitalise €730M To Reduce Its Debt


Christmas, in July, in Florida. 90 degrees with a chance of thunderstorms. A typical summer day….but with Christmas music in the kitchen and the Muppets Christmas Carol movie playing on the television.
We gathered in the kitchen to prepare a few of our traditional Christmas foods. Not all of them, that would be messing too much with the real Christmas!
There is always some shenanigans that go along with the preparation. This year, Randy and Maggie decided dancing was in order.
Problem was, neither of them wanted to lead! Don't you just love Randy's festive shirt?
And where would we be without Bella's cool Christmas socks? We went all out for this celebration including a little decorating of the house. I just love the way my boys relate to each other. It's always so much fun to have them together. We don't get the whole gang together too often, but I have learned to be thankful for the ones who are here and not spend too much time wishing for a perfect family get-together with all of them. I'd spend all my time wishing and never enjoy what I have.
And our celebration wouldn't be complete without the white elephant gift exchange. I ended up with a box of Swiss Cake Rolls. But there were some true treasures among the prizes.
This one was the favorite. A dog toy, actually, but the humans had a good laugh with it and fought over it until Randy finally ended up with it. When you give it a gentle squeeze it oinks and a strong squeeze makes it squeal. Do I need to say more?
We love doing things that make for great memories. This Christmas in July was a perfect event to add to the list.
Previous PostPrevious When You Pray, What Do You Say?


Jesse Cool has a new partner at Flea Street Cafe — and the face is very familiar. Michael Biesemeyer worked for long periods of time over the past decade at the Menlo Park restaurant.
"I've been hoping to find a partner for a few years," explained Jesse. "I made a few attempts with chefs, but that did not work out. In signing a 10-year lease extension — and already 38 years into the business — I knew I needed help to both maintain the core history and values of Flea Street, and to support me as operations become more challenging at my age.
Michael was a captain/server and the most respected employee by both staff and customers, according to Jesse. She also characterizes him as a solid family man and a lifetime professional in the food industry.
Knowing that he was working at Protege, a new restaurant in Palo Alto, Jesse emailed him to see if he was interested. She got a quick "Let's have coffee," from Michael in return. He was soon named the new Managing Partner.
Initially, Michael is working on building the private dining part of the business and accommodating larger groups, up to 20. The outdoor area will be further weatherized.


text:
Home Biography & Net Worth Barbara Corcoran Net Worth 2022: Age, Height, Weight, Husband, Kids, Bio-Wiki
Barbara Corcoran Net Worth 2022: Age, Height, Weight, Husband, Kids, Bio-Wiki
Barbara Ann Corcoran
Edgewater, New Jersey, United States
Husband/Spouse
Bill Higgins
Yes (Tom Higgins, Katie Higgins)
Dating/Boyfriend
American businesswoman, investor, speaker, consultant, syndicated columnist, author, and television personality
Barbara Corcoran is an American investor who is also a businessman and a consultant as well as a speaker. Barbara is not only television but also a book writer, not forgetting her role as a syndicated columnist. She is famous as an investor on ABC's Shark Tank and her moniker Shark.
Maybe you know about Barbara Corcoran very well But do you know how old and tall is she and what is her net worth in 2022? If you do not know, We have prepared this article about details of Barbara Corcoran's short biography-wiki, career, professional life, personal life, today's net worth, age, height, weight, and more facts. Well, if you're ready, let's start.
Barbara Ann Corcoran was born in 1949 on 10th March in New Jersey, United States of America. Her place of birth is Edgewater. Barbara graduated from St. Thomas Aquinas College with an education degree back in 1971. On graduating, Barbara looked for a fortune as a teacher and pursued the job for one year. She left teaching after a short duration. Subsequently, she tackled different jobs among them renting apartments in New York City.
She aimed to be self-employed, and luckily her dream came true in 1973. That was when she together with her boyfriend then founded Corcoran Group. It was a real estate business established and while at it published The Corcoran Report on real estate data in New York City.
Barbara Corcoran sold her business for sixty-six million dollars to the NRT Incorporated in 2001. Today, Barbara is a business mogul in New Jersey. She was mentioned as a competitor for season 25 of the Dancing with the Stars contest where she joined with Joe Motsepe. In the Title of Shark Tank, Shark Barbara was third after Mark Cuban and Robert Herjavec.
Barbara first marriage was between her and a Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, but they later divorced. Her second husband is Bill Higgins who was a son of a retired Navy known as Captain F. Higgins. He was in the famous Gulf War in Persia and was also in the FBI. The marriage between the couples was done in 1988.
During her stay with Bill Higgins, Barbra could not conceive. However, her sister donated an egg, and through in-vitro, she did eventually. Subsequently, she gave birth to a son called Tom. They stayed for a time without another baby and then decided on adopting a baby girl who was named Kate. Tom was a student at Ivy League School as per Barbara words. On the other hand, her daughter had a problem with learning things. The couple currently lives in Manhattan.
Being born on 10 March 1949, Barbara Corcoran is 72 years old as of today's date 18th January 2022. Her height is 1.65 m tall, and her weight is 55 kg.
Barbara started her career as a real estate commentator. She became a columnist for a Magazine known as More. Corcoran is also a columnist for The Daily Review as well as Redbook. She has also written books severally.
Barbara has appeared on different television shows including Larry King Live. In about all real estate events, Barbara is invited to share her experience with the audience in the business. She has been a consultant of business through her television production business known as Barbara Corcoran Inclusive. She is also featured in National Broadcasting Corporation in a show called Today.
In CNBC Barbara is the host of a show named The Millionaire Broker with Barbara Corcoran where she contributes to real estate business. She also writes in the magazine called New York Daily News as a weekly columnist. Barbara is the founding member of Forefront Venture Partners.
Barbara Corcoran has received 3 Emmy Awards because of her contribution to the Tank Shark show.
Net Worth & Salary of Barbara Corcoran in 2022
Barbara Corcoran Net Worth
Barbara Corcoran has an estimated net worth of over $90 million as of January 2022. She has various sources of income which include her careers as a consultant, businessman, investor, television personality as well as an author. Her several books have earned her money through their sales. Barbara is one of the inventors of the Tank Shark show. In addition to that, she hosts television shows.
Barbara Corcoran has excelled miraculously in her businesses and investments. Nevertheless, her family is not very smooth, bearing the fact that her two children are not biologically hers. She has been with a husband before her current one. Who cannot guess that probably the divorce came up as a result of fertility?


text:
Feeding a data hungry world with less energy
New research from the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory shows that while server use has risen as we consume ever more real time data, energy demand has not.
JLL Staff Reporter
Every time you watch that YouTube video that's currently the talk of your office, somewhere in the world, a data center consumes energy.
That's a lot of electricity, given that YouTube is reported to get 5 billion video views a day. Yet data center energy consumption isn't rising as fast as you might think.
New research from the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory shows that while server use has risen as we consume ever more real time data, energy demand has not. In fact, U.S. data center energy consumption began to plateau in 2010 as data centers become more energy-efficient.
The realities of global climate change have spurred sophisticated energy-efficiency solutions, from refrigerant-based cooling systems to the rise of data center microgrids.
"Climate change is becoming a clear influence on strategy, as the data center industry increasingly looks to improve its triple bottom line of people, planet and profits," says Ali Greenwood, Vice President of Data Center Solutions at JLL. "New technologies and regulations now allow data center facilities to fully participate in sustainability and corporate responsibility programs."
The figures are set to become even greener. While the number of data center servers is expected to grow by 40 percent from 2010 to 2020, the industry is on target to reduce energy use by another 10 to 40 percent by 2020.
Improving sustainability strategies
According to new JLL research on data center trends, one area of sustainability improvement lies in the cooling and powering strategies. Data centers must carefully control server space temperature and humidity to prevent the over-heating of hard-working equipment. But the cooling process itself can generate greenhouse gases or consume large amounts of water.
Fortunately, advanced cooling strategies have emerged to make the cooling less resource-intensive—an especially meaningful development in drought- and heat-stricken areas in the Western United States.
California, for example recently made headlines by relaxing state law on refrigerants to pave the way for more refrigerant-based cooling over water cooling, and potentially saving millions of gallons of water per day.
More sophisticated server management approaches are also having a big impact. In theory, a data center should only consume the amount of energy needed for the work that its servers are performing. The reality is that, until recently, the average server used only a fraction of the energy provided, resulting in significant energy waste. Today, many data centers are adopting new approaches to optimize energy use, such as consolidating servers, using energy-efficient equipment, configuring the server racks to distribute power more effectively, and adopting other sophisticated server management strategies.
"Consolidating multiple platforms and virtualizing applications on one or two servers reduces energy consumption and data center crowding," explains Greenwood. "While upfront virtualization costs can be relatively high, an average three-year return on investment makes it a sound long-term strategy."
The new data center microgrids
Data center microgrids are catching on. This is where one or more data center is powered by an energy source that is separate from a region's main power grid. In Arizona, for example, the state's largest power utility company is developing a 63-megawatt microgrids with partner Aligned Data Centers, a subsidiary of Aligned Energy. Meanwhile, in Colorado, the Niobrara Energy Park will serve multiple data centers with a 200-megawatt gas-fired plant, a 50-megawatt solar farm, 50 megawatts of fuel cells, and other energy resources.
"The pairing of data centers and microgrids is a natural evolution, considering the data center industry's dependence on reliable power to provide uninterrupted service to customers," notes Greenwood. "Microgrids also enable data centers to tap renewable energy sources, which is what some major data center users are eagerly pursuing."
As JLL's research shows, demand for cloud services, videos and data center space is growing rapidly around the world. Where energy is concerned, however, data centers are learning to do more with less to reap the benefits of lower operating costs as well as smaller carbon footprints.
What's on the mind of investors and occupiers in 2023?
How will multistory industrial builds stack up in U.S. markets?
Why virtual tours are sticking around
How governments are supporting the pursuit of greener buildings
Why disability access is a rising focus for companies
Five trends that shaped real estate in 2022
The hunt for the next big life-sciences city
Real estate sustainability data reveals world's top performers
5 things neuroscience reveals about how we work
COP27: 6 developments to support decarbonizing global real estate
5 new metrics measuring the workplace
Investor caution dampens real estate investment
Why hotel investors are opting for upgrades over new builds
How companies are dialing down energy costs
How can developing world cities blend resilience with growth?
PODCAST: Do warehouses need green certifications?
PODCAST: The building blocks of a net-zero warehouse
PODCAST: The long road to a greener last mile
PODCAST: Why the path to net zero is taking so long
Why data centers are moving onshore
The scope of green leases is expanding beyond the environment
How listed property companies are getting on board with sustainability reporting
Data centers are finding new homes in old buildings
How materials shortages are changing how developers work
How is sustainability making real estate more transparent?
What firms are doing to address quiet quitting
JLL releases the MNC CRE Strategies under the Pandemic Report
Navigating the ideal workspace with half the effort
Companies cook up fresh ways to lure employees back
How are green building certifications moving with the times?
5 incentives to entice employees back to the office
Hotels are finding room for co-living spaces
Why companies are turning to modular office furniture
Borrowing: ECB becomes follower of fashion
Why cold storage assets are gaining steam
Why semi-automated warehouses are getting cheaper
What big industrial deals mean for CRE
How urban greening projects are underpinning sustainable cities
Closing the real estate transparency gap
Real estate debt broadens appeal with investors
How are circular economy principles taking hold in real estate?
Raising the bar: five ways hotels can optimize F&B operations
How third places are becoming mainstream


text:
Previous: Freehold covenants
Mortgages are security interests, usually given to a lender of money to secure a loan. They allows a lender (the mortgagee), to be confident that in the event that a loan is not paid off by a borrower (the mortgagor), the security may be used to recover the loan amount. The security interest will automatically come to an end once the mortgagor has paid off the loan amount and any additional costs required, such as interest. It is a common misconception that mortgages are 'given out' by banks, such that a person 'obtains a mortgage'. This is not technically correct. A borrower (mortgagor) grants a mortgage to a mortgagee (bank) in return for a mortgage loan, which will be paid off over time, and with interest. The term 'mortgage' describes the security interest granted.
Creation of mortgages
Mortgages can be created to secure credit agreements over both unregistered and registered land. They can be either legal or equitable in nature, and their creation can be affected by both misrepresentation and undue influence, which are both discussed in more detail in the contract law revision notes section of this website.
Unregistered land
In unregistered land, mortgages over freehold (fee simple) estates can be created in two ways, according to section 85 of the Law of Property Act (LPA) 1925. Section 86 is an equivalent section applicable to leasehold estates, as long fixed term leases provide sufficient security for a mortgagee. The first method of creation is known as a 'demise for a term of years absolute subject to a proviso for lesser on redemption'. This means that a mortgagee is granted a possessory interest in the mortgagor's land so that the land can be sold by the mortgagee if necessary. The second method is known as a 'charge by deed expressed to be by way of legal mortgage'. This grants a mortgagee a charge (security interest) over the property, without granting possession. However, s 87 LPA 1925 gives the same rights to a mortgagee with a charge as a mortgagee with a possessory interest would have.
Registered land
Under s 23 of the Land Registration Act (LRA) 2002, mortgages over registered land can only be created by way of charge. This, according to s 53 LRA 2002, has the same effect as creating a mortgage by way of deed.
Legal mortgages
Mortgages can be either legal or equitable in nature. Legal mortgages must be created by deed, according to s 52 LPA 1925. The grant of a legal mortgage in registered land is a disposition required to be completed by registration under s 27(2) LRA 2002
Equitable mortgages
A mortgage will be legal, rather than equitable, if it is created by a specifically enforceable agreement (in equity), but was: not created by deed; not agreed in writing as required by s 53 LPA or granted against an equitable, as opposed to a legal estate in land.
Where a statement is made to one or more parties to a mortgage (usually a one of two joint mortgagors) which inaccurately reflects the terms of a mortgage, and that representation induces the party to enter into the mortgage transaction, that transaction will be voidable to the extent of the statement by virtue of the law on misrepresentation. For example, in Barclays Bank v O'Brien [1994], where the defendant was told that a mortgage intended to secure an overdraft was limited to £60,000, when in fact it was not and £154,000 was owed, the defendant was only bound to the extent of the misrepresentation: £60,000.
Undue influence is the abuse or misuse of one person's influence over another due to a threat, pressure or the deliberate withholding of information. In the context of mortgages, the stereotypical transaction involves a mortgagee bank and two joint mortgagors – a husband and wife. The stereotype continues that a wife is induced by her (trusted) husband to secure their joint home for the husband's sole benefit, for example, over his company's debts. The court is required to strike a balance between protecting mortgagees from being held permanently out of money owed and wives who expect secure accommodation.
Requirements of undue influence
There are two ways in which a 'wife' can avoid a mortgage transaction through undue influence. She may prove that she was unduly influenced in fact. This means, according to Barclays Bank v O'Brien [1994] that she must show that: her influencer had the capacity to influence her; she was in fact unduly influenced, and that this undue influence caused her to enter into the transaction. However, following the reform of undue influence culminating in RBS v Etridge [2002], a wife may avoid a transaction on the grounds of undue influence as a result of 'presumed undue influence', where there is no actual proof that undue influence took place. This will require the wife to show that there existed a relationship of trust and confidence, and that from this, a transaction resulted which calls for an explanation.
Where the above two requirements are satisfied, undue influence will be inferred where a satisfactory explanation is not given. There is neither a need to prove that any trust or confidence was actually placed in the influencer, nor that the transaction was to the manifest disadvantage or the wife.
A relationship of trust and confidence may be proven factually, or presumed. There will be a presumption of such a relationship where the claimant and influencer are parent and child, or solicitor and client. There is no presumption between a husband and wife, as wives, it is said, will often manage their financial affairs as a result of their marriage.
A transaction requiring explanation can arise easily. However, the more disadvantageous the transaction is to the wife/claimant, the more difficult it will be to explain the transaction.
Effect of undue influence
If actual undue influence is proven, the claimant will not be bound by the transaction entered into. The position concerning presumed undue influence is more complex. It will be presumed, for the purpose of explanation, that a wife has proved that she and her husband were in a relationship of trust and confidence, and that there has been a transaction calling for an explanation which involves a mortgagee (bank) being granted a mortgage over the marital home.
Whenever one person (the wife) grants a security over another's debts (the husband's) in a non-commercial context (a marriage), and which is not to the benefit of the person (the wife), a mortgagee will be "put on notice" or "put on enquiry", according to RBS v Etridge [2002]. As a bank cannot be expected to delve into the private lives of every mortgagor they grant a mortgage to, Etridge lays out a number of steps which a mortgagee must take at minimum to satisfy itself that no undue influence could affect their mortgage. A mortgagee, according to CIBC Mortgages v Pitt [1994] may take the transaction at 'face value' to establish whether or not it is put on enquiry.
Once on enquiry, a mortgagee must: meet with the person (in private) and tell them of the extent of their liability, warn them of the risks of entering into the transaction and urge them to take separate legal advice. They may outsource this obligation to a solicitor, who must certify that he has advised accordingly in writing. Where a bank knows or ought to have known that a solicitor did not appropriately advise the person, reasonable steps will not have been taken.
If reasonable steps are taken by a bank, of which the above are a minimum, the person may not claim that by virtue of undue influence, they are not bound by the mortgage.
The result of undue influence
It is usually the case that the person referred to above will wish to avoid being bound by a mortgage once the mortgage has been defaulted on: the person will not wish to be required to pay up on their guarantee of the influencer's debt, and may wish to retain possession of the land secured against that debt.
As confirmed by TSB Bank v Camfield [1995], if undue influence is either found or inferred, a mortgage will be void as against the person who was influenced. However, as illustrated by First National Bank v Achampong [2003], where a wife had been influenced by her husband as joint tenant, the influencer will still be bound, the marital joint tenancy will be severed under s 63 LPA 1925, and the mortgagee will then be entitled to claim against the influencer's share of any resulting tenancy in common, which may include applying for an order for sale under s 14 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act (TOLATA) 1996, or declaring the influencer bankrupt and applying for a similar order under s 335A of the Insolvency Act 1996. In all likelihood, the house will be sold, and the person influenced will be able to keep their share of the estate in the form of money, but not possession of that land.
Effect of mortgages
Mortgagors' rights
Once created, the mortgagor (or borrower) in a mortgage transaction will expect to pay off his mortgage loan with interest, and then to have his property unencumbered by the mortgage once repaid.
To get his property back unencumbered, a mortgagor must redeem his mortgage (pay it off completely, whether early or on time). Every mortgage agreement will have a redemption date. At common law, a mortgage cannot be redeemed after this date, however, equity now allows redemption to take place at any time after this date. As a result, mortgage agreement redemption dates are usually shortly after the mortgage was initially granted to the mortgagee.
A right to redemption (to settle and end the mortgage) may not be excluded, either expressly or impliedly. In Samuel v Jarrah Timber [1904], an option to purchase the fee simple over which a mortgage was granted was void as it (in theory) destroyed the mortgagor's right to redemption. A similar option may, however, be granted in a separate transaction, as occurred in Reeve v Lisle [1902]. A redemption date very close to the final payment date of a mortgage loan will also be void, as it renders the right to redemption (early) illusory, according to Fairclough v Swan Brewery [1912]. Finally, an unreasonable term in a mortgage will not destroy a mortgagor's right to redeem, according to Multiservice Bookbinding v Marden [1979], unless it is unconscionable or contrary to public policy. Commonly, it is said that a mortgagor's right to redeem results from his 'equity of redemption'.
Priority between mortgagees and contributors
Where two people have contributed the purchase price of an estate which is mortgaged, there may often be disputes between non-mortgagor contributors and a mortgagee. If a contributor agreed to the mortgage being granted, and is one of two or more legal owners of the mortgaged estate, a sale by the bank will overreach the contributor's interest. But if there has been no agreement, or the contributor has only an equitable interest in the estate, a mortgagee will be required to apply for an order for sale under s 14 TOLATA 1996 in order to realise its equity in the mortgaged estate.
Where there is an acquisition mortgage over an estate (i.e. a mortgage was granted to fund the initial purchase of the estate), agreement of another contributor may be imputed such that the mortgage will take priority over a contributor. This will be the case, according to Bristol & West Building Society v Henning [1985] where the contributor knew or ought to have known that an acquisition mortgage was granted. Abbey National v Cann [1991] confirmed this buy xanax medication online view, finding that an acquisition mortgage is 'bound together' with its purchase, such that a contributor's interest cannot take priority as it is created later in time. It could be argued that the contributor's interest should also be 'bound together', but such an argument would undermine a practical judgment.
In non-acquisition mortgages, a variety of priority issues could arise: overreaching (if the estate has two legal owners), notice (as above), registration (of the contributor's interest) and actual occupation. In Equity and Law Home Loans v Prestidge [1992], a contributor (with contribution £10,000 and different sole registered legal owner) was only bound to the extent of £30,000 mortgage which was consented to, not a later re-mortgage for £43,000 which was not consented to.
Mortgagees' rights
Following the grant of a mortgage loan, a mortgagee seeks only repayment. It will want the loan amount repaying, along with interest (its profit). It will also want the ability to reclaim unpaid loan amount though exercising rights over its security interest.
Irrespective of its security interest, a mortgagee will always have a personal claim against a mortgagor by virtue of the mortgage agreement. However, if the mortgagee is declared bankrupt, a personal claim would only allow a mortgagee to recover in the same proportions as any other creditor. A mortgage allows a mortgagee to seize the secured estate with priority over other creditors. When carrying out any of its obligations or exercising any of its rights, a mortgagee is under a duty to act fairly, according to Palk v Mortgage Services Funding Plc [1993].
A right to possession
In reality, a mortgagee will not usually want to possess an estate mortgaged in their favour. However, they may wish to obtain possession in order to maintain the value of their secured asset and intercept income (of rent), if appropriate. Possession will usually also be the precursor to sale.
A mortgagee has a right to possession even before the 'ink is dry' on the mortgage agreement, according to Four-maids Ltd v Dudley Marshall (Properties) Ltd [1957]. However, a mortgagee must:
Take reasonable care as to the state of the possessed property, according to Palk v Mortgage Services Funding Plc [1993];
Account to the mortgagor for any income or profits that could have been received, as opposed to income actually received, according to White v City of London Brewery Co (1889); and
Only seek possession in order to protect its own interests, a requirement which the courts may look behind a legal relationship to assess, according to Quennell v Maltby [1979]
Postponement of possession
Historically, where a mortgagee sought possession of mortgaged land in order to protect its interests, a mortgagor could apply to the High Court to have possession postponed for up to 28 days if he could show that the whole of his mortgage debt could be paid off within that time, as was held in Birmingham Citizens Permanent Building Society v Caunt [1962]. This has now been replaced by statute. It should be noted that possession may not be postponed where a mortgagor is in negative equity (he owed more under his mortgage loan than his secured asset is worth), according to Cheltenham and Gloucester Plc v Krausz [1997]. Section 36 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 provides:
(1) Where the mortgagee under a mortgage of [a dwelling] brings an action in which he claims possession of the mortgaged property…the court may exercise any of the powers conferred on it by subsection (2) below if it appears to the court that in the event of its exercising the power the mortgagor is likely to be able within a reasonable period to pay any sums due under the mortgage or to remedy a default consisting of a breach of any other obligation arising under or by virtue of the mortgage.
(2) The court…may adjourn the proceedings … stay or suspend execution of the judgment or order, or…postpone the date for delivery of possession, for such period or periods as the court thinks reasonable.
Shortly after this enactment, Halifax Building Society v Clark [1973] decided that any sums due was to be interpreted as meaning all existing and future sums due under the mortgage agreement, rendering s 36 almost irrelevant. As a result, section 8 of the Administration of Justice Act 1973 redefined 'any sums due' as meaning any sum outstanding at the date of the hearing which the mortgagor would normally be expected to have paid.
A 'reasonable period' was more sensibly defined by First Middlesbrough Trading and Mortgage Co v Cunningham [1973] as the remaining mortgage term. This period of time is only the starting point though, according to Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society v Norgan [1996], and originally hinted at in Royal Trust of Canada v Markham [1975].
As a few further clarifications, s 36, contrary to the words of its statute, does not require a mortgagor to have defaulted on payments before invoking its use, and a spouse, under s 30 of the Family Law Act 1996, is entitled to help pay off a partner's mortgage loan, having been joined to any proceedings under s 55 of that same Act.
A mortgagor can be prevented from using section 36 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 by the mortgagee taking peaceable possession of mortgaged land. A subsequent sale, leading to the eviction of the mortgagor, will not violate Article 1 of Protocol 1 (peaceful enjoyment of property) of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to Horsham Properties Group v Clark [2008].
A right to sell
Usually, a mortgagee is not interested in obtaining possession for any reason other than to sell the mortgagor's land to recover their unpaid loan amount. To do this, the power of sale must have both arisen and become exercisable. If the power has arisen, but is not exercisable, the mortgagor will have a damages claim against the mortgagee. If the power has neither arisen nor become exercisable, the mortgagee will have no title to sell.
The power to sell is only available for legal mortgages and arises only after the date of redemption specified in the mortgage deed, according to s 101 LPA 1925.
The power to sell becomes exercisable when at least 1 of the three conditions in s 103 LPA 1925 is satisfied:
A mortgage loan instalment was missed, and 3 months has passed since the mortgagee notified the mortgagor of this failure to pay
Interest has been in arrears for at least 2 months
There has been some other breach of the mortgage agreement as defined by the mortgagor and mortgagee
When a mortgagee sells the mortgagor's title, s 52 LPA 1925 allows a purchase to assume that the mortgagee has the right to sell, unless there is a contrary register entry; and s 54 LPA 1925 provides that a mortgagee has notice of anything on the land register for estate being sold.
Once sold, s 105 LPA 1925 instructs a mortgagor how to act with sale money. The mortgagee acts only as a trustee for the money received. Interests with priority over the mortgagee must firstly be settled (if not overreached). Sale costs must then be paid. Finally, the mortgagee may take what is left to discharge the mortgage loan amount owed to itself. If this residual amount does not cover the amount owed, the mortgagee is left with a personal claim only against the mortgagor. If there is any excess money, it must be returned to the mortgagor.
Duties when selling as a mortgagee
Cuckmere Brick Co v Mutual Finance [1971] requires a mortgagee to act in good faith and with reasonable care to obtain the true market value of an estate being sold. Silven Properties v RBS [2004] does not oblige a mortgagee to await planning permission outcomes or otherwise prepare land for sale, but does oblige mortgagees to point out the potential in land being sold. These duties are owed only to the mortgagor, not other interested parties, according to Parker-Tweedale v Dunbar Bank [1991]. Tse Kwong Lam v Wong Chit Sen [1983] prohibits a mortgagee from selling to a person with in interest in the mortgagee's establishment unless it can be shown that the best price for the mortgagor was still obtained.
A right to foreclosure
It is possible in extreme circumstances that foreclosure will be granted to a mortgagee, entitling it to immediate possession and not discharging any excess loan amount owed by the mortgagor. However, it is used so infrequently that the Law Commission have proposed its abolition.
A right to appoint a receiver
A mortgagee may delegate its power to sell to a receiver, under the same conditions in s 101 LPA 1925 as discussed above.
Sale by mortgagor
It is possible that a mortgagor may wish to sell his land whilst still subject to a mortgage. This usually poses no difficulty if the sale price will cover the outstanding mortgage loan value – the mortgage will simply be redeemed. However, in some circumstances, where a mortgagee does not consent to this redemption, a court may intervene.
During postponement of possession proceedings, a court may postpone possession to allow a mortgagor to sell. The mortgagor must show that he will be able to pay off the outstanding loan amount from the sale, according to Royal Trust Co of Canada v Markham [1975]. This may include making up a shortfall with personal funds, as was said in Cheltenham and Gloucester Plc v Krausz [1997] (where there is negative equity). National & Provincial Building Society v Lloyd [1996] requires that the mortgagor must be able to sell within a reasonable time: postponement on the sale of a doubtful security for 3-5 years was rejected in Bristol and West Building Society v Ellis [1996], but postponement for 3 months where the mortgagor already had an offer in place in Target Home Loans v Clothier [1994] was acceptable.
It is also possible that a court will permit a sale by a mortgagor which is not to the benefit of the mortgagee in extreme circumstances, courtesy of its apparently limitless jurisdiction under s 91(2) LPA:
In any action, whether for foreclosure, or for redemption, or for sale, or for the raising and payment in any manner of mortgage money, the court, on the request of the mortgagee, or of any person interested either in the mortgage money or in the right of redemption, and, notwithstanding that:
any other person dissents; or
the mortgagee or any person so interested does not appear in the action;
Palk v Mortgage Services Funding Plc [1993] reserves this jurisdiction for exceptional circumstances (interest was accumulating at an unfair £30,000 per year, which was greater than the land's maximum rental value). Though the odd case of Polonski v Lloyds Bank Mortgages [1998] permitted a non-disadvantageous sale under s 91(2) in very unexceptional circumstances.
A mortgagee can prevent a court from using its jurisdiction under s 91(2) by taking possession of the mortgagor's land.
Successors to mortgaged land
Legal mortgages in unregistered land will bind the world if created by deed. Mortgages created by charge must be registered as class c(i) land charges or recorded as notices on the charges register of mortgaged land. Failure to comply with these requirements will leave a mortgagor without a security interest, and merely a personal claim against a mortgagor if the land is sold.
Equitable mortgages are also subject to the same rules, but are registered as class c(iii) land charges if title to mortgaged land is unregistered.
A mortgagee may assign the benefit of a mortgage to a third party either by deed (in the case of legal mortgages) or simply in writing (in the case of equitable mortgages), providing that assignment is not prohibited by the mortgage agreement.


text:
Leicester Kurdish Solidarity Campaign
Leicester people supporting Kurds in their struggle to be free
Why do we need a Solidarity Campaign?
2 November 2019: Leicester Stand in support with Kurds in Rojava/Syria
We stand with the Kurdish people in Rojava, 22.10.2019 5.30pm, Clocktower Leicester UK
Kurds in northern Syria, Rojava, are under attack from NATO member the Turkish government, with weapons and reportedly chemical weapons. Turkey is determined to clear the Kurds out of their homelands in Syria along the border between Syria and Turkey, while the international community stands by.
UK stopped new contracts for the sale of weapons but those already made will continue, and these weapons will potentially kill Kurds in Syria.
Urgent action is necessary to stop further Turkish invasion of the Kurdish area in Syria; and to take back responsibility for British fighters with ISIS connections currently held captive by the Kurds in Syria.
The Government of Turkey took over Afrin in the Kurdish area of Syria in 2018 and relocated their allies from Idlib who are fighters with ISIS and related organisations, into Afrin causing the Kurdish population to be uprooted from their homelands, kidnapping and torturing them, and destroying their cultural icons.
Turkey is now further invading the Kurdish areas in Syria forcing Kurds to move from their homelands or face potential genocide.
ISIS-related foreign fighters are held captive by the Kurds in northern Syria because the Kurds have been organised and on the ground, fighting the takeover by Turkey's allies in ISIS and its related groups, as a result of which the Kurds have been left holding many foreign fighters at the Kurds' expense because the countries these people come from will not take them back, UK included.
We call for the UK Parliament to speak out with an urgent and loud voice:
• To condemn the actions of the Turkish Government and the threats to further invade the Kurdish areas in northern Syria,
• to take non-violent but persuasive economic and other political action including withholding intelligence information and preventing any sales of weapons, to ensure that Erdogan and his Government know it will not be in their interests to take further action against the Kurds in Syria.
• To engage with the Syrian Democratic Council to ask what support may be needed to encourage stability in the area .
• To instruct the Foreign Office to take urgent steps to bring back to UK the British Citizens currently held captive as a result of their attachment to ISIS and thereby relieve Kurds of the burden of managing their confinement
Erdogan threatened to crush the heads of what he called Kurdish fighters on Tuesday 22.10.2019 if they do not leave Sere Kaniye (also known as Ras al-Ayn). The SDF plans to leave the area to protect the lives of those who live there. Civilians have already been attacked, and medical support was initially prevented from entering the area.
Erdogan's forces were indiscriminate in their attacks on Kurds in Afrin last year. There is no reason to expect that Sere Kaniye will be any different on Tuesday.
There needs to be an international inquiry into the treatment of Kurds in Rojava.
Any donations should be given to Heyva Sor, the Kurdish Red Crescent who provide humanitarian support on the ground: http://www.heyvasoruk.org/donations/donate-to-heyva-sor-a-kurdistane-e-v
Author SheilaPosted on October 21, 2019 October 22, 2019 Categories Action, Coming Up, News, Rojava-Syria
Previous Previous post: Political views
Next Next post: We in Leicester stand with Kurds in Syria
Bakur – Turkey
Rojava-Syria
We in Leicester stand with Kurds in Syria
Example of a letter for MPs re: Turkey/Kurds in Syria/ISIS captives
Reading Between the Lines – 2 October 2018
Leicester Kurdish Solidarity Campaign Proudly powered by WordPress