[snip]between 1993-1995, there were no cautions on the register and therefore no legal entitlement,
He already had the entitlement to the interest in the property; whether or not he did anything to protect it.
It's this point that I'm trying to stress and that represents your main problem; the caution and the legal entitlement are completely different things.
I could have transferred my interest at that time to my partner or anyone for that matter if done correctly,
You could have, but your interest was nothing as you were only entitled to what was left over after the Official Receiver / Trustee got his.
I would even had been able to have borrowed even as a discharged bankrupt through the sub prime markets.
What would he have done then...?
He'd have got upset and looked to see if there was any way he could prosecute, if there was any way he could reverse the transaction, or if there was any way he could get his hands on something else instead, like the next property you bought.
the argument that I should have known that 1/2 the house was his and shouldn't have been sold/re mortgaged would have been fundamentally flawed as there was no documentation to prove otherwise at that time.
They'd have said you should have known you were bankrupt, and that people can be assumed to know what happens to assets in bankruptcy. Assets vest in the Official Receiver automatically, he doesn't have to do anything to make them his.
Just as there was no registered caution in 2000 when I did remortgage and another solicitor dealt with that conveyancing, so I find it difficult to believe that another solicitor would have knowingly allowed me to re-mortgage a property which was not mine.
It's only because I gathered they were done at different times and probably by different solicitors that I reckoned the 1996 solicitor probably didn't commit an offence. If he'd been doing it as part of the remortgage process I'd have definitely said he crossed the line.
I'd be very interested to know what other people think. I've
I've also been thinking, but didn't want to say it until the picture was complete, that if you haven't already you should post your circumstances somewhere else and see what other people say.
Once place I'd really recommend (despite the name) is the forums at iva.co.uk (there is an "if an IVA won't work for you" section with bankruptcy topics). There are some very experienced people there, and it's never a bad thing to have lots of people look at the same thing as they will always come up with slightly different angles that other people might miss, not consider, or take differently.
They might even rip what I've said apart, and obviously you'd be hoping they might!
People will be able to give a best balanced view if you post the whole story from start to finish (even though it'll be a nastily long novel), including the complete chronology with all the events, and focussing on the dates people have been in office and the correspondence to them, and the role of your solicitor in 1996. There's a lot more to this than met the eye from your first post!
If you like, I can try and order it all together into a nice little story for you tomorrow night.
for others to perhaps offer a different view or in fact the same as yours, and I'm glad you agree there's lots more to this than met the eye from my original post.
when they wrote to us asking for the loan to be repaid(you may recall interests rates had been high), we sought the advice of a solicitor
). 
