Wednesday 17 July 2013

Have Corrie got it wrong about Emily's house?

(This post was originally posted by Flaming Nora on the Coronation Street Blog July 2013, reposted to this blog with permission.)

Sunny Jim almost choked on his cocoa as we sat on the sofa last night watching Coronation Street.  It came at that bit when Emily said she was going to sell her house to Norris, you know, as if she still owned it.

She doesn't, does she?

Didn't Emily get involved with tricky Dicky Richard Hillman and sign a contract to release the equity in her house?

Yes, I know, he's dead and gone now but surely even Emily would have remembered there's no money in her home and I don't recall it ever being referred to after his death that the contract was null and void and she'd got the deeds to her property back.

Or is that Emily's plan? To lead Norris up the garden path thinking he's going to inherit something that isn't there?

(edited to add: check some of the comments on the Coronation Street Blog for this post when it was first published, there seems to be an answer there. In a nutshell, because Richard Hillman was a criminal, it was deemed that his contracts were null and void so Emily's house reverted back to her. No idea on why she didn't have to pay the money back to Richard's estate though.)

Follow the Bluenose CorrieBlog on Twitter and Facebook

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...