IF you are an ex-GMAC RFC customer who had your "mortgage" sold and you REALLY want to get your own back on the Cooperative Bank and MAS No.5, here's a way how! Check your GMAC "terms and Conditions", specifically Clause 5 which states; Oh, who give a !!!! what it says, it's NOT LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE! Goto http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2117.html then go to section 86. Section 1 of the Power of Attorney act affirms that in order for PoA to be enforceable it MUST be executed as a separate Deed. GMAC didn't care whether their paperwork was in order or not. They SUPPOSED that as long as they got the charge on your property, then they would win. That was THEN, this is NOW and we know now about how they misled people. Now, you need to write to the Land Registry at; Land Registry, Rosebrae Court, Woodside Ferry Approach, Birkenhead, Merseyside CH41 6DU Use form K9 and DEMAND a "RECTIFICATION" of the register to remove the illegal charge from YOUR property or you WILL hold them liable for them having allowed the (ILLEGAL) application of the charge and state that you intend to seek a damages claim against the LR for ALL losses incurred as a result thereof (the LR already know and admit that they have done a lot of this in the past, but they NEED people to write in and have the records put right as they don't know which are genuine charges, very few I'll wager, and which are bogus. Bear in mind you must provide proof such as the claim of purported PoA in your mortgage "Terms and Conditions". Remember, a "lender" can ONLY bring a claim against you for "dispossession" (theft of your property) if the charge is still on the property BUT it is YOUR responsibility, as the property OWNER, to have the incorrect charge removed. Why incorrect? Because GMAC NEVER had LEGAL PoA therefore they NEVER had the legal right to put a charge on your property, this failure oflegal PoA means YOU should have done this, regardless as to whether they had a claim or otherwise. Again the BOS v. Waugh affirms this. Thus when they "sold" your now DEFECTIVE mortgage it went through at least one other company (which was never disclosed or declared its "ownership" of your mortgage) thus GMAC also LIED to you when they told you it was sold to MAS No.5 or whoever. They would have sent you a "Notice of Assignment" this SHOULD, in reality, have come from the intermediary but most likely came from GMAC (who assumed you would never find out the TRUTH) thus the transfer of equitable rights was NEVER perfected, NOR was it legally executed correctly thus MAS No.5 or whoever, NEVER had the rights to demand any funds from you. This means that the "assets" which MAS are claiming, in their submitted accounts, are worth far less than it's liabilities (which are based a load of mortgages with NO ENFORCEABLE SECURITY behind them) but ONLY if YOU act and have the charge rectified (removed). What else does this mean? It means that MAS No.5 are trading in bankruptcy (which is illegal) as they should now be in receivership (Let's see how THEY like it). Why should YOU be held liable for THEIR activities? They should have checked the documentation PRIOR to purchasing these mortgages. It's NOT your fault, but they thought they could make a fast buck and no one would EVER find out and thus they could hold you to a VOID contract!! You CAN argue that you will continue to pay but ONLY if what you have paid them to date is taken off the capital amount (Don't forget the 8% statutory Interest) OR you could just tell them to go paddle a canoe over Niagara Falls and see what happens. If you have already had your house taken by MAS No.5 then you need to seek out a good solicitor and show them this, as you NOW have a claim for damages based on the above (A solicitor should be able to make a case from the above and WILL win if he's any good) this may enable you to get your house back and at the same time, push MAS (Group) and it's parent the Cooperative into a much need collapse. Apparently, according to Law Debenture, who handled the sales of these "mortgages", out of the seven blocks in the tranche Britannia bought, FIVE are now insolvent this means that the insurance has paid out due to less than 80% of the mortgages remaining active (NOT in DEFAULT). Now you can also bet your life that despite having been PAID IN FULL for the remaining active percentage, that the holder of these "paid off mortgages" is STILL demanding payments from the "borrowers". In case your solicitor tells you that the Waugh case is non definitive, tell him that the PUBLISHED version is NOT a true account of the results and that, allegedly, Behrens tried to cover his tracks for making previous void judgements so he suppressed the true outcome to try to hide his mistakes. You should seek out the parties involved (make a donation) to get a truer view of the results. Show these people no mercy. Report ALL such cases to Action Fraud AND file charges against those involved with your local Police for THEFT and demanding money with menaces (threats to steal your house) and MAKE SURE YOU CHASE IT REGULARLY FOR PROGRESS. Above all remember this; FRAUD VITIATES ANY CONTRACT AB INITIO (from the start)!!! GOOD RIDDANCE I say!

I plan to making life VERY hard for MAS No.5 join my campaign to take them to the cleaners and give them a taste of their own medicine AND lots more.... PM me is you want in and pass the word round. join EVERY forum you can, post on facebook, twitter, whatEVER social network you can find. I will provide the information, when we have enough members I will organise a meeting somewhere and we will discuss what we will do to them.

When was the LAST time you heard anything about this debt as if it is over 6 years AND you can prove this then simply remind them that it is barred by Statute of Limitation then relax. SORTED. IF on the other hand the business was a Limited company, tell them to go whistle. IF it was a partnership or sole trading / family company, ask them to prove the debt (you need to see the actual accounting). If they can't prove it or say they don't then keep on at them to prove it. Chances are they will give up after a few months. REMEMBER, admit to NOTHING!!!

I WON'T sell the house, I grew up in it so too many memories for me. I'm NOT going to let these parasites get away with this sort of unethical behaviour. Fair enough, they loaned me the money, but that us NO excuse for them to behave the way they do . A short sharps shock is in order. BTW as GMAC RFC sold them my mortgage I technically don't have a contract with MAS No.5 as I never signed anything to that effect. Maybe some mileage could be got out of that approach? I'm willing to contribute to have an expert look at any "contract" they supply.

Reading other threads related to MAS No.5 seems to indicate they are a right bunch of something VERY nasty. I'm in the same boat, ridiculous rate rises obviously in an attempt to force defaults (which would be an illegal activity - not that it would bother MAS No.5 any)!! I was wondering if anyone has made any progress with this matter?

Do what me and my mates did, park there again then wait in hiding until the ****** turns up, we then clamped HIS van with his OWN clamp we had removed the previous day, except WE used high strength military grade chain and same grade lock. One of us kept the pleb busy whilst we applied this. THEN, for good measure we chained him to the manhole cover. As far as we know he's still there. As this happened in an area we were just visiting, it amazes me how quickly after parking we got clamped. These retards must lie in wait somewhere. You should have seen the look on his face when he saw what we'd done. He was SO eager to explain that it was "illegal" to park where our decoy had he completely failed to notice the two guys applying the clamp, which I must say was done with the speed of a formula one pit crew. Wish I'd taken photies, but three guys ALL giving this induhvidual the bird then driving off. GREAT. Oh, BTW this was at around 17:50, just before "knocking off time" so he would have had a LONG time to sit and ponder how it feel to get "done". As regards the chain, get a locksmith to remove it, then give it back to the moron in question (locked of course) most likely he'll spend a month of two trying to figure out how you got it off.

MBNA must give all prospective staff an IQ test, if they FAIL they GET the job!!:D If I EVER met anyone of the cretins I've had to deal with so far, I'd be sorely tempted to rearrange a few facial features. I've never come across such a bunch of ignorant, boorish and determined criminals before. Hopefully my complaints to; OFCOM (for telephone harassment) OTELO (for the same) ICO (Breach of DPA) Trading Standards (Breaches of CCA 1974) OFT (as above- suggested their CC license be revoked and breaches of CCA 1974) FO (As above) ASA (Section 46 of the CCA 1974 - False Advertising) FSA (as above) Banking Standards Board (breaches of guides) A few choice letters to national newspapers INCLUDING Private Eye In EACH case the complaint was accompanied by a 38MB file of PDF scanned evidence, a full explanation from me, time lines of events, lists of what acts breached and when, and foremost EACH organisation was made aware that I was in contact with ALL the others too!! I think MBNA should be more than a little worried by what I have done to them. I gave them ample chance to sort it out amicably, I told them what I would do if they didn't make the effort, and now I've gone and DONE them!! I hope they ALL rot in hell for eternity. They picked on the wrong person this time!

That was NOT my point. If enough people all got together and complained EN MASSE to say the FSA, FO, OFCOM (yes for misuse of telephones) Banking Standards then something WILL be done. It doesn't matter if the debts are sold on, this is about putting ALL MBNA employees on the dole, where people like them belong. Let's see how they like it when THEY get harassed for being in debt! :mad:. All it takes is a flood of letters ALL about the same thing and action will be taken.

AND the other stuff (again). The thing that REALLY annoys me is that they want to know how much my wife earns and attach the debt to her too! I told Optima legal to shove it where the sun didn't shine on the phone. Another interesting point is S.46 of the CCA 1974. MBNA are in breach as they falsely imply on ALL their CC related documentation that the FSA can help "MBNA is regulated by the FSA" and when I called them and asked, "If I have ANY problems with my CC, as per your literature, you are saying that the FSA WILL help me"? They said a VERY categorical "Yes". This is NOT true. I spoke with the FSA and they said they only had very limited powers regarding CC's and could certainly not help in the way MBNA were implying. I was told to register a complaint and they would investigate. I suggest EVERYONE on this forum goto the FSA's website; Financial advertising : FSA Money made clear - about the FSA Then click "Report Misleading Advert" on the top RHS. Register the SAME complaint. It will cost MBNA a small fortune to have all their literature re-done :p:p:p SHAME!! Also make a complaint about the same with the Advertising Standards Authority. I have. I've done this quite a few times now (other companies) and I've had FAVOURABLE outcomes 90% of the time. If we get a few 100 from here to do this then MBNA will get nutzed and fined even!! Let's DO MBNA and give them a taste of their own medicine. I'm happy to write to them and tell them why they are getting all this merde and WHY I started it. I've already done the national newspapers thing and have phone appointments with three (out of eight) so far. AWWWWW POOR MBNA!!! Let's harass THEM for a change.. Steven4064 I like the avatar, that's my attitude to MBNA. "Come on then, but you're gonna get hurt". CCA_EXE.pdf

Hi again all and thanks for all the info WHOOPS!! VERY silly me I blanked out the boxes BUT forgot it only tags on MY PC, anyone else will be able to see my details. Still ALL of them have changed as I moved and I'm all but "off the grid" due to the nature of the company I work for. My problem is I CAN pay MBNA (and they know it) but I'm waiting on some money coming in in October so have NOTHING until then. I stepped back as MD of the company I work for in January (to save the company money due to trading difficulties) the (independent) CC insurance deemed me as having left of my own accord so won't pay out. I could go back, but this would probably push the company over the edge then I'd get nothing! Catch 22! I'm not a greedy fat cat, never will be, the jobs of the employees come first in my book as they have families who are struggling too! BTW I have TWO other credit cards. When I told Barclays what I had done they said "No problem, we'll freeze interest at 0% for you until you get back on your feet" I asked them to freeze the card so it could not be used and they were VERY pleased I was being responsible, they have literally bent over backwards to help, but MBNA? What scummers they are. I have spoken to the FO and been asked if I will put together a portfolio of evidence from as many sources as possible (I'm hoping to use this forum if people agree) as they will launch an investigation into MBNA's business practices if I can provide enough good stuff. the fines levied could run into a VERY many zeroed number AND, just maybe lead to restrictions being put on their Consumer Credit License . OK lets have another go at doing this PROPERLY this time (I hope) . CCA1.pdf

**Deleted** by Siliquaesid

Hi Steve, WOW 11K+ posts and LOTS of victories! **RESPECT** MANY thanks for dropping in here too to give me some help. MBNA CCA reply. I must admit all the writing looks like mine. OK ignore the annual income, at the time I was adding bonuses which I never got to make the numbers look better. In the letter they sent me from Optima legal, they threaten they can make me sell my house. I've heard this is only in EXTREME cases and they must be able to convince the judge that they feel they have NO chance of ever getting their money back any other way, so my offers at the bottom of the letter show that they cannot go down that route as I have told them when and how much I CAN pay.

Hi Capricorn1601 and thanks for your reply. Sadly yes they did and I had it checked by a company called CreditClear and they said it was enforceable, BUT...... I've seen reference to companies like this charging a fee of £295 which sits in their account for 6 or so months after which they simply return it with a "Sorry sucker, thanks for the loan, your CCA cannot be challenged" letter. Just imagine if 10000 people did this, the interest on that amount for 6 months would make a very nice income. **[problem] ALERT** . I 'm in the wrong job, I should be a dishonest person,it's more profitable than being str8. It may still be that I am correct in my suspicions, but then maybe not. It may also be that if I am right, my agreement MAY actually be challenged. I'll post a copy of what they sent me. ASAP.

Hi all, my first post so please bear with me. This has been going on sine January, or thereabouts and MBNA are telling me that there is no dispute. So, how does this read to you? MBNA Europe Bank Limited Customer Advocate Office Chester Business Park Chester CH4 9FB WITHOUT PREJUDICE READ VERY CAREFULLY Re. MBNA Platinum Card No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Sirs, Referring your to my many previous letters, all of which seem to have been answered (if at all) in a vague and totally uncooperative manner, I must now spend time repeatedly explaining to you the same thing. It's almost as if your entire staff are lacking in basic reading skills or are too poorly trained to get the point of the problem you (MBNA) have created. As this constant repeating myself is not part of the normal administration of my account, I feel obliged to inform you that I intend to levy a charge (at the rate of £150/Hr which is what a solicitor would cost me) for the time it takes me address this matter as of my deadline (which you breached) of 10 June. The bill for my time so far is included and will be debited from the true balance outstanding on my account. Let me recap; My initial complaint was due to unsolicited marketing SMS to my mobile phone. If you BOTHER to check the agreement I signed, you will see that the box for “phone” (this is taken to INCLUDE my mobile phone) as it appears, in some strange way, MBNA's definition of what a phone is changes depending on what colour, shape or method of data transmission that phone uses. For the purposes of the Telecommunications Act 2003, there is but ONE definition of what a telephone is, and THAT is the one MBNA WILL use (under LAW) for the purposes of this (repeat) explanation. I REPEATEDLY asked MBNA to STOP sending these messages which started in June 2007. The first time should have been enough under Section 22 of the Privacy Act 2003 but no, for some reason which only MBNA seems to know, and in STRICT contradiction of both the a/m Acts this HARASSMENT continued. By repeatedly sending such messages MBNA were in direct contravention of S.127 of the Communications Act 2003 and thus liable for prosecution and fines under section 130 of same and I would refer you to the case of OFCOM v. Telecom Billing Services Ltd (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_ccases/closed_all/cw_880old241007/notice.pdf). Due to repeatedly sending unsolicited SMS messages to people who had been in contact with them previously, OFCOM fined TBS some £50,000. As I am in the process of compiling a list of similar such actions perpetrated by MBNA not just with respect to my complaint, expect OFCOM to apply a similarly hefty fine on you. This would include the same practice MBNA use of logging numbers customers called from and assigning that number against their accounts when there can be no certainty that the number used actually belongs to that customer (e.g. may be a public call box). THAT is why this practice is illegal! A copy of the content of two of these messages is shown below; PICTURE MISSING!!! I certainly wasn't “delighted” to get the announcement (which I never asked for). Invariably these arrived when I was relaxing in the evening, driving (causing me to pull over and check the message in case it was important and on more than one occasion making me late thus leading to lost earnings) or in meetings, and as all my friends will testify (in court if need be) I HATE SMS messages. They all know my reaction when I receive one. Other were of the ilk; PICTURE MISSING!!! Notwithstanding the above, I requested an official apology in writing, I am still not in receipt of this apology so this matter is still ongoing and has NOT been resolved as you incorrectly state. Failure to provide a simple apology for the above, has led to me asking for a gesture of goodwill, or some form of compensation for the breaches of UK and EU law by MBNA as of June 2006 (three years now) although I only asked for a goodwill gesture as part of the apology in December 2008. I have been illegally and immorally wronged by MBNA and can therefor, as a matter of professional courtesy, and in law, reasonably expect an apology of some form. That which was forthcoming, I consider inappropriate and insufficient and so this matter too is still unresolved also not as per your previous statements. In light of the many recent successful challenges issued against MBNA and other CC companies to have Credit agreements declared unenforceable I made a section 77 & 78 request as per the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (in an effort to make MBNA listen and take notice that I was serious about not just letting you get away with breaking the law as seems to be the case with an alarming regularity if the consumer forums within the UK are anything to go by) this gave MBNA a period of TWELVE DAYS + TWO (14 just in case you have trouble doing the maths) to reply after which a DEFAULT would occur. At the same time I issued a Subject Access Request (pursuant of Section 7 of The Data Protection Act 1998. The S.77/78 CCA request gives a maximum time period not exceeding 30 days from the initial request whilst SAR gives a maximum period of 43 days in which to comply after which, in both cases, a criminal offence occurs and would render MBNA liable to prosecution. Both of the above were posted by Royal Mail “First Class Signed For” and so their receipt at your offices could be checked. It would appear that both were signed for by one “Chris Drew” on the 5 February 2009 and not as Gail Powell creatively with the truth states for the avoidance of any doubt (in her letter of 9 June 2009) the 27 of February 2009. The SAR was executed within two weeks, and I commend MBNA for this but I should like to point out that many lines of the photocopied documents supplied are crossed out in heavy black marker pen thus vital information relating to my account could be deemed to have been removed or missing. In addition a copy of the log-file from your SMS sending system, showing when you sent me the messages in question, was missing thus the S.7 DPA request is incomplete in it's execution and as the 43 days have now passed this is now also the subject of a criminal offence committed by MBNA. The S.77/78 request was also not complied with (i.e. I was not in receipt of the documentation) until the 7 March 2009 (some 30 days) thus after the prescribed 14 days a default under the CCA 1974 was incurred my MBNA as was a criminal act. MBNA should be aware that sending time sensitive documents such as the S.77/78 request via second class post and the default period smacks of pulling two fingers at me and saying “Up your pal, we are bigger than you. We can flout the law as we see fit. What are you going to do about it”? Well quite a lot actually! You cannot argue that postal delays were the cause. The same 14 days period is applied to an NIP following a motoring offence so the CPS have to send you NIP's well before the due date. This means efficient and effective internal processes, unlike those MBNA appear to use which rely on applying dates which imply an earlier response than actual to documents then sending them out via known slow-delivery mail route, and hoping no one will notice. During a default such as that incurred above, any agreement covered by the CCA 1974 is deemed unenforceable (CCA 1974 S78 subsection 6) and as such no interest or charges may be applied by the lender, irrespective of whether or not the underlying and original debt exists. In simple terms, if a borrowers balance is £5000 at the time the default occurs and the normal monthly interest only payments are £100 then the lender CANNOT for the period that the default exists, apply that interest charge, thus if the default existed for a period of one month then the outstanding balance at the end of that month would STILL be £5000, yet in my case, a default arose for a period of some SEVENTEEN (17) days. Pro-rata, MBNA should have reduced the interest amount due for that period, you did not. I sent to you a letter dated 18 February 2009, posted on the 20 February 2009 and received by MBNA on 21 February 2009 (signed for at 9:00) and declaring a default. When I became aware of the your illegal application of the incorrect interest, I declared a dispute on 3 April 2009, declaring said dispute with Equifax, CallCredit, and Experian. On the 24 April MBNA send a reminder (deemed as a demand) for the sum of £208.18 which, under the terms of a valid and legal dispute re. the outstanding balance, you are not legally entitled to do so and you are reminded that it is an offence under the CCA 1974 to deny a dispute exists when there are reasonable ground to suspect that one in fact does as per my dispute. As the above is recorded and proved using evidence provided by yourselves (dated letters, proof of delivery dates, statements issued requesting interest during default AND dispute periods, you cannot claim at any point that you have or indeed attempted to comply with the law as per the CCA 1974, in fact MBNA have blatantly flouted this Act to give the impression that it was in the right when it is NOT, and as such has committed a further offence under the Act. Looking at MBNA's website and marketing literature it is evident that there is a blatant and deliberate breach of S.46 of the CCA 1974 (S.46.—(1) If an advertisement to which this Part applies conveys information which in a material respect is false or misleading the advertiser commits an offence) in which MBNA state that they are regulated by the FSA and thus the debtor (as defined by the CCA 1974) is afforded protection by this. This is simply NOT true in the case of credit card agreements over which the FSA has no jurisdiction. MBNA's recent passing of data personal to me to one Optima Legal despite my instructions denying you the right to do so are not only a criminal offence under a CCA 1974 dispute, but also a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. Both the letter from Optima Legal (confirmed by them as having it's wording approved by MBNA in a recorded telephone conversation) and the letter from MBNA itself dated 17 May 2009 are in direct breach of the OFT guidelines for debt collection as they falsely imply that you can force me to sell my home by placing a charge on it when you cannot (except in extreme circumstances, which in this case do not and have never existed). This matter has been reported. A denial of access notice was issued to you and any agents you might employ. Any breach of this WILL be defended to my full rights within the law. In view of the many and varied criminal offences and breaches of codes of conduct MBNA has committed in this matter, I have no option but to provide a full suite of (now substantial and corroborated) evidence (this letter included) along with individually written explanatory letters of all relevant documents pertaining thereto to the following; The Information Commissioners Office OFCOM Trading Standards (local and national offices) The Office of Fair Trading The Financial Services Authority The Financial Ombudsman The Advertising Standards Agency The Banking Standards Board The Finance and Leasing Association The national press (all papers). In addition to the above, and in light of continued harassment, the police! In each case, the organisation will be made aware to which other organisations copies have been sent. I'm sure MBNA will have no problem convincing each of them that it is in the right and also that you should be allowed to retain a valid Consumer Credit License. For the avoidance of any doubt, I offer the following terms which from which MBNA may chose from the following options as to how I proceed; MBNA Freeze this account in it's entirety, that being at the balance at the CORRECT amount of £10,400.67 and the interest at (0%) whereupon I will undertake that on the 10 October 2009 (following the voluntary sale of my goods and chattels to raise the required amount) make a lump sum payment of £7500 to settle the account IN FULL. This amount being the £10,400 minus my compensation of £2500 (in lieu of a £50,000 fine by the ICO and OFCOM) and the charge for having to repeatedly explain this matter repeatedly (to people who are evidently inadequately trained to the do jobs they are doing) of £400. I request a full hand written apology from the UK president of MBNA, along with a direct contact number so that I may talk to him and him alone should any problems arise in the future. PLUS a compensation payment of £2500 (in lieu of a £50,000 fine by the ICO and OFCOM) for the harassment I received with respect to the SMS messages, AND an interest reduction from 27.9% to 17.9% (capped for the life of the balance). A ONE OFF FULL page advert/apology in all the national newspapers of my choice on a page directly opposite MBNA's normal credit card or other service provided advert (so people can see what MBNA are really like). Included in this advert MUST be a link to a website which I will set up where people may go and view all the evidence I have regarding MBNA's behaviour regarding this matter. The copy of this advert must be approved by me prior to printing after which NO changes must be made. MBNA continues as is, despite my many attempts to reach an amicable settlement in the past (including the offer of help by the National Mediation Service) and the now offering of these new terms. We go to court where I embarrass you by winning, and believe you me I WILL win! I suggest STRONGLY suggest that as of now MBNA comply with the law and that you start getting your facts right. I also suggest you better train your staff to address issues in a timely and correct manner and that you conduct a full review of internal procedures relating to the handling of time sensitive documentation. In some cases, a review of staff manners might also be of benefit to your customers. SiliquaeSid

And he's about as much use as an ashtray on a motorcycle!