Morning all.

Is there anywhere I can go to so that my charges on my Loan with Swift Advances can be looked at?

Ive very nearly finished paying back the original loan with Swift, only to be told that I have over £6000 in charges to repay.

Ive got a breakdown of the charges from them which I am happy to upload.

Im looking to see if these charges are reasonable an fair.

Ive not put this in the Swift forum as charges affect all loans.

Thanks.

there is no such thing as a 'reasonable/fair' charge.

if it is a PENALTY for you not doing something you should have

the all PENALT charges are unlawful and can be reclaimed.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?330996-Latest-Spreadsheets-PPI-Claims-and-Charges-Claims-Dec-2011

the CISHEET is the one you want

and put their int rate in cell d 15.

is this a secured loan?

dx

[ATTACH=CONFIG]53412[/ATTACH]It was a secured loan.

Ive attached the transition list with the charges on it.

admin fees

letter fees

arrears charges

demand for payment

management charge

returned dd fee

I see they took you to court?

tell us what happened and what judgement [pcm] you were directed to pay

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?296108-Hot-news-for-anyone-who-has-suffered-mortgage-arrears-charges-irresponsible-lending-or-other-unfair-lender-conduct

It didn't get to Court as we made a lump payment of £2k.

Are you saying that all charges are wrong such as arrears letters, returned DD charges and management charges?

but papers were raised?

dx

Yes, we made the payment the day before the hearing.

They even charged as £100 to cancel the repossession.

What dx means ot ask is "How did the case come to a conclusion"

Was it stayed/struck out/tomlin order/discontinued

ok so you cant reclaim sols/litigation stuff.

but the cancel fee ... yes

What dx means ot ask is "How did the case come to a conclusion"

 

Was it stayed/struck out/tomlin order/discontinued

If I recall they were granted a Repossession order without us being present in October 2008.

They issued a repossession warrant on the 11th Feb.

They then wanted to take possession on 28th Feb 2008,

but we paid a lump sum on the 27th and that was cancelled by them.

I believe they could ask for another possession order if we ever fell behind again.

Im wondering if the £23 appears charges (sometimes three in a month)

or the Management charge for taking a debit card payment (£35 a time)

or the management fees of £70

or the charge of £75 for a letter are fair.

They have had some much money off us of the last seven years.

We have one more payment on the original loan and then years more paying off these charges.

as advised

reclaim the charges listed

dx

Why were the payments lower from 2010 compared to the start of the loan , was this a special arrangement and a lengthened agreement.

I wonder how their terms work because on their T&C the have the right to ask for increased payments to offset any charges or missed payments yet I haven't found anybody who has been asked this by them.

Have they let you know the payment was never going to settle the loan within term or have they just let you carry on paying letting the interest on the charges increase.

I wonder if this is a fair part of the relationship due to the fact that they had terms in place but never seem to invoke them.

as advised

 

 

reclaim the charges listed

 

 

dx

Thanks for the advice so far.

Is there any precedent for reclaiming all charges?

I thought institutions could charge a reasonable fee e.g. £12 for a returned DD.

On what grounds would I would I ask for all the charges to be cancelled?

If I ask for them all the be cancelled and they say no, what would be my counter argument?

Thanks again.

Mudge.

Why were the payments lower from 2010 compared to the start of the loan , was this a special arrangement and a lengthened agreement. I wonder how their terms work because on their T&C the have the right to ask for increased payments to offset any charges or missed payments yet I haven't found anybody who has been asked this by them. Have they let you know the payment was never going to settle the loan within term or have they just let you carry on paying letting the interest on the charges increase. I wonder if this is a fair part of the relationship due to the fact that they had terms in place but never seem to invoke them.

When I make my monthly payments they mention the charges,

but until this month I have never had a breakdown or statement of the charges due.

When I queried this last week, they told me they were under no obligation to send me a statement of charges annually.

I moaned a few months ago about the charges and about £250 was taken off.

We then had a letter last month, with a charges balance, and they had not taken off either £250, or the interest on the refund.

I cannot see from the list of charges they have sent me where the refunds were made.

We have had letters telling us they we were in arrears, but the figure shown was always zero.

The decrease in payments was from the PPI ending, which I have reclaimed already,

unfortunately Swift didn't have to pay the money back, but the broker who sold the PPI.

please read the links I sent you

NOTHING to do with the FSA and £12 limit at ALL>

dx

Where there is a debit and a comment like reversal of charge is their way of refunding.

They usually refund a charge but forget about any interest it has accrued and

I am sure there is always something sitting deep within the account that is accruing interest that you do not know about.

They tell everybody that there isn't a requirement to send out statements and the ones they do aren't very detailed

so you only ever find out about how bad it as got is when it is too late.

This is another part of the relationship that is unfair but

they seem to get away with it especially in court where it is hard to overcome the bias against you for missing payments in the first place.

Hi Meelis whilst you are here, did you complain to the FCA or FOS or both?

The links DX posted will guide you well Mudge.

Like most been round the houses being told that I need to complain to one who then tell you its another

who then tell you its another who then tell you its nothing to do with any.

Then I read that all the regulatory bodies were changing so have been formulating a complaint and deciding where to place it.

It gets worse when you know the stock answers that have been given and accepted to a lot of the complaints

so I am constantly looking for a different angle.

The other angles are naturally a lot harder to prove but there is definitely something going on with them.

Hope you manage to go for the complaint to the reg bodies Meelis. The thing going on is how to get rich quick duping people and making it legal. Let's add to that a fail safe formula, unregulated.

D, the thing is that in the past no regulatory body has taken an interest seriously because it is a hard nut to crack.

Too many decisions have gone against the victims due to either poorly researched or presented cases,

courts bias towards the better presented case brought about by the limitless funding they have,

general public perception based around the theory that you borrowed the funds

so you knew what you were doing or the real cost of doing something will ruin the country further.

I have heard that the ombudsmen is taking more of an interest now but they always take things case by case

whereas there are too many people with the same problems with companies like swift that it needs a more far reaching approach.

The original start of this thread is a case in point,

I believe there will be a lot more coming out of the woodwork as more and more people come to the end of their terms

and find they still owe a great deal.

My only court appearance so far was with a very thorough bundle which was conveniently disregarded

and the only words I was allowed to say was my name and whether I could maintain payments.

Rather like the Bank charges debacle, very quickly the Banks become the victim, we'll go bust if this carries on. They wouldn't have. A lot has happened since 2008 and the attitude towards the banking industry has changed in places which will make a difference. They can be reigned in, and there are people in the right places who will see to it. Bring it on!

Meelis has all talk of Swift stopped on the other site after [removed] Andy poked his nose in?

I expect Andy not the real name and glad Meelis migrated to here on CAG.

I believe the same argument which applied to Wonga and the rest applies to the secured lending industry, reg or not. It's all about unfairness, creating detriment and knowingly doing so. You don't lend money to those who can least afford it at higher int rates over longer terms,charging extortionate penalty charges. How does that fit into society? We pray for the Judges who will tackle this industry.