Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Swift are planning to repossess my property next week - help!


Sdq23
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2516 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

In 2006 I took out a secured loan on my property with swift advances, the loan was £44,000. The loan term was 10 years, with monthly repayments of approx £450.

 

3 years ago I missed a few payments and fell into arrears with them of £4000 and in 2014 they took me to court in regards to the arrears. I managed to clear the arrears by making an agreement of paying £200 more on top of the original monthly payments.

 

The arrears were cleared but now the term of the loan has ended (in 2016) and I am left with £44,000 still left to pay (somehow??).

 

 

Swift are now planning to repossess my property next week unless I can pay them the full amount.

I have put in the N244 in court today and have my hearing on Monday.

 

I have been in contact with swift for these past few weeks trying to sort out something with them but they aren't listening.

 

 

I also have 2 acres of land in another country which I have told swift I am willing to sell to pay the amount I owe but it will take a few months for it to get sorted.

 

 

I have even showed them the documents and letters from the lawyers in that country.

But they are still not budging.

 

Can anybody please help with some advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you got all the statements?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so how much of this balance are penalty charges & all the unlawful insurances you were made to take out...

 

 

I cant see how if you only missed a few payments you can still owe £44k!!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Date of Execution of Loan: December 2005

Duration of Loan: 120 Months

Amount of Credit for Loan: £25,365.00

Broker Fee: £2,500.00

Admin Fee: £530.00

Arrears: £8,592

Opening Balance December 2016: £42,796.28

 

This is from the Account statement in December 2016

 

Apologies for the Arrears figure in the first post.

 

When I have checked through most of the statements I will post the penalty charges and insurances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was you only making interest only payments...and not paying any of the Capital back?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

click upload^^

 

PLEASE do it to ONE multipage PDF

not lots!!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

tariff of charges too

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was you only making interest only payments...and not paying any of the Capital back?

 

Andy

 

This.

 

Andy may have hit the ball on the head even before the payment paperwork was posted up!.

That paperwork shows a 12% APR, so roughly 1% / month.

 

45k loan?

1% / month : monthly interest about £450 - which is what is shown.

So, it looks suspiciously like this was an "interest only" mortgage. Was there a separate "endowment" component??

 

So, the OP can look towards claiming back any unlawful charges or mis-sold insurances, but if this was an interest only mortgage, the capital was always due to be repaid at the end of its term!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a secured loan not a mortgage. Swift secured loans are set up with the interest added up front to the loan. This added to the principal is accruing interest for the whole term. A redemption statement will show more clearly where they're coming from with this £44k outstanding. They must have added a lot of charges for this amount still to be owed if all your contractual payments were made.

 

With ref to your Court hearing, I believe the Judge will want to know how Swift can expect to repossess your home if you are doing everything right to keep your home and imo will support you to do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A 10 year secured loan on your property is as good as a mortgage.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It feels like it but it isn't to buy your home. In this case as far as we know the borrower has repaid the loan as stated on the agreement within the term and there should not be a surprise amount left after the term. It's a mystery at the moment. Need more info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy.

a 10 year loan against your property is/was as good as a mortgage in everything but the important eyes of the laws/regs.

 

 

I say was because it has been recognised and all current secured lending comes under mortgage regulations, surprisingly though existing products are not being included.

 

 

If I was cynical I would say the regulators are aware of the problem so are avoiding the onus to act being placed upon them.

 

 

You also asked whether it was an interest only loan,

with any of these loans if you have charges added near the beginning it is added to the capital which nullifies the payment, you are soon only covering the interest.

 

 

If you are unaware of this then the payments are never increased to cover the charges or costs that are added hence the fact you never pay the loan off.

 

 

Companies like this know there is no requirement to keep you fully informed on an unregulated loan so don't.

 

 

Read into that what you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It feels like it but it isn't to buy your home. .

 

Andy. a 10 year loan against your property is/was as good as a mortgage in everything but the important eyes of the laws/regs.

 

Thanks chaps...Im fully aware of the difference in the type of agreements...Mortgage>Secured Loan and its legislation...I simply stated its as good as one in that there is no provision to reduce the capital because of the scandalous interest rates and penalties being applied...thats all.:-)

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy, being site team I guessed you would know.

 

 

My reply was more generic for the others who might be reading and might not understand and also to highlight that 1st and 2nd charge are now both covered as mortgages but the relevant authorities have chosen not to include existing products.

 

 

This has left existing 2nd charge loans ( usually termed as mortgages by the likes of Swift) as totally devoid of regulations of any type because the authorities will not recognise them as mortgages or as consumer loans.

 

 

The concern we all need to understand though is these are generally long term products which are only just beginning to end and I fear there are a lot of people who are just unaware of the position they might be in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks meellis....yes its a very valid point and information that posters should be aware of.As you state now that theses agreement are beginning to mature/come to the end of the term no doubt we will have many more threads on this subject.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks chaps...Im fully aware of the difference in the type of agreements...Mortgage>Secured Loan and its legislation...I simply stated its as good as one in that there is no provision to reduce the capital because of the scandalous interest rates and penalties being applied...thats all.:-)

 

I know you know also Andy, my reply was to the previous poster. Many wish their loans with Swift would come under the mortgage regulations.

 

More payment history needed. If you request a redemption statement it will be more clear to see the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule of 78:

 

For loans of under £25,000 a potential hidden penalty used to come from ‘rule of 78' interest calculations, a complicated formula which artificially allocates repayments towards interest not capital, leaving more left to repay than you think. Repay very soon after borrowing and it can mean paying back more than you borrowed. Find out more: Rule of 78.

 

Thankfully people taking out loans these days don't have to worry as the government has banned rule of 78 charges, however most people with loans taken out before that will be caught by this.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know how this Swift customer got on in Court??

 

That's how Swift make people feel hopeless with all the doom and gloom which comes with this type of lending unregulated over 25k before a certain date so on and so on.

 

So how did this Swifter get on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know how this Swift customer got on in Court??

 

Afraid not determindator...last activity 9th February 2017 15:01...we will just have to wait and see if there is any update.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...