Interesting....maybe the outcome of this case will see a class action by the consumers affected by securitisation: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/business/suit-accuses-jpmorgan-unit-of-broad-misconduct-on-mortgage-securities.html?_r=1

Any good letter before action templates on here other than the bank ones ?

No probs...I will give them 10 days to respond. Thanks

As well as the letters, we had a discussion that resulted in the dealer confirming that he would not be paying for any repairs. I confirmed this back to him in writing yesterday. I also confirmed that the independant garage advised that the intercooler had ruptured following a visual inspection. The dealer knows of what the problem is and still resisting any further costs. The car needs to be fixed today. I shall send another pre-action letter today to advise of the outcome and confirm that costs will be submitted together with full details. I will give him 7 days to pay and then will submit a claim to court. I cant afford for the car to be off road for any longer than is needed awaiting for the dealers reply.

Hi Conniff, The garage has just called and has advised the intercooler has a big split in it. He is awaiting for the new intercooler at a cost of £300 approx. Model is a 2004 9-3 2.2 TiD. It looks like the intercooler is the problem. What are your thoughts ?

Hi, I was at the garage last night and it is apparent that the intercooler is ruptured. This is evident by the pool of oil in the tray. The dealer has already replaced the EGR valve and many SAAB forums say that the intercooler is renowned for this problem (rupturing/ballooning at the bottom with the resultant black smoke). The problem largely points towards the intercooler however, I except that if the smoke is still present following replacement, then I will be liable for footing the bill. I am working on the basis that the intercooler is the problem until the garage tells me otherwise ! I have photos and videos and the collection of letters that have been sent. Once I have the bills, do you think there will be anything else required. I have asked the garage to run exhaust emission tests prior to replacement in order to demonstrate that the car was not roadworthy and hence, not fit for purpose.

The car is five years old and had done 41k when purchased. What other information do you think will be required to prove that the dealer is at fault here...

I purchased a car from a second hand dealer in February 2010 and quickly found that the car was smoking. Over the ast few months, I have issued a number of letters and the dealer has amenable to resolve matters. However, the fundamental issue has still not been resolved and the dealer is not willing to continue investigating for probems. I have taken the car to a local garage today and they have identified the intercooler as having a leak. I have taken a short video together with photographs of the excessive black smoking. The dealer has refused to resolve the matter and I have informed them in writing that I shall seek recovery through the formal channels. My next step is to get the car repaired myself and recover the money back from the dealer. I have asked my local garage to undertake an exhaust emissions test to demonstrate that the car is not for purpose. The problems with the car were notified within the first 28 days following purchase. The dealer changed a few parts but to no avail. What other information will I need to demonstrate that the car was not fit for purpose at the time of sale ?

I agree 100% ! However, the defence could be a "educated & legally informed" group rather than a individual With regard to the unfair contract terms, I was suggesting that by the nature of the original lender's business model (use of SPV's), would it be fair to say that they never had the intention of fulfilling the contract for the full term and hence, the terms of the contract were not suitable for the type of contract that was entered into by the borrower ?

Here is my case: We had/have a mortgage with SPML and obviously, Capstone collect the payments each month. My problem is this, we have never been late with a payment in over 2 years and our mortgage is now on the libor rate. As we have never missed a payment, we have rarely had to deal with Capstone however, I understand the problems and legalities involved regarding securitisation. For the safety of our home, we will continue to pay the premiums however, I would like to start the complaint procedure with Companies House for trading insolvently and also, I would like to the test the unfair contract terms issue. My contract is with SPML and aside from the fact that they never had the intention to honour the mortgage for the full term, they are free to sell the mortgage on. I suppose the big question is what would I be seeking as a resolve to the matter... a free house ? compensation of payments made to date ? At the end of the day, irrespective of the state of SPML, someone else now owns the mortgage....the big question is who !

A few years ago, a company I was working went into administration. I was paid the normal sums owed by the redundancy office and the remainder was paid by the balances within the companies funds. Three years on, and I have just received a letter from the Joint Receiver's advising that "it would appear that I may be a creditor in the liquidation and that they do not appear to have received a claim forum". Obviously not wanting to look a gifthorse in the mouth...If I would to state a claim for say £500 of expenses, how would they validate my claim ? There may have been some expenses owing for business mileage etc, how would I substantiate this so late after the company going into administration and how is to say, that they are able to confirm whether there is an entitlement ? Opinions/advice gratefully received

I think that will be my first port of call.

My 2 year old son tripped over a raised paved area yesterday whilst at the local community council. The condition of the paving is in a bad state and I am going there today with a ruler and pen to take some pictures. My son sustained a head injury which required a visit to A+E for x-rays and stitches. The wound is approx. 3 inches long and is quite deep. He is obviously extremely traumatised about the whole ordeal and I am sure that he will never forget the accident. There will be a permanent scar left on the wound has healed. After today, I will have the following information to substantiate my claim: Photographs of the location where the incident occurred. Photographs of the Injuries sustained Hospital Incident Logs (can be obtained if required by a court) My questions are as follows: Is this a claim worth pursuing the council for ? Should I open direct dialogue with them first or go to a Solicitor ? As my Child is only 2 years old, what compensation could be claimed as obviously there would be no loss of earnings on his or our part ? What is general compensation value (General Damages) for an injury of this nature ? I have never prepared a personal injury claim before and am well aware that this area is a minefield regarding legalities etc. I want to make sure that I start the procedure correctly without prejudicing my claim later down the line. Thanks

Hahahaha...check this. I just tried to open a petition to get the Prime Minister to overturn the decision...this is the response I got: What a load of boolocks !

This sounds very much like an inside job...the Government have bailed out the banks already...they don't want to bail them out again and hence it is easier to put pressure on the House of Lords to hand down judgement in favour of the banks. The whole process is flawed. Looking at this from a macro perspective, we put in a claim to the banks, the banks pay us, the banks show deficit on end of year accounts, this reduces share price, government bails out bank, tax hikes to taxpayer to pay for bail out.

Superb....thanks Marc

Thanks... @BF: I think that this is the way they are playing this one however, looking at the TUPE legislation, the onus is on the dismissing employer to prove that the termination of employment is not related to economic, technical or organisational restructure. My father and his colleague was "removed from site" for a poor reason however, it has since become common knowledge that these roles has not been replaced. Could this action not could be construed as an organisational restructure ? @ Ell-Enn: He has worked for the originatal company for one year and hence, this term of employment satisifies the requirement for TUPE legislation to apply.

My father works for a facilities management (FM) company who has a contract to provide maintenance services to a retailer. The FM company in question lost the contract and it was awarded to another contractor effective from 1st October 2009. On the 30th September, he received a verbal warning for over-running his allocated coffee break by 5 minutes. The new FM company took over the contract on the morning of 1st October. My father was called into a meeting the same morning and was advised that the client had requested that he be removed from site following the incident on 30th September whilst the contract was in the hands of his original employer. The new FM company actioned his removal from site and he has been on gardening leave since this date on full pay. The new FM company have attempted to fulfill their TUPE obligations by suggesting alternative positions within the company however, to date, the positions put forward have not been within his geographical location nor have they been in keeping with his role. It would seem that the new company are going to serve 4 weeks termination notice in the near future however, I would like to know whether there is a case here for unfair dismissal or whether it would be worth him handing in his notice to provide a foundation for a case of constructive dismissal. Any advice would be gratefully appreciated. Thanks

Thanks to the both of you. I did consider making the tone of the letter more demanding however relented on the basis that this would form the basis of the next letter should they refuse my first tentative approach. I feel that although we may feel that we have been deceived, to be forceful in our approach at this stage of the speculative enquiry would not be considered in the same manner as it would if we had approached them with an offer which looks to be mutually beneficial to both parties (i.e lender gets recovery of capital and borrower gets to move to an alternative lender). Any more comments or thoughts appreciated....this is being posted by the end of the day. Thanks

Here is the first draft...The purpose of the letter is to reduce the LTV to 75% in order that I can move away to an alternative lender...Please let me know what you think ? I have thought about Crapstone's point with regard to holding on however, it there is going to be a fire sale, then that will happen with or without my letter being sent ! Worth a go !

Thanks Crapstone ! The ERC has passed now as the fixed period has ended. Should this be addressed to Capstone or SPML's address ? Any idea of the wording of the letter ?

Can anyone assist with http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/170607-spml-london-mortgage-company-97.html#post2529988 I have read this thread with interest and understand the issues noted however, this does not address the potential (if any!) for speculative discount for settlement purposes (like the deals seen offered by other Lehmans subsidaries/trading companies ?

I have a mortgage with SPML whose fixed rate ended earlier this year and I am now on the libor rate. As SPML is no longer offering new products due to the Lehman Problems, would it be worth me giving them the incentive for me to move away by requesting a discount on the amount owed thus increasing the equity/LTV ? Please let me know your thoughts as to whether anyone else has done this ? I have just rung them up and the settlement is virtually no different (this would obviously be the case as it was an interest only mortgage !). Should I offer a settlement of Amount owed less 15% discount ? Do you have any idea of the wording as obviously it would be subject to successful offer of a mortgage from an alternative lender. Also, should this be made out to SPML's address direct or Capstone ? I think Capstone would say no to discounted settlement whereas as SPML's administrators may think differently ?

Oh.....okay I didnt know that...I think I will leave until early 2011 then ;( Thanks all....much appreciated

So should I SAR, CCA or send them the 'Prove It' letter (even though they haven't asked for it !).