This 8% interests me as i was in court with SWIFT who stated under oath that their cost of borrowing was 12% when the judge was determining the interest during my time order.

They told me the same. That's why I filed a complaint with FSA and FOS. Although a tiger with one tooth can't hurt the more teeth the bigger the bite. FILE A COMPLAINT AS I HAVE JOES MY LANDLORD:mad2::mad2:

They say only first borrowers are included not second mortgage borrowers

As far as I'm concerned a crime is a crime and proven extortion can't be tagged to one type of loan and not all. I'm in touch with FSA and FOS and I can see the likes of SWIFT having to include every borrower. Also I believe lenders such as SWIFT are sitting on the edge of a cliff and are guaranteed to fall. Now a test case has been proven the snowball effect MUST happen :lol::lol:

I have spoken to swift who stated that the judgement only applied to first mortgages and as my loan was a second charges we were not getting a refund. In fact they stated that they had already contacted all people due a refund. As I have suffered everything in the judgement including the" Eastern counselling" I have contacted the FOS who have agreed to take on my case and are now writing to SWIFT. d I keep posting here does anyone know? :mad2::mad2::smile:

I don't know where and how to post this but to anyone effected by Swift the email I've got should opwn the doors to people like you and me: Sorry about the size but I'm sure it's great news: FSA fines mortgage lender £630,000 Thursday, September 08, 2011 Published by MILLIE DYSON Regulation & Compliance | 0 Comments The Financial Services Authority has today fined Essex based mortgage lender Swift 1st Limited £630,000 for unfair treatment of some customers facing mortgage arrears.. The firm has also agreed to carry out a programme to provide redress to customers who were in arrears and who were charged certain arrears fees and charges that were excessive. Swift will provide redress to customers who redeemed their mortgages early where it miscalculated the interest on the redemption balance. It is estimated that the total cost of the redress to customers will be approximately £2.35 million. The FSA has identified a number of serious failings by Swift which occurred between June 2007 and July 2009 in relation to its arrears fees and charges and in its dealings with customers in arrears. Swift applied certain charges to its customers’ accounts that were in arrears which were excessive in that they did not reflect a reasonable estimate of the cost of administering an account in arrears. These were: - Arrears management fee: a monthly management fee applied to a customer in arrears; - Default notice fee: a default fee applied when a customer’s account fell into arrears; - Unpaid mortgage payment fee: applied when a cheque, direct debit or standing order was not honoured by a customer’s bank; and - Litigation fees: fees applied to customers’ accounts when Swift started legal proceedings. In addition: - Swift applied excessive early repayment charges to the redemption figures of customers who were, or had been, in arrears; - Swift failed to send all its customers in arrears certain prescribed documents, providing information on the options available to them; - Swift focussed on the collection of arrears without always proactively engaging with customers to establish an appropriate “Arrangement To Pay” based on their individual circumstances; and - Swift also failed to have adequate systems and controls in place to deal with early redemptions which resulted in some customers who redeemed their mortgages overpaying. The FSA considers that Swift’s failings are serious as under FSA rules, a firm must consider the interests of its customers and ensure that they are treated fairly. Swift’s failings continued over a significant period of time and impacted about 2,500 customers. As Swift specialised in the sub-prime sector, a number of customers who already had an adverse credit status were put at further risk of financial detriment. Tracey McDermott, acting director of enforcement and financial crime, said: “Firms must ensure they treat their customers fairly. Many of Swift’s customers were already in a vulnerable position, having fallen into arrears on their mortgage payments, and they could ill afford excessive and unfair fees. "The FSA will take robust action to ensure not only that firms are fined for such failings but also that they identify and compensate customers who have been disadvantaged. The costs of doing so are often much more than the fine.” Swift reported its failings in relation to early repayment charges and redemption balances to the FSA. Swift also agreed to settle at an early stage and therefore qualified for a 30% reduction in penalty. Were it not for this discount the FSA would have imposed a financial penalty of £900,000.

I have finally given up and sold my house to avoid more swift "penalties". Although I won a time order they still crippled me with about 4K charges. Can you or anyone tell me if there is any milage in chasing them after I am away from them. I sent them a good letter requesting a number of things but they have ignored it. I can't remeber how to open a new " thread" so apologise for this intrusion Kind Regards JOES MY LANDLORD

Hi, I've been trying to get some sense out of SWIFT regarding my secured loan. I've put my house on the market [4 months ago] without any luck yet. The only reason I've done this is to clear the Swift loan as I am shortly [Jan] only going to be able to pay £100 per month instead of £228. I wrote a letter of complaint to Alan Loblack who sent me a hard lines letter. When I asked for more details I have been ignored [2 months] and a chaser [both sent recorded] has also been ignored. Does anyone know what is likely to happen when I start sending half payment? Merry XXXXX Xmas

I can scan them and send but to where? [email protected]

I am trying to folow this thread. At the moment I have just found out that as a result of Swift Advances reporting to equifax and neglecting to mention the time order and reduction I won against them in 2009 feb my wife's perfect credit rating is now so bad we have had to put our house on the market to get out of the swift loan. The time order proved an expensive route even though I won because they charged me via Eastern plus they hired lawyers which I was forced to pay for. Something like £3500 was added plus the credit rating problem makes me feel desperate. At 69 I could do without this. I have witness statements signed by Mark White if anyone's interested

I got in bother in sept 08. After contacting Swift for help which they refused I applied and won a time order. I then went back to get the interest rate reduced with success. however I needed a default letter to proceed with the time order which meant i had to miss 2 payments. Swift charged for latters etc then stuck £250 on for involving their "debt counciling company" [actually swift]. Two years later I find they have wrongly stated the situation to Equifax and as a result my wifes credit is destroyed. I am in the position of selling our house as the incorrect equifax info has made it impossible for us to exist. I am looking to sue Swift and would appreciate any help. Similarly if anyone needs advise about time orders contact me.

I understand you had a case in dec but can't find the outcome. have you been poorly? Kind Regards joesmylandlord [colin]

I have been getting up to three calls a day from Barclays collections over a loan. I sent the formal letter re harrassement which they have acknowledged as received [verbally] and have "logged a complaint" but have insisted they are entitled and determined to continue calling until i settle. Is there anything elese I can do as the smartypants was positive he could call my mobile forever at any time??

Thanks Nightowl!!

Hi, 38D. I'm trying to open a new post about silent calls and can't work out how. This post might as well be doing something useful so can anyone remind me how?