This might be a little painful, but is there anyone out there who has been repossessed by Swift Advances who could provide some folks over on the Swift forum with the account summary of their settlement figures? We are building a full picture of what they do to try to stop them both charging excessive fees and settlement charges, try and stop this relentless repossession program they have and to build a portfolio for the OFT and FSA. I appreciate that having been repossessed this may be difficult to revisit, but it would be helping others who face the same prospect and these people need to be stopped. PM me if you can help or have any of the old papers and accounts etc. This is our thread if you wish to add anything http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/swift-advances/153362-swift-advances-secured-loan.html Thank you, everything will remain confidential. Smarterchick

Blimey Sparkie, you been on the pop? great bit of journalism if you ask me...(which you won't of course!) SC

Hi Marky, you realise that Swift originally said its rates went up according to the bank base rate, then it was changed to the Libor rate, then in court they say it's as a result of its lending costs and shareholder pressure, but officially it's Libor. All that when they borrow money from their bankers at fixed capped rates!

Nothing to do with spml, but a simialr situation, what happens if the loan company and the spv Ltd co. have the same directors? What slant would anyone have on that? I'm on a fishing exercise....

I know this might be a little painful for someone who had this happen to revisit it, but if anyone has been repo'd by Swift could they let me know? Thanks SC -

You tell us! It doesn't make sense, the Directors are the same in Swift and in Kestrel, their accounts show the sold the loans and Kestrel Aquired them, it smacks of securitisation as Sparkie says " they are a none trading company" which would imply securitisation - don't know enough about this to argue it though.

It can't be. You are talking about it being securitised and Webster and Payne have both confirmed in writing Swift do not securitise. They'd hardly lie now would they being CEO and the firms solicitor! SC

I don't think the CML - or Council of Mortgage Lenders figures actually include sub-prime repossessions either,so if I'm right the numbers are far greater than that figure they quote by tens of thousands.

DUDES??? Botted means CagBotted, which effectively is a sensorship or the editing of our posts because the site may have been threatened with legal action and possible site close down because the post contains 'risky' words such as 'fraud' 'thief' 'Liar' 'conspiracy' or any other potentially liabelous word attributed to an individual or organisation which might jeapordise the whole forum. We do have to respect the site and the fact it could be sued, so we have to be careful what we post. That's why we only ever post the truth so as not to upset the balance on this level playing field between finance companies and consumers...

Well, how interesting. Firstly, for my 'bots' can I say to AlanfromDerby how sorry I am for taking up so much of your time having to edit all these posts - that's not what one likes to think you people in the site team are required to do. However, this just demonstrates quite clearly that Swift are just a little bit disturbed at the fact nerves are being touched and the fact that they have no doubt called in lawyers to attack the site as they don't like seeing a mirror image of what they do on a public forum. The trouble is, from what I know of what is posted ALL of it can be substantaited with documentation or recorded telephone calls so if ever the site was threatened with action please feel free to come to we on this thread and we will provide you with all the documentary evidence you need to support what is said. That, my friends in Brentford is something you can do nothing whatsoever to repudiate no matter what threats you make to the site. What you can't handle is the fact that those who you previously took to the cleaners as sole account holders who knew nothing have been suceeded by a whole load of people who discuss the information you peddle to the courts, share that information, compare that information and expose that information for what it is. To counter it, you cry wolf. Tough. and for you it's going to get tougher. You can bott away all you like Alan, it will make no difference to the final outcome. Save the reputation of the forum, but many a campaign has lead to nerves endings getting extremely raw and that's because it's getting too hot in the Brentford kitchen. SC

Just been botted for something on here - wofor??

My apologies to a degree, maybe it is a bit strong, but I was looking at my grandfathers tag over the weekend and he died in the trenches at 34 yrs of age fighting for our country...when I watch these politicians giving away most of what he was fighting for and these laws which are there in parliament being ignored by the judiciary and the companies too..it kinda gets the writing joined-up. That's why these so called official watchdogs need to get their acts together and make themselves felt where it hurts, just like some stupid camera stuck up a pole can make us feel for rolling our cars over a couple of yellow lines and sending us a massive fine for doing so. That works quick enough and woe betide us if we don't cough up on time.These companies take months to repsond if they respond at all..it's all a nonsense.

...and he's (Zion) trying to prove what exactly I wonder? I had this quoted to me by a finance company trying to pull the wool over my eyes too..they try anything. The only thing about this is ' is it relevavnt to your own case?' If not, ignore it or tell the person trying to use it to naff off and go find more appropriate legislation. As mentioned in the article " At a time when borrowers are becoming ever more aware of their statutory rights and are increasingly willing to challenge the enforceability of loan agreements," ( the completion of that sentence about it being good news for lenders I fail to agree with other than it clarifies certain points in procedure) it just goes to show that lenders are beginning to realise that they cannot hide behind a raft of small print to intimidate the layman and woman into thinking they are always right. It is my opinion that it shouldn't be left to consumers to have to analyse these agreements as is happeneing to a frightening degree on this forum alone only to be treated like parhiahs. We should not have to be challenging these companies in court, the officialese of the finance industry who are supposed to make sure we get a fair deal should step in with might and force to ensure these companies abide by the law, put their hands up and admit wrong doing and stop this massive pounding of innocent people by these companies frightened they might have to write-off a loan because they couldn't be bothered to employ the right legal people to set their agreements up within the legal framework they are obliged to abvide by. We are but a drop in the ocean on CAG compared by all those people who have been stripped of their assets, ground through the emotional turmoil of financial ruin when these companies have absolutely NO right to do it and who have no access or time or inclination to find the support on here - THAT's what P**ses me off! So Zion if you are a troll, I hope you learn something from other peoples situations on here and realise that most of us are mere laypeople trying, in the face of all adversity, to find the rights which many people died to get these to statute, and save what little left they have using the law which is supposed to protect them, but of which they know little about. The companies peddling this tripe have both the money and the legal teams to make sure they get it right and have ballsed-up and again expect the unsuspecting to cough up for their mistakes. There, that's my Monday rant over. SC

That No.20 above looks rather incriminating too Sparkie...how can he say " All these costs were as a result of increase in costs of funds to Swift" when they borrowed at a fixed rate or are linked to Libor which was coming down? mmm??? I hope he's a dexterous with his answers as he is with his Witness Statements.

I just hope Swift staff are watching this and taking a live read of what is unfolding...hang your head in shame Swift...you will be wiped off the face of the business map....

He's on drugs :D

sparkle - 'f' Off

I'm gutted Sparkie, they must be feeling pretty smug with themselves matey, but there's fight in the old dogs yet. As pkelly said - (who is that guy? ) they can win over some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time and we ain't finished with them yet. If sparkle ever sets foot on this forum again there's gonna be blood spilt, creepy little git. Worms have got more dignity. Stick with it, we'll find a route, just as we have in other directions. Just because you didn't get heard by a judge who knows 'f' all about the real world doesn't mean there's any holes in your arguments, we've all been up against DJ's who are on some kind of mission and it doesn't help being a LIP - that's roulette matey, bloody roulette - Russian roulette at that. We'll keep working those arguments and one of us will find a way through. You have NOTHING to apologise for on here my friend, NOTHING at all, so don't even go there.. SC

That's me told !

The charges register contains identifying particulars of registered mortgages and notice of other financial burdens secured on the property (but does not disclose details of the amounts of money involved). It also gives notice of other rights and interests to which the property is subject such as leases, rights of way or covenants restricting the use of the property. This is the charges register, my registry doesn't contain any figures whatsoever, but would the official register not contain it? Lets not get excited yet folks...

That's mean...no goodwishes from Sparkle72, shame on them...

Good luck young man and make sure that leprecaun doesn't keep you up half the night you need your beauty sleep tonight just in case MW turns up with his nervous twitch! (Falkowski that is! )

There was this bloke I spoke to about 2 hours ago who said he was getting an early night tonight....he must have gone off to sleep! Maybe he's been practicing the monkey dance for his court appearance? Oh and Sparkle, I do hope it wasn't anything we said that sent Robert and Jonny off with their P45's was it? We are taking bets as to which of the other two goes next, fancy a punt?

Hallo Mrs Kelly, I think were on size 2 font tonight...... Glad you're back Mrs! It's getting like humpty dumpty in Brentwood.. Oh, and it's goodnight from Her...

Silence is golden, but I'll do a jig and a song for you if you're lonely? There...