Sced, disagree cuz, for the same reason LMC & SPPL have no directors since October 14/15 2009. Also, if they had the intention of keeping them they would filed their latest accounts. As for Attia, she may well be replaced, but again they will have to file their accounts, and 2008 ARE under the 2006 CA and they are bankrupt. Think about it, where are they getting their 'servicing revenues' from, any payments go to the SPVs, lets see their 2009 accounts? There are NO directors(LMC/SPPL), so how can they instruct? 'shadow directors' are illegal, and the accounts you have posted say 'winding down'. This is over & done with, its up to us follow through... ..bring the pain. ITBG? end game.

LD, CH got a reply from PWC, that they want to keep LMC. So the notice was removed, but they will have to appoint a director asap, or another notice will go out to strike off. PWC just stalling...the insolvency investor notices on SPPL..same will occur with LMC. ITBG? end game.

..if you are with LMC or SPPL, the're dust anyway-no directors etc. if there are no officers in the co's, they have no authority to act upon you in court; correct otherwise... only SPML & PML, have attia, but...not for long...then justice for all? ..bring the pain. ITBG? end game.

..tick.tock.tick.tock...attia in the dock.. stand fast. ITBG? end game.

..at the very least, the starting point would be the correct understanding of a true sale(Supers). then the argument you believe that lender does not own your mortgage. whether the court agrees is another matter. point is if you have chosen that path, make sure you get your facts right and you believe them, and maybe you'll get lucky like IS IT ME? notwithstanding your other defences.. ITBG? end game.

..Ryde, i see why you have been unsuccessful in court to get disclosure, when in your above post, you still donot understand Supers argument. That the lender through a true sale, sells both the legal & equitable title to the SPV.end of. The SPV then does not, as is mandatory under s.27(3)&(4) LRA 2002, register its titles with the LR. ..'learn from wot Super left, and put it into effect..' ITGG! o.p.p.

..closing in...Attia WebCHeck - Select and Access Company Information ITBG? end game.

IATWB, if exposure is a risk, can you PM myself with the info you have? or someone else, you are 100% sure about, like SuperSleuth? ITBG? endgame.

..are WE all in agreement, that with all the recent postings, with all of Supers' posts, all the lenders accounts and spvs too...that the SPVs legally own ALL the Lehman mortgages. On the balance of the evidence, are there still any doubters, VETS or otherwise, that the SPVs legally own your mortgages? roll call.. ITBG? end game.

..for me the deletion of 'napiernuts', own posts, pretty much sums it up. It would not be the first time, it has deleted its own posts, having exposed itself. i leave you with IS IT ME?, still walking point. as for arguments in court, you are allowed several defences, whether it is who owns your mortgage, the Norgan rule, the pre-action protocols etc. They are all valid, the order you choose is upto you. i also think Ryde, may have something from the prospectus, the SPV as an unlicensed lender, with the subsequent validity of the contract-well worth looking into(OP). ITBG? end game.

..made it! back just- got outta hell...as suspected Nappynuts aka SHILL is talk'in a load of boll***s, and a confirmed Jackal. ITGG! rage against the jackals

thats all i wanted to know. goodbye. ITGG! escapes to earth

..so you are absolutely, unequivocally stating a chose in possession is transferable by delivery? ITGG!

answer? ITGG!

answer? are not the widgets a 'chose in possession' ITGG!

so, company A buys 1000 widgets, from Company B, A pays for them with due consideration, then does A then legally own the widgets by contract & consideration of payment to B? ITGG!

what if the MSA said: 'The Seller(lender)sells AN ABSOLUTE ASSIGNMENT WITH FULL TITLE GUARANTEE and the Buyer(SPV)accepts AN ABSOLUTE ASSIGNMENT WITH FULL TITLE GUARANTEE' would that be a legitimate transfer of the legal title within the MSA contract? ITGG!

..gosh its hot in here. So as an LIP, whats wrong asking under 31.6(b)ii, obvious? ITGG!

..this thread is a jackal FREE zone, so we shall continue on your 'Mortgage Sale Agreements - Disclosure' thread. ITGG! going to hell

..in deference to LD, exfiltrate. ITGG! respect tha vets

..the jackal from the Omen, is who let WUF out. ITGG! buffy

..WUF, is the Jackal from the Omen. ITGG! ms.constantine

..WUF is a JACKAL. ITGG! destroyer of jackals

..WUF..GFYS. ITGG! cyborg

..eh? WUF ITGG! bionic