There are two arguments here then 1.Swift 1st Ltd must have sold your morgae to Swift Advances Plc which they can't because they are not FSA registered ...so that leaves .. 2..The possession order has been granted to the wrong company and must be absolutely unlawful and the Court has made a serious error in law and judgement and can be appealed against with absolute certainty. In my "obnoxious" opinion as usual:D:D:D sparkie

Refer them to Wilson v Hurstanger and explain to them that you will be presenting their letter to the Court because by saying what they have in that letter makes it practically open and shut that not only was any commission paid secret ..... but now they are attempting to conceal it and that is an offence under the New Fraud Act 2006. You can also refer them to the later case wherein MBNA were ruled to have received a scret commission I can find you that case although it was CC judgement it will show them you mean business The Court will see that you do have a very subsatntial case to pursue. IMO they have placed themselves in a very vulnerable position. sparkie

Busterg am I right in saying that you have a Swft 1st/First Ltd mortgage but your court papers say you were sued by Swift Advances Plc...if so the wrong company sued you and that is cancellable if you make an application to the Court. sparkie sparkie

You were lucky sweetjane ...we had 3 interest rate hikes in 2007 .. June .August ..October..post exact amount later sparkie

I think you will also find Swift 1st/First Ltd are linked to the LIBOR rate and not the BOE rate. sparkie

Under normal circumstances a company can use as many names as they like but when it comes to consumer credit business you must have your own license or be named on the licence of someoine else you work closely with represent or act for under the name you are trading/acting under ...fact straight from the OFT if you do not you are committing a criminal offence. Example of our friends operating as ......SWIFT ADVANCES......... that trading name/style carries out consumer credit related business for and on behalf of SWIFT ADVANCES PLC........Swift Advances name is not on their license and therefore carrying out unlicensed criminal activities. sparkie

Here we are again taken from the site posted by lookinforinfo If your loan is with Swift Advances, this usually means we hold a second or subsequent secured loan They refer to Swift and the Swift Group and Swift 1st but not Swift Advances Plc. And as we have found out neither Swift Advances Swift or the Swift Group have a license to carry on Consumer Credit related business. sparkie

Hi sweetjane .more than a little slap dash .some of their accounts are not signed and some are not dated ..these are all foul of the Companies Act..their auditors KPMG are not what one would call "an untarnished firm of accountants" by far sparkie

2 0f our other"Field Agents" "Eleanor Rigby 00-00" and "Murphy "O" Murphy 0-0 " have paid personal visits to Barclays Bank HQ's with various documents debentures accounts etc etc and Barclays have allocated a special reference Number issued by their own fraud investigation dept to supply any further info, and that it will by pass all other departments and go direct to that team who have now been allocated to investigate what is happening with their mortgages with The SWIFT GROUP!!!?????? and the Kestrel Companies We now await developements from this angle now.. We had to give "Murphy "O" Murphy" single agent numbers because he couldnt count past two zeros:D sparkie

Good meeting with Counsel. He has taken a list of documents (13) I have asked SWift Advances Plc & Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd..........going to get an expert on securitisation equitable transfer and "phoenixing" to look into the sale of our particular loan to the Kestrel company concerned, want all this for our appeal to the appeal Court (3 Judges). Looks very promising................... but fingers crossed!! sparkie

Tried to post a computer secreen shot from our brokers ( but it comes out too small to redd on the forum) but it shows that shows that they did not approach any other lender but went stright to Swift Advances Plc...........would that not be called that a conflict of interest, and a breach of fiduciary duty??.....especially when they got paid brokers fees by us AND commission by Swift Advances Plc. There is a box that is headed ....Other lenders approached....Its BLANK. Have another 2hr appointment with Counsel at 2 o'clock today...he is going for secret commission (amongst other things) Mr White said they do not pay commission ....Mr Webster ( after Mark Whte had declered this in court )said they do from time to time but not on our particular agreement. I have the evidence form Promise Finance that they did and a big sum at that sparkie

Debbbbsy's quote "lies on top of lies". That is one statement I agree with 1000% and I've got the proof of about 11 of them. sparkie

Just a quickie folks ..If you can prove 100% either Swift Advances Plc or Swift 1st (First) Ltd whichever they say is their correct title ( they have used both at sometime or other) paid a "SECRET COMMISSION" of more than the documentary fee that Mr White states they ONLY pay.......... it will & DOES render the agreement unenforceable............and that is good breakfast food for thought;) sparkie

There is "waffling" and there is "woffling"......."woffling" is worse than "waffling"....only us old soldiers know the difference we had a lot of woffle thrown at us in the forces..............and don't mention violins:D:D:D:D:p sparkie

Section 39 says (1) A person who engages in any activities for whch a licence is required when he has not a licence ee under a licence covering thise activities commits an offence. (2) A licencee under a standard licence who carries on business under a name not specified in the licence commits an offence. The standard license allows an individual or a partnership to trade under those names listed on the license, and is divided into seven categories: Category A: Consumer credit business Category B: Consumer hire business Category C: Credit brokerage Category D: Debt-adjusting and counselling Category E: Debt-collecting Category F: Credit reference agencies (3) A person who fails to give the Director or a licensee notice under section 36 within the period specified commits an offence ( specified period is 21 days) ( Section 36 is very pertinent to Swift Advances Plc) Section 40 is too long to type I'll have copy this from the act on next post sparkie

Hi Gallahad, I am inclined to agree with that 100% and I form that opinion from the sections of the CCA that goverens licences, ............Thanks ...I'm back "punching fresh air" again mate .....What can be a more legal document than your Credit Agreement?? BY the way what is the correct spelling of licence(s) / license(s)???? sparkie

Take no notice of Andrews woffling folks .........if you came in covered in snow and said its snowing he would HAVE to go out tomake sure:D:D:D "So, lets get back to Swift - same company, You all call them Swift or Swift Advances, how many of you know what is behind all these trading styles? How many of you know if the one you dealt with has a license to use the trading style and how many of you know what to do about it?" DECEPTION The OFT have aready stated and the CCA Act says it all sections 34 to 40 that any trading stayle or name MUST be on the OFT register and hold a license if it is to carry out ANY CCA related business ...but I also want the OFT to say it again TO ME just as that extra confirmation ...don't need it really the CCA says it all. sparkie

HI Doc nice to be back. You have hit the nail on the head ."tooooooo late" offences have ben committed .......you cant drive a car without a license then tell the cppers that you will get one tomorrow sparkie

I hope everyone realises the full consequences and implications of the answer back from the OFT. If the answer is yes , that is correct.....anyone and everyone that has had correspondence with the names of any of these trading names and styles can claim that they were issued whilst a criminal offence was being committed and the law says no -one should gain from a criminal act being committed.........lets just wait and see.......If say.... you have a letter with the heading Swift Advances and they have demanded money from you then Swift Advances Plc have committe a criminal offence using a trading name/style that has not got a license to carry out CCA related business.......if you have a letter headed the Swift Group demanding money then that also is another criminal offence that has been committed by Swift Advances Plc using a trading name that is not licensed again for the same reason. The biggest one is at the bottom of some CCA agreements is the trading style of "Swift Advances"............at the bottom of mineis the logo and trading style name of "Swift". This will mean that they have been arranged by these two trading style names which are not licensed to carry out CCA business activities. Comments ....thoughts ...notes etc etc welcomed even disagreements sparkie

Everyone shuld continue their pressure on the OFT and the FSA......... I am just sending this e-mail off to Mr David Blocksidge Dear Mr Blocksidge Could you or your office please confirm once and for all that it is a legal requirement for the following trading styles and names that are being used by Swift Advances Plc are names and styles to be shown on their license issued by the OFT to conduct Consumer Credit Business.. 1.…“Swift Advances” 2.…“The Swift Group” 3.…“Eastern Counselling Services” 4.…“Swift Group Legal Services” 5.… “Swift” And can you confirm that Swift First Limited can be known as the same company as Swift 1st Limited as far as licensing reference is concerned. I also ask you to refer to the last e-mail I sent to you regarding the internet advertisement put out by Swift Advances Plc/ Swift Group????, and ask you to look closely at the bottom information notes....and make a note of what it says ; SWIFT GROUP, ARCADIA HOUSE, WARLEY HILL BUSINESS PARK, BRENTWOOD, ESSEX CM13 3BE TELEPHONE: 0845 0748800 FAX: 0845 0729009 This is not a consumer advertisement and is not to be shown to existing or potential customers. Yours sincerely

Maybe just maybe ........they have at last decided to talk to each other???? If anyone can think of where else this can be posted for the benefit of all members please copy and post it sparkie sparkie The City watchdog announced plans to launch a new committee to spot problems in the financial services sector before they affect large numbers of consumers. The Financial Services Authority is proposing joining forces with the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Ombudsman Service to form a new consumer protection committee. The committee would look out for sales practices or product designs which have the potential to turn into mis-selling scandals or create widespread consumer detriment. The move would update the current "wider implications process" under which the three groups come together to tackle financial issues that fall into all of their areas and are affecting a large number of consumers. But the process is often only triggered once a significant number of people have already been affected. The wider implications process has recently been used to look at issues including unauthorised overdraft charges, the sale of payment protection insurance and the plight of policyholders in closed with-profits funds. Sheila Nicoll, FSA director of conduct policy, said: "The co-ordination committee is a clear indication of the intention and will of the authorities to work even more closely together to improve the experience of consumers, and to avoid problems happening in the first place." Ray Watson, OFT director of consumer credit, said: "Identifying and dealing with problems at an early stage is important for ensuring consumers do not suffer unnecessary harm from financial products. "We believe that the proposals for a new co-ordination committee and the focus on risk will improve our ability to deal with problems before they become widespread."

HI 42 man I think quite a few did miss this ...it was in his ruling Carey v HSBC Bank. sparkie

Have sent Mr Blocksidge a litle e-mail with the link about the SWIFT GROUP Dear Mr Blocksidge, I would ask you to view this internet link ......Powered by Google Docs it is an advert put out by "THE SWIFT GROUP" and a mortgage company First Mortgage Options. Brokers/AGENTS of Swift....... as you are aware there is no such entity in this country as The Swift Group..I have already made the real "Swift Group" in America aware that Swift Advances Plc are using their good name in the involvement in more than Irregular financial activities in this country. I trust that the OFT will bear this in mind also, that it states quite clearly that the Swift Group is a trading name of Swift Advances plc, which again as pointed out before, is not a name on Swift Advances Plc CCA license issued by your office sparkie

It looks as f they are trying to show that they are not who they say they are and are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of OFT.....and I wonder if the OFT will in fact "chicken out" from taking the action they should ....take their license off them. It looks as if the OFT may be convinced that Swift will tell them they will behave...what about all the people who have lost their homes by the criminal activities of Swift Advances Plc and Swift 1st Ltd....I just wonder that's all sparkie

We should all send Mr Blocksidge the link to this Advert and Mr Webster....with special note that The Swift Group is another trading style of Swift Advances Plc.........................NOT LICENSED TO CARRY OUT CCA BUSINESS sparkie