Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[overdone]

Firstly overdone, you have stated in your letter that the charges are ' illegal ' - not so, as emmaf01 states, they are 'unlawful' subtle difference, but a difference non the less. Secondly, the OFT do not set the laws of this country, their guidelines are just that ' guidelines ' which one expects businesses to adhere to I admit. Thirdly, the OFT also do not intervene with charges it is the Financial Ombudsman in Canary Wharf (FOS), Lastly, Swift are not noted for responding to anything except in court when one poster had 6 of them turn up to convince the judge their charges were reasonable, another had an extremely expensive Consumer Credit Barrister turn up to defend Swift, so they answer little or nothing, take you to court and throw everything they've got at defending, so be careful. They won't roll over like the banks or some DCA's, you have to get them with critical FACT and that comes in the detail of their agreement documents, which as I have said before one needs to look at very closely and get checked by someone who knows what they are doing. Most are wrong as you have stated, but get it right, don't stab at it like using words such as 'illegal' they'll pounce on one tiny slip up.

 

Sarah

Dear Sarah,

All I want is my charges refunded, just over 1000 pounds. It seems I should have gone as a "hardship case" to The Financial Ombudsman. Yes?

[emmaf01]

You can just take them to court- a loan account case would not be stayed in the same way as a bank account claim, I think.

[andrew1]

You can just take them to court- a loan account case would not be stayed in the same way as a bank account claim, I think.

 

What case or laws would you use as your basis for Claim emmaf01 ?

 

 

Overdone, my apologies for sounding a bit hard, when I read it I thought "oooh! that was tough" Didn't mean to be. If you have an agreement though get it checked none the less because an awful lot of their agreements are or could be deemed unenforceable, but just the charges? You could do worse than a hardship case or FOS although the FOS backlog is growing I believe. Possibly 6 month wait.

 

Sarah

[emmaf01]

I would have thought if they were charging £23 for each phone call or letter that would be disproportionate to the costs incurred by these actions. I would be heading towards a standard UTCCR 1999 action, but then I look at every charge now and query it.

 

But I see the charges as an action after any issues about the validity the agreement are sorted, if you see what I mean.

[andrew1]

I would have thought if they were charging £23 for each phone call or letter that would be disproportionate to the costs incurred by these actions. I would be heading towards a standard UTCCR 1999 action, but then I look at every charge now and query it.

 

But I see the charges as an action after any issues about the validity the agreement are sorted, if you see what I mean.

 

Trouble is emmaf01, Swift brought six people into court to justify their charges and got away with it, showing the judge they were a smaller company and had higher unit costs and so on, I'll try and find the thread it was shown on, they really laid it on thick by all accounts and that's what you are up against with companies like Swift who are as sharp as razors when it comes to defending despite the apparent rip off we feel they are getting away with, the fact that these are clearly automatic penalties you may well have a fight on your hands which may prove expensive to go through, not that I wish to try to put people off from claiming ( I'd be chucked off the site if I did )

 

 

Sarah

[Sparkie1723]

Hullo everyone ,

I would just like to put forward what I believe would be a strong argument against Swifts claim about their charges and their costs are higher because they are a smaller company than Banks …..they are predominately owned by The Alchemy group.

These people are Venture Capitalists …who operate for huge profits, Swifts charges are so extortionate not because they are a small company their charges are inflated because the Venture Capitalists want a much profit from EVERYTHING they do...... so most of the charges are absolute pure profit …not actual costs….just my argument

 

sparkie

[andrew1]

You'll have to try and be a bit more precise than that for a judge though Sparkie, but I agree with you.

[Sparkie1723]

You'll have to try and be a bit more precise than that for a judge though Sparkie, but I agree with you.

 

 

Hi Andrew,

I'm not in direct conflict with Swift myself...I only put that forward for others to consider building their argument on for claiming charges back, by the way have you scanned your agreement???

 

sparkie

[andrew1]

Hi Andrew,

I'm not in direct conflict with Swift myself...I only put that forward for others to consider building their argument on for claiming charges back, by the way have you scanned your agreement???

 

sparkie

 

I'm not either Sparkie, just doing what you are in questioning all this, I'll get the other persons agreement sent over once their scanner is fixed.

 

Thanks.

 

Sarah

[overdone]

Had this letter from Bob the Bankbuster.

 

Dear Overdone,

Unfortunately, your potential claim is more complicated than most of the banks current account penalty charges claims:

 

Whilst I think you probably have a strong case for claiming back some of the default charges, it would be difficult to isolate those from what may be legally defensible charges (Even though they are still probably immorally high). I feel it would be too complicated for me to be able to offer any realistic hope of a positive result in a reasonable time. Therefor, reluctantly, I have to decline the request to take this case on.

 

Sorry if you are disapionted with this.

 

You might want to try your local Citizens Advice Bureau to see what they might be able to do. I had an enquiry about helping some one with a problem with swift loans last year. I suspect that Swift Advances may be the same firm-so they probably have a bit of form in this sort of thing.

best wishes

Bob Egerton

 

I posted this at the beginning of the thread. Bob the Bankbuster has contributed to this site so I believe. Hence my hesitation in going to court and think F O S a better route.

[42man]

This cagger had a positive result although she was silenced !!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgage-companies/46576-me-swift.html

[determindator]

Swift are wasting Court time to keep defending the same complaint over and over again. I'm starting off with a PPI claim in that forum for starters. Then it is the charges and unfair contract agreement. Can we not have one big mother of cases against Swift which would benefit all of their borrowers. What happens if Swift become insolvent? Does anyone know about their financial standing? I presume we all know who their bankers are, if not I do. I think their arrogant response reflects their attitude to their borrowers when I read Me V Swift. It said in substance that high charges are made (and obviously this covers all the extortion) because it is sub prime lenders borrowing and it pays for the risk. That comes across nicer than their quote on the thread. An example could be made of Swift in this economic climate to show the type of lenders who are allowed to operate in this country. What would happen if we managed to get their licence revoked?

[determindator]

Is it poss to get Court claim refs for anyone who won against Swift or got them to back down?

[determindator]

Will I be put in a concrete boot and never seen again:eek:

 

Only joking just seemed an appropriate one for these gaaangsterrrs!

[determindator]

I feel a gangster rap coming on! (and swift's name is in it:D)

[determindator]

Well, well, well!

 

Did anyone watch Andrew Marr's Sunday morn show 9am today. Guess who was on the couch with Yvette Cooper MP (Chief sec to the treasury) Jon Moulton of the Alchemy group!! His position on the show was a 'private equity boss.' I wonder what he would have said if questioned about his connections with Swift, a prime example of what caused the problem in the first place. Selling unsuitable products. I will be making enquires about his appearance on the show in the sense why Alchemy as a particular choice, as he contributed nothing. Glad to say, in my opinion, YP MP didn't make a connection with him, she drew back to her corner of the couch.

[Sparkie1723]

Some heartening news for everyone, I can confirm and assure folks that Swift are subject to an official investgation by the OFT.........can't say too much but take it as fact.

So make more complaints to the OFT everyone

 

sparkie

[andrew1]

Sparkie, that's good news, OFT will not take up individual complaints and deal with them, so for the benefit of the masses, what are they to complain about and how does that help their personal causes? I know several people have different kinds of issues with Swift, charges for one being too high, Unenforceable agreements (If people only knew what to look for) and various other things, but complaining to the OFT benefit everyone do you think?

[overdone]

Some heartening news for everyone, I can confirm and assure folks that Swift are subject to an official investgation by the OFT.........can't say too much but take it as fact.

So make more complaints to the OFT everyone

 

sparkie

OFT still have not even acknowledged my complaint. I have a feeling when a company the size of swift are challenged they will not go to the wall easily. They have already demonstrated an ability to sway judges with barristers and will employ the same if OFT try to do anything serious. They will only get, I feel, their standing reaffirmed. They will not compromise easily.

[Sparkie1723]

The more who complain...the more the OFT have got on them....I just know that an investigation is under way and has been since January this year.......The OFT have now got the UnFair Commercial Practices to use...so far they have used them twice this year....they have to gather REAL evidence as these Regs carry prison sentences....so even if you have complained ....complain again it will benefit EVERYONE.

By the way overdone Swift class themselves as a "small" company.

 

sparkie

[determindator]

I believe this is magnificent news and I feel all has not been in vain. I will send in a complaint as I'm sure everything helps. I do hope we can see the start of this financial sector being regulated. Why charge higher interest than mortgage rates for borrowing less money, with security. Absolutely absurd. Swift are swift to get the repossessions going by far the worst I've seen in the mortgage and secured loan sector. It's just because they can. Preying on the vulnerable like vultures. I will also mention the tiny writing on the agreement and terms and conditions. This is all to make the transaction harder to understand. There is no reason why the contract cannot be made easier to read.

 

Thanks again for the news Sparkie.

[overdone]

By the way overdone Swift class themselves as a "small" company.

 

sparkie

What difference does that make to the overall picture?

[42man]

Excellent Sparkie.....ty for the update....please keep us posted...

[Sparkie1723]

A "smaller" company is more likely to get a "smack in the teeth" from the OFT than say ...Lloyds TSB or Nationwide or others ....if you folllow what Im saying.

 

sparkie

[1stlifeline]

Thanks to 42 man for pointing me in the direction of this thread. I am having problems with Swift. They applied for repossession about a year ago which was suspended providing we now keep up the paymants. Wehave done this but this month the payment is late, I have rung Swift and they said they would accept payment late this once! Of course they will, its more money for them in charges!

 

The thing is we have an offer on our haouse and so will be paying them off soon. However the amount they want back takes almost all the collateral in our property. I fully intend to start reclaiming and am about to do a SAR request. BUT- we havnt informed them we are selling and assume our solicitor wil just pay them off when the sale goes through just as he will with the morgage company. Because of this I dont want to rock the boat until the sale goes through just in case we hit a problem.

Will I still be able to reclaim charges evn if we have settled the loan?