Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


overdone
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

HI Blackie,

 

With reference to your post on assignment.......we have to be clear that Swifts accounts stated that they "SOLD" these accounts ( mine was one them) they did not assign them and I have a letter from John Webster stating that actual fact ..................that it was not a "legal assignment" Swift retained all Title rights.............that is just pure wind.......Swift received a LORRA LORRA LORRA money for the sale of these mortgages ......you can't sell your house and still say you own the garage unless it is in the deal..........Mr Webster then went on to contradict himsef again by saying it was purely an internal accounting transaction..

 

The man is in trouble.

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Someone sent me a Swift agreement with 4 different interest rates on it .the copy I have is a bit blurred .and I'm not sure who sent it to me , can the member who has this agreement send me another copy .as it will be another Nail in Mr Whites box

 

It's O.K. Folks it was sweetjane and I have found the clear copy ...panic over

Mark White said this on the stand

 

“ That it was not the practice for a credit agreement to show or attempt to show a series of different interest rates which could be said to be applicable” and went on to say that it would have been misleading to show or attempt to show such in the instant case”.

 

Mine showed 1 rate only ...I have another that shows 2, and now have another that shows 4 ......ALL Swift agreements

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Complaint form regarding Mr Falkowski's part in my case and dispute has gone off to the Bar Standards Board along with copies of all docs .

 

Does not cost anything to complain and stand up for justice....this is going to take up a lot of Mr Falkowski's time defending my complaint.

 

He is trying to pass the book" on to Swift legal............I received this e-mail from Mathew Payne

 

Mr Falkowski's clerks have forwarded to us the emails that you have sent to rthem recently. As Mr Falkowski has acted for Swift in its case against you, he is not at liberty to discuss with you bany issues in your case. All communications about the case should be made through Swift Group Legal Services.

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Matthew Payne

 

Notice the spelling!!??

 

I sent this reply............Because Mr Falkowksi has a code of conduct to comply with

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Payne.

 

This therefore, will have to be an issue between ourselves Mr Falkowski, and the Bar Council Standards Board to whom a complaint will be made tonight.

 

Yours sincerely

sparkie

 

The above e-mail has been read 5 times

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is another complaint to the Legal Complaints Service about MR Payne in the process regarding the Witness statement of truth he made attached to the initial claim Form ;)

 

This complaint will surround this e-mail I sent Mr Payne a while ago

 

Dear Mr Payne,

 

Do you recall completing the court documents appertaining to the application by Swift for possession of our home?

 

I wish to draw your attention to that Court Document N5 (Claim form for possession of property) which show that Swift Advances Plc are the Claimant.

 

You state on this document that you are the solicitor for the Claimant.

Being in that position you will have been completely aware that on the 18th April 2007 Swift sold our loan and “lock stock and barrel” to Kestrel Loans No1 Ltd.

 

This means that Kestrel No 1 paid off our liability to Swift, you in the position of solicitor for Swift would have most likely been involved in the actual sale.

 

Therefore you would know that Swift Advances Plc had no right to be stated as the Claimant on the Court documents you signed along with a statement of truth.

 

I submit to you that you deliberately misled the court on this extremely important fact.

 

In the Particulars of Claim in support of this application you state the interest rate at the start of the mortgage was 10.30% per annum.

 

This is also incorrect as the agreement states it was 9.84% and Mr Whites Statement of Truth ( which you more than likely gave assistance to in making) also confirms that the rate of interest at the start of the loan was 9.84%.

 

I also draw your attention to 9 (b) on this particulars of claim, you have crossed out this sub paragraph.

Why did you not give notice to our First Charge mortgage holder Abbey Plc who have a registered interest in the property. Why did you cross it out?

 

Abbey still do not know that any proceedings were taken.

 

I refer you to the fact that you being a solicitor will know the consequences of making such inaccurate statements contained in a signed statement of truth.

 

In any reinstatement of proceedings being considered being taken against us, I will be referring all this to the court and ask that you attend to answer these questions and points

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr P might try and tell you he wasn't in the employ of Swift Group Legal Services at that time Sparkie, but he was at J.W.Godfrey who were Swifts in-house solicitors - he was promoted when it became SGLS at the end of 2007....baaad move! :p

SC

 

 

As he filled all this in in July 2008 he can't try and use that ploy........ he can't be that daft ...........trying to mislead the Court again:);-)

 

In any event he signed it on belalf of Swift.

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's O.K. Folks it was sweetjane and I have found the clear copy ...panic over"

 

Glad you found it Sparkie - just logged on. Always seemed like they were charging different interest rates for different parts of the loan, then adding them together, dividing by the number of parts, taking away the first number you thought of and hey presto, let's use that as an APR!!! Now we learn they're charging interest on the charges . . . How do we begin to calculate the interest on the charges to reclaim? Before adding the 8% compensation of course? :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's O.K. Folks it was sweetjane and I have found the clear copy ...panic over"

 

Glad you found it Sparkie - just logged on. Always seemed like they were charging different interest rates for different parts of the loan, then adding them together, dividing by the number of parts, taking away the first number you thought of and hey presto, let's use that as an APR!!! Now we learn they're charging interest on the charges . . . How do we begin to calculate the interest on the charges to reclaim? Before adding the 8% compensation of course? :confused:

 

 

IMO you would charge the correct APR interest to the total charges that you are claiming back then add the 8% to that total...you would claim that correct APR because it is incorrectly stated on your agreement.

 

If you can follow that sweetjane?

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweetjane .

 

The APR shown on your agreemnt is 15.8% this is incorrect it should be shown as 18.2%......this makes your agreemnt unenforceable from the start yours was/is a Regulated one...........you should claim your charges back at this rate I don't think the court would allow you to add the county court rate on top of this .but this compounds your interest rate so I would do this.

sparkie

 

Each monthly charge add interest @1.57% and so on and so on

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparkie can you check my agreement if i send it now? P.s count me in for the big hit!!!

 

No problem mate .but remember I am not legally trained .I'm an auto eliectrician and any views are just my own ...but will help anyone if they ask if I can ....I will do my uttermost.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Sparkie spoke to my friend who is willing to have a look at the evidence you have. He presumes you will be LIP (I think that is what he said). Because the case is the county court, will you be asking for an adjournment and requesting it go to High Court. Can you send me your draft in word please , this way I can get it emailed to him today. I have pm you with some advice from him

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

Just a quick post aimed at the Swift people perusing these comments.

 

You have reduced your fees in an attempt to look reasonable and fair, which is probably too little too late however, but what about taking the next step and reducing your interest rates?

 

3 or 4% should do the trick?

 

It might get some of us off your back?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Too little too late. Of course in court they will profess to be not waiting for court ruling like GMAC, of course they are law abiding people, who would never flout the protocols. Let's not be fooled people, there is too much going on at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Had a very interesting letter from an MP today. I hav been hounding every one I can in Parliament, emailing etc, sending them copies of Swifts interest rate increases, their charges etc. Can't say anymore at the moment, but things are actually starting to get going. Thank go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a very interesting letter from an MP today. I hav been hounding every one I can in Parliament, emailing etc, sending them copies of Swifts interest rate increases, their charges etc. Can't say anymore at the moment, but things are actually starting to get going. Thank go.

 

Hi Blackie,

 

Thanks for your PM,s will be in touch again ..things are getting going more than anyone can dream of .it will all be made clearer after the 24 this month in N. Ireland..BIG stuff is going on, Swift have been advised of some of it BUT they have the rest of 70% to be made aware of yet.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...