Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[jansus]

Sparkie- reference your earlier post - if the arrears were cleared I believe it would give you a reprieve of time.But as they have a suspended possesion order as soon as you did not pay your normal MP you would be back in court. As this is a secured loan I am not sure if the arrears protocol applies but if it does then you may still have the right to put the house on the market for sale and then remain in the property during this time. Ell-enn is the best person to check about this.

 

If this is an option then I would implore you to explore this possibility because if they take the house back you will have lost all control of the sale price and what is left to come back to you after the debts /charges are repaid.

 

I agree with the earlier post - the judge was really only dealing with the arrears position- the fact that you are putting the loan into dispute or have other allegations against the lender may not have been within his/her remit.

 

Please pm Ell-enn as she may be able to help you with the law regarding staying in the property whilst you try and sell it ( hopefully it wont come to that but it may give you some time)

[Sparkie1723]

Sparkie- reference your earlier post - if the arrears were cleared I believe it would give you a reprieve of time.But as they have a suspended possesion order as soon as you did not pay your normal MP you would be back in court. As this is a secured loan I am not sure if the arrears protocol applies but if it does then you may still have the right to put the house on the market for sale and then remain in the property during this time. Ell-enn is the best person to check about this.

 

If this is an option then I would implore you to explore this possibility because if they take the house back you will have lost all control of the sale price and what is left to come back to you after the debts /charges are repaid.

 

I agree with the earlier post - the judge was really only dealing with the arrears position- the fact that you are putting the loan into dispute or have other allegations against the lender may not have been within his/her remit.

 

Please pm Ell-enn as she may be able to help you with the law regarding staying in the property whilst you try and sell it ( hopefully it wont come to that but it may give you some time)

 

Hi Jansus

 

That is the whole of my argument they did not have a suspended possession order on the property it was nt dealt with no suspended order was ever put on by the Court...not at all .....they were awarded immediate 28 day possession just like that.

 

sparkie

[jansus]

sorry it is a long thread - but it would not be a suspended order unless there were proposals to repay the arrears or sell the house ,or I have seen cases where the loan was in dispute because of PPI query or the arrears figure was in dispute because charges were included.But in each case unless you are in a position to resume payments you are only buying time.

[Sparkie1723]

sorry it is a long thread - but it would not be a suspended order unless there were proposals to repay the arrears or sell the house ,or I have seen cases where the loan was in dispute because of PPI query or the arrears figure was in dispute because charges were included.But in each case unless you are in a position to resume payments you are only buying time.

 

 

NEVER EVEN GOT ASKED ABOUT ANY PROPOSALS BY EITHER SWIFT OR THE JUDGE

[jansus]

Did you have any proposals then - thats what you would normally complete in the N244 - if you have then Ell-enn is the expert in this area.

 

As far as i know you can appeal right up to and including the day of eviction.

 

Does the mortgage lender with the first charge know whats going on?

[Sparkie1723]

There was no N244.............. Iknow you could not have read this whole thread but a hearing took place on 18th Decemeber 2008 when I brought the arrears at that time up to date no possession part was heard In fact Mark White stated and confirmed in his witness statement for this hearing that ...that hearing proceeded on my part 20 counter claim alone.

 

On the 19th Dec Swift applied for possession of our propetry which was given it was as simple as that.... no can you do this.... can you pay that ....can you clear some or all of the arrears..... nothing ........just Possession order given immediate 28 days possession either pay it all or you are out.

 

Ps Do Abbey know about it NO .........I rang Abbey this morning and they know nothing about it ....not until I told them...they only knew that Swift have asked for a redemtion figure.

I asked if they could helpbut they said due top our age they could only add £20.000 to our mortgage which of course will not mosyt likely cover Swifts legal and other charges let alone the balance of our loan

Edited December 4, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[overdone]

I don't know if this is any good. In the merry cause of moving I have found my old Swift paying in book. The account number is missing though the Branch Sort code is there. Why did someone want this?

[paulwlton]

Sparkie, Another case where the legal elite ride roughshod over the layperson.

 

The judiciary, along with politicians and rapacious bankers will continue to take the pi** because they're all in the "comfort" zone and each others pockets.

 

PW

[Sparkie1723]

My biggest problem is My partner my better half and I say this sincerely.

 

She would commit suicide if our house is taken sold or what ever ...Please believe me I could handle it ................she will not be able to......she feels shame at not being able to pay them or .....get the finance to get us out of this possession problem for a few years ...i do not sya this lightly I know her ...i have known her since we were 15........we know we are not for much longer on this earth......BUT I think she deserves better .............and in this respect I must take ALL the blame for our predicament, even though the majority of this loan was spent on increasing the value of our home ....... now we know it was just for Swifts gain...........and after 70 odd years 55 of them working (except 12yrs in the army) we will leave our children nothing!

 

Might well as not been here on this earth.

 

I am so sorry for and to her I cannot describe it........she still cannot grasp the full impact yet.

 

BUt then again we are not the only ones and we certainly will not be the last

 

sparkie

Edited December 4, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

Good night everyone .I am soooo tired

 

sparkie

[Apollo18]

Hi Sparkie,

 

Keep your chin up mate.....Neither you nor the Mrs have anything to be ashamed about whatsoever!

 

Keep plugging away every day, and keep everyone here posted. I'm sure persistence will pay off in the end, and there's still the case with the lads in Northern Ireland on the 18th.....It may still work out in everyones favour.

 

Try and stay positive!

 

Apollo18

[jansus]

Just some random thoughts running through my mind - is there anyway your children could come on to the mortgage with you to enable you to re-mortgage with your first mortgagee?

 

After all as you say it will be in their interests in the long run.

 

Sorry if I am posting silly ideas - tell me to shut up if you want - I just want to help if I can.

 

Also did you see my thread about mis-selling of mortgages into retirement age.

 

I will post a link anyway.

 

sorry if have done it before - bit stressed myself at the moment so losing the plot.

 

dont worry about asking for any help.

 

there for but the grace of god go I.

[jansus]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/191026-were-you-mis-sold.html

[Sparkie1723]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/191026-were-you-mis-sold.html

 

Couldn't sleep.....so I'm still digging .....that will be very helpful I think jansus thank you very much..although I was still working when We applied for our loan we were 70 when we applied for it .......but I had to cut my work down it was getting too much in August 2008......... now I work about 10 to 15 hours a week ( I have to to make ends meet but they are not meeting because of this heavy loan to Swift .........thats getting a bit hard now. Thanks for that link

 

sparkie

[Smarterchick]

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....

[Sparkie1723]

I must give sweetjane a very special thank you I have thanked her privately ............but I must thank her specially publicly .....I will her tell you all why I won't because she may not wish me to ........ but it was/is very special, her pseudonym name of "sweetjane" suits her..no other way to describe her......so again sweetjane.

THANK YOU

XX

Sparkie & Partner

[Dougal16T]

The problem I face now I have got my head together is................. that now Swift have got a 28 day possession order..........It means that We have got to pay them the whole mortgage off including all their penalties etc etc.........they will not let us pay just the arrears of that I am absolutely certain ...because of the way and manner I have fought them......they will push for it all.

 

They also know that because of our age we will never get another loan to pay them off.

A fact that they never worry about because they have their sights set on your/our homes.

 

This is why they lend to people of our age (we were 70) when we applied for our loan.( vast majority spent on increasing the value of our home)

 

They saw our value at that time as £240.000 its now gone down like evryone elses to £ 220.000.

 

So I have to go after Mark White and is falsehoods in his statements of truth ..this time with a Barrister on an appeal

 

sparkie

 

Sparkie

 

What EXACTLY does your 28 day Order say? I had one made against me....kept the property BUT paid nothing!!

 

Please PM me and let me know - I MAY be able to help.

 

Cheers

 

Dougal

[Sparkie1723]

Hiya Daz,

 

are you O.k. mate?

[Sparkie1723]

This is a transcript of one of the phone calls frm Promise Finance............I comletely forgot I had this

 

Pressure selling???

 

One of the 50 odd or so calls

Promise ........................Hullo

 

Me .............................treble one zero (My phone number)

 

Promise.........................Is that Mr Grace?

 

Me.............................. it is yes!

 

Promise ........................Hullo Mr Grace its Helen at Promise

 

Me...............................Yes

 

Promise......................... Mr Grace has your wife managed to speak to them yet ( meaning Swift)

 

Me................................Not today No!

 

Promise.........................Oh Mr Grace I really do need her to speak with them Is there any way she can call them?

 

Me ...............................she is going to tomorrow.

 

Promise..........................Erm is there any way she can call them today.

 

Me ................................No!

 

Promise..........................Oh erm its just that I am trying to get funds for you Mr Grace and I can't get them until she has spoken to them.

 

Me................................Yes but We haven't got any i panic

 

Promise ......................... No but it's the rate Mr Grace if our lender changes the rate before your wife has spoken to them, then they won't honour the rate you have got thats why I need her to speak to them

 

Me ..............................But they can do that anyway

 

Promise........................Well not really not for a couple of months they cant, you see I am trying to do get the funds for you, and I really need her to speak to them, Is there any reason why she can't speak to them today?

 

Me ............................Yes,... she's not here.

 

Promise ........................Oh , Right O.K because I'm trying to get the funds for you ....can you reiterate to her that she really does need to call them because I really can't get the funds for you until she does.

 

Me ............................Yes O.K

Promise.......................O.k Mr Grace Thank you

 

One month after our loan had started Swift increased their rate of interest on our loan by 0.35%

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

When I see this firm of solicitors on thursday about an appeal I will be telling him to look to using this, and getting a top barrister from Liverpool or Manchester to handle the appeal.

 

 

An “unfair relationship” could include the terms of an agreement, the ways in which enforcement is being carried out, or anything else. The new rules are retrospective and will make lenders responsible for the transgressions of their brokers, even when these do not fall within the antecedent negotiation rules.

 

Promise Finance Ltd even increased the amount my Partner got as her pension on their computer system from what is stated on our application form

 

 

Blemain Finance v Bentley

 

A debtor has secured a five-year block on repossession in a claims management case against his lender, after using consumer credit law to challenge his secured loan

agreement.

 

Peter Bentley, of Bridgend, Cardiff, used the meaning of unfair relationships under Section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act (CCA) 1974 to claim that his loan contract with Blemain Finance was an unfair one. Blemain also agreed to charge no further interest on the £40,000 loan and cut his repayments from £550 to £150 a month.

 

At the High Court in Cardiff, Judge Milwyn Jarman also prevented the lender from levying any charges or legal costs "whatsoever." The judge barred Blemain for enforcing repayment via repossession for five years, but even after this period, it can only bring repossession proceedings if there are at least 12 months? arrears on the new level of payments.

 

Bentley's lawyers, Consumer Credit Litigation Solicitors (CCLS), successfully argued that Blemain had loaned the money to Bentley irresponsibly and that the agreement took advantage of his desperate situation. CCLS argued that shortcomings in the decision making procedure on granting the loan, such as in the under writing, affordability checks and valuation processes, led to the credit agreement being unfair.

 

Andrew Settle, solicitor for CCLS, said: "The relationship between the parties was an unfair one within the meaning of Section 140A of the CCA 1974. CCLS is utilising a significant number of legal arguments, like those used on behalf of Mr Bentley, in thousands of cases on behalf of our clients." CCLS successfully demanded to have the loan account re written, which is believed to be the first time a loan account has been rewritten under settlement, as a result of the unfair relationships test.

Something I asked Swift to do in May 2007 by refunding the Brokers fees and other charges, and reducing the montly payment I have that in writing ....they refused

Bentley's case was taken on by claims management company Cartal Client Review. Carl Wright, chief executive of Cartal Client Review, claimed that Blemain made the offer to Bentley in a bid to prevent a judge in a High Court setting a legal precedent against its lending practices.

 

He added: "A legal precedent could have driven a coach and horses through all its loan accounts. The consumer credit rule book is being rewritten as a result of High Court settlements like Blemain Finance v Bentley." Bentley's financial problems started when his mother died in 2007.

 

He began part-time work to look after his father, who was suffering from Alzheimer's, and then took out a £40,000 secured loan in February 2007 to alleviate his financial predicament. His caring responsibilities led to a drop in working hours, and therefore a fall in income, and he then fell behind on his repayments.

 

Blemain later chased Bentley for repayments on the loan, which by the time of this case being heard in court, had increased to £47,000.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Gallahad]

I really hope you get a good one sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

I really hope you get a good one sparkie

 

Cheers mate, I will be asking thm to get the best one around

 

An urgent letter and all the docs has also gone off to the FOS .I will be phoning them on Tuesday and asking if they will look at the case straight away.

 

sparkie

[Gallahad]

well if there is any justice in this world they should do

[Sparkie1723]

I know my case has taken over this thread but If I suceed in all this it bodes well for EVERY Swift customer I just cannot fail now for everyones cause.

 

This is the chronology of events a near to the actual happenings as I can remember that I have sent to the FOS along with my defenec and all the documents, that the Judge just threw to one side

 

 

February 2007. Apply for a £30.000 loan to First Plus Finance Application declined due to our age.

 

Also just spotted this inour SAR from Promise ..The reason we were turned down by First Plus according to them was THAT WE WE TENANTS OF A HOUSE ..........They did the valuation and all the ownership checks

 

 

February 2007. Contacted by Promise Finance Ltd who said they could

arrange our loan no problem. Received two application forms from Promise Finance informed to fill one form in by hand and sign it, and then just sign the blank one.

 

It was explained that Promise would merely transfer all handwritten information onto the blank signed one for clarity for the lender. Application made for £30.000.Promise Finance explained that we would be charged fees and other charges that would be taken out of the loan of any wher between £5000 to £8000 and advised that if we wanted £30.000, we should increase our loan to cover these costs.

 

 

March 2007 We sign Credit Agreement for £43.000. (15th March 2009)

From this time onwards we were bombarded with phone calls from Promise Finance for my partner to complete asecurity check with Swift Advances, who had to have this check carried out before we would get our Funds.

 

They pestered us and insisted we contacted Swift immediately even when I told them we were in no panic, Promise stated that they could not gaurantte that the interest rate of our loan to be held. I said that Swift could increase at any time in any event I was told not for a couple months.

 

I have a recording of this statement including lot of other calls on a CD. We discovered later that if fact we had been misled and had borrowed £46.955 One month after our agreement was signed Swift informed us that our interest rate was increasing by 0.35%.

 

About One month later they increased the rate again May 2008 I questioned these increases and challenged Swift about all The fees and charges having been added when Promise Finance had informed us that they would be deducted from our original loan amount ans was the exact reason why we had increased the loan amount.

 

A dispute began and escalated because we felt we should have these chargesrefunded and the agreement put right in line with our application which had been manually altered by someone in Promise finance or Swift we do not know to £43.000. We did not fill in a new application form.

 

 

May 2008 After informing Swift unless these were returned we would cease paying the instalments, we were finding we could not keep them up in any event because I had to stop working full time because it was getting too much for me Both myself and my partner are now on pension credit.

 

 

July 2008 ( not quite 3 months in arrears ) Swift issue possession application proceedings against us. We engaged solicitors to act for us and defend this Application, who on their advice we also engaged a Barrister, and made a counter claim against Swift Advances for breach of the Data Protection ( supplying incorrect information to the Credit Reference Agencies, namely a default when in fact we were up to date with our payments as we had cleared the arrears.

 

 

Dec 2008 At a final meeting on 16th Dec 2008 with the Barrister I began to realise that the Defence and counterclaim he had prepared was an extremely poor on, he had not pleaded our case sufficiently and as we had instructed him to, nor had the solicitors taken any notice of all the data and information that we had collected and passed on to them.

 

We therefore dispensed with his services, with the view to asking for an adjourment to give us time to seek a more qualified and competent counsel famliar with consumer law as this one most certainly was not.

 

My decision regarding his competence was clearly proved when he failed to convince the court to grant an adjournment because I was finally forced to conduct the case as a LIP because the person who I thought and the Recorder was initially led to believe was a solictor was in fact not one.

 

The result of all this is clearly seen from the judgement summary that merely proceeded on our counterclaim, the pleadings regarding The Unfair Terms, Section 140 not pleaded, section 13 of the DPA not even mentioned.

 

I was not allowed to pursue these issues as they had not been pleaded sufficiently or at all by the Counsel engaged. Hence I lost my claim because Courts do not like LIP’s, they think we are imbeciles.

 

I faced a senior very competent and qualified Counsel from Grays Inn Chambers London, and ,……….I make this allegation with absolute proof of it, A Witness for Swift Advances who made deliberate known false misleading statements in written statements of truth and under oath.

 

I have obtained this proof since this judgement. We have attempted to keep up the payments and at times attempted to pay a little off the arrears, but came in the postion we cannot pay this amount of £ 632.00 per month as we now only have a total monthly income of just £1000 per month, all our savings except for £1750 has gone in solicitors and barristers fees, a total of over £ 8000.

 

November 17th 2009 Swift issue possession summons which was heard 3rd Dec 2009, despite what I believed was an extremely strong Defence.

 

Judge stated that by submitting a Defence just a few days before a hearing was unacceptable and despite Swift Advances stating in their Witness statement of truth or that hearing, that the previous one had proceeded on the Counterclaim issue only, the Judge ruled that everything had been dealt with at that previous hearing, when in fact it had not, and completely disregarded our Defence and made an order for a 28 day possession.

 

Swift Barrister got 45 mins to argue for Swift I got no more than 10 mins, hearing stated at 10.30 am I was home in E.Port at 11.55 a.m.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Gallahad]

Not just swift but blemain, SPML and all the other sharks too