Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[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

[Sparkie1723]

I don't mind everyone seeing these they are public domain any how

 

The first application form is exactly how I filled the first one in

 

 

The second one is what Swift presented in Court that Promise filled in.....and this is what they based our loan on..................take a look Will just delete our phone number and e-mail address everything else will be left

 

Not working for some reason so I 'll just post what we filled in and what was wrong with the typed one filled in by Promise

 

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

got it I think.this is what Swift based our loan on the only things i've removed is our adress and day and month of birth.......the telephone number was my business number not home number

 

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

All Swift saw was the figure £230.000 value of our property

[Sparkie1723]

I hope sparkle reads this on monday ....because I feel that I will get my case to the Court of Appeal and will finally beat them with a good legal Counsel this time. I want Swift to know what is coming to them....because if I dont.............. they will move in agianst me dead on zero hour because I have fought them so much.

 

Even so I will still fight them after the fact.

 

Just an added note ...The Barrister I dismissed and made the complaint to the Bar Council Standards Board have informed me that it is to be heard by the Barristers Court on 27th of January 2010. the last case I heard about of a Barrister that got found grossly negligent ( which is what I claimed against him) had to get his insurance to cough up £75000)

 

Nothing wrong with dreaming is there ???:D:D:D That'll be the day:rolleyes:

Edited December 6, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

This is what I wrote to them ...maybe a top Barrister there will see what is going on with Swift also and take some action by informing another Chambers to investigate ..younever know.

 

4th December 2009

For The Urgent Attention of

Miss Ille Okee

Bar Standards Board

Your Ref PC 2009/0346

 

Dear Miss Okee

 

Having had very quick advice on my Complaint to the Bar Council about Mr XXXXX.

I have been advised to ask you to ask the Bar Council to consider these further late points and ask if you would kindly pass this letter and documents attached on to the Barrister who is dealing with the complaint

1...The reference to the fact in the judgement summary the judge specifically stated that the pleadings under Section 140 of the Consumer Credit Act were not pleaded in a manner they should have been by a competent Barrister, in fact not at all.

2...That the pleadings under the Data Protection Act were not pleaded at all in fact no reference to Section 13 of that afore aid Act the section claims are made under can be seen in the Defence /Counter claim

3... Finally it is said that one of the first and foremost things that Mr XXXXXX should have advised me to do should have been to make a Subject Data Access Request( SDAR) to the Claimant, to obtain all data and information they held and information surrounding the whole dispute.

Since these proceedings I have submitted that SDAR discovered a tremendous amount of data and information, that would have been an enormous assistance in giving much more substance strength and depth to both our Defence and Counter Claim.

I attach the following a page from that information headed History Notes ( Doc 1)

It is shown that our account was transferred to a Company called Kestrel No1.

I have since discovered that this company is actually Kestrel Loans No1 Ltd which is another company associated with Swift Advances Plc.

It is shown that The Title Indemnity Insurance stated on the CCA agreement was taken out on the 21st May 2007.

I have been refused this document as the Chief Executive of Swift Advances states in an e-mail letter tome that it was taken out on 4th April 2007 and is of no concern of ours.

I believe that this document may have been back dated and is the reason of the refusal to supply it, we paid £ 135 for and are being charged interest on this money.

I have also discovered that once an account is transferred to Kestrel No 1 both Swift and Kestrel No 1 process this account on their separate computer systems, and I believe creating a false asset for one of these companies.

I have discovered this with the assistance of another Swift Customer who’s home has been repossessed/ forced sale at below market value by Swift. (Docs 2 & 3)

 

Following this information that I have discovered after our Court hearing that was unsuccessful, that not only that was our account just transferred the whole mortgage was sold to this other company. I attach a copy the relative page of Swifts Audited yearly accounts, that states this.( Doc 4)

I also attach a copy of the relative page from the yearly audited accounts of Kestrel Loans no 1 Ltd that shows that they “Acquired all loans and mortgages” from Swift

Advances Plc and Swift 1st Ltd ( Doc 5)

I have also discovered that the land registry charge made by Swift Advances is improperly registered according to the Land Registry, Mr XXXXX had sight of this document in the Claimant Court bundle he did not notice it. (Doc 6)

I believe that if Mr XXXXXX had advised us to make this SDAR he would have obtained all this information well before the Court hearing, enough information to formulate a real firm substantial Defence and Counter claim, and possibly could have been completely successful in that Defence and Counter claim

The result of all this is that Swift have now yesterday 3rd December gained a full 28 day possession order on our property which I believe is an unlawful possession as it is unclear who owns our mortgage.

We now have 27 days to try and raise the funds to redeem our mortgage or be evicted and I submit this is all down to the fault of Mr XXXXXXX.

I have an appointment to see another solicitor with a view to making an appeal against the order, which was refused at the last hearing which was reinstated 19th November 2009and judgement given 3rd December 2009

I submit that Mr XXXXXXX has been extremely negligent and failed completely in his capacity as a Barrister to act and advise in our best interests.

Besides the above extra information he never pleaded the unfair terms in credit contracts the only statute besides section 140 that can be applied to unregulated agreements even though the Recorder allowed Swift Advances to use them when it was to their advantage and disallowed me from referring to them, as is seen from the judgement summary.

I humbly ask the Bar Council to consider these latest developments with as much haste as possible.

Yours very sincerely

Edited December 6, 2009 by freakyleaky
You missed one. :)

[Sparkie1723]

NO more woffle and crap from me tonight.........Jus would peeps thoughts and views on what I have got on Swift tthat will finally come out if I have anything to do with it.

 

sparkie

[JHGlover]

Hello you all, qestion, can a claim still be made on PPI if a claim has been paid during the 3 year term, but would it still be claimable, if the term was only for 3 years but payments are being collected for the 15 year term of the loan.

[Sparkie1723]

Hello you all, qestion, can a claim still be made on PPI if a claim has been paid during the 3 year term, but would it still be claimable, if the term was only for 3 years but payments are being collected for the 15 year term of the loan.

 

Hullo JH

 

IMO yes you can.........But in view of my two failed encounters with Swift .....get others opinion on this as well:cool:

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Have made contact also with Client Cartel ....the firm that took the Bentley v Blenhaim case on!!

 

Have also written to the FSA and the OFT

with my previous complaint referenece number

 

The OFT Person is

Mr Paul Hosier

Secured Lending Team

 

SEnt everything to him.............a Big file/dossier

sparkie

Edited December 6, 2009 by Sparkie1723

[Gallahad]

Hullo JH

 

IMO yes you can.........But in view of my two failed encounters with Swift .....get others opinion on this as well:cool:

 

sparkie

 

Seems to me it was justice that failed Sparkie and you are still fighting;)

[Marky1701]

Seems to me it was justice that failed Sparkie and you are still fighting;)

 

Quite right.

 

But we ALL need to keep on fighting.

 

The best and maybe only chance of getting these slimeballs is to individually take the fight to the OFT, FSA, MP's - anyone we can think of who will help expose this company for what it is.

 

The weight of numbers is what will win in the end, Sparkie, bless his cotton socks, regardless of how knowledgeable he is, is just one man, if Swift had to deal with a few thousand ( and there must be thousands who are currently getting shafted with mickey mouse interest rates, charges etc etc) then I am convinced it will be a different ending.

 

COME ON !!!!

Edited December 6, 2009 by Marky1701

[Sparkie1723]

Thanks Marky & Gallahad and everyone ......you are absoltely right . there is nothing more powerful than people power.

 

Thanks againfor ALL YOUR support

 

Maybe down ........but not quite out for the Count YET ..must be getting close though:)

 

sparkie............

[JHGlover]

Hullo JH

 

IMO yes you can.........But in view of my two failed encounters with Swift .....get others opinion on this as well:cool:

 

sparkie

 

Currently no fight but am preparing for one, my parents have not as yet defaulted, but sure as eggs is eggs they will not be able to continue to keep up the repayments, i have advised they send for SAR which we are waiting for, once we get this information we can start to look at any details that will be required to to for unfair or unenforcable CA, it will be interesting to find out what details are sent, certainlay as the interest rate seems to be increasing whenever Swift feel the urge, so will be looking to claim back the PPI, and any other outragous fees, like broker fees, we have also asked for the original CA, be intyeresting to see if they send an original or, one thats been changed to fit with Swifts usual tactics. but we do have the original to compare with, is there any documentation i should be looking for in the SAR that swift may feel like omiting ?? also should they have recieved statements from swift about how their account stands??

Edited December 6, 2009 by JHGlover
adding

[JHGlover]

Currently no fight but am preparing for one, my parents have not as yet defaulted, but sure as eggs is eggs they will not be able to continue to keep up the repayments, i have advised they send for SAR which we are waiting for, once we get this information we can start to look at any details that will be required to to for unfair or unenforcable CA, it will be interesting to find out what details are sent, certainlay as the interest rate seems to be increasing whenever Swift feel the urge, so will be looking to claim back the PPI, and any other outragous fees, like broker fees, we have also asked for the original CA, be intyeresting to see if they send an original or, one thats been changed to fit with Swifts usual tactics. but we do have the original to compare with, is there any documentation i should be looking for in the SAR that swift may feel like omiting ?? also should they have recieved statements from swift about how their account stands??

 

why is it wyen you write something something changes, i have just been informed by my parent that he has contacted Swift to explain his loosing his job, it would seem he has missed his last payment and swift will be sending him a letter to put down his expenditure etc: is there any advice out the on how to complete this or will Swift be favourable, and rip him off aggain by lowering his payments and extending the loan and of course adding more interest ??

[welshperson3]

hi sparkie

 

just a bit of info for you regarding cartel.

 

i had them out yesterday regarding a issue i have with a sub prime lender

 

1 they charge £495 for taking it on then if they win they charge 30% of whatever they get written off

 

2 although i have progressed with this claim (SAR LETTERS ETC) they want to go back to day one and send out Thayer own SAR this is going to drag this out for longer than necessary.

[Sparkie1723]

hi sparkie

 

just a bit of info for you regarding cartel.

 

i had them out yesterday regarding a issue i have with a sub prime lender

 

1 they charge £495 for taking it on then if they win they charge 30% of whatever they get written off

 

2 although i have progressed with this claim (SAR LETTERS ETC) they want to go back to day one and send out Thayer own SAR this is going to drag this out for longer than necessary.

 

 

Thanks for that .....don't think I'll bother with them ...JUst checking all options We'll go for the legal Aid aspect .I think we qualify for that no problem ...........both of us are on pension credit.

 

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

why is it wyen you write something something changes, i have just been informed by my parent that he has contacted Swift to explain his loosing his job, it would seem he has missed his last payment and swift will be sending him a letter to put down his expenditure etc: is there any advice out the on how to complete this or will Swift be favourable, and rip him off aggain by lowering his payments and extending the loan and of course adding more interest ??

 

 

Hi JH

The most your parents can expect from Swift is the lowering of payments and extending the term of the loan .have no fear no matter how good it looks and to your parents advantage................ Swift will not allow themselves to lose any money.

 

When they are not entitled to it in the first place and I will end up finally proving it.......Even if I haven't got a house.........I'll prove it from a tent if necessary.

 

sparkie

[welshperson3]

sparky try goggling to find out which solicitors cartel used and go to them direct could be a cheaper option

[JHGlover]

hi sparkie

 

just a bit of info for you regarding cartel.

 

i had them out yesterday regarding a issue i have with a sub prime lender

 

1 they charge £495 for taking it on then if they win they charge 30% of whatever they get written off

 

2 although i have progressed with this claim (SAR LETTERS ETC) they want to go back to day one and send out Thayer own SAR this is going to drag this out for longer than necessary.

 

If anyone does find a decent solicitor who deals with this type of law, and are good, let me no........... why the up front fees

[Gallahad]

If anyone does find a decent solicitor who deals with this type of law, and are good, let me no........... why the up front fees

The upfront fee is to cover them should they end up not doing anything which from what I understand is quite often.

[welshperson3]

hi sparky

 

regarding the blemain case u mentioned earlier

the law firm that won that is (Consumer Credit Litigation Solicitors) they have a web site.

 

i have no connections or knowledge of this firm, but it might be worth checking them out as one of your options.

 

wp3

[caro]

hi sparkie

 

just a bit of info for you regarding cartel.

 

i had them out yesterday regarding a issue i have with a sub prime lender

 

1 they charge £495 for taking it on then if they win they charge 30% of whatever they get written off

 

2 although i have progressed with this claim (SAR LETTERS ETC) they want to go back to day one and send out Thayer own SAR this is going to drag this out for longer than necessary.

 

What on earth is the point of a SAR if one has already been complied with?

 

Please read this:- The Office of Fair Trading: Claims regulator and OFT issue consumer alert