Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[frettful38]

My MP has written saying:

 

Thank you for your email concerning second charge lenders. . . . I was very concerned about the points you raised in your email regarding Swift Advances. I have written to Mr John Fingleton, CEO of the OFT, and Hector Sants, CEO of the FSA enclosing a copy of your email and asking for thier comments on the points raised. I will write to you again when I have received a reply. In the interim, should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me." Well, I'm seeing him and another MP this week.

 

Excellent news sweetjane, please keep us posted:D.

[coolchris]

Yet again Swift have tried to do the dirty on our account with them. After phoning about them being total arseholes in handling a simple switch of Bank account Direct Debit, they still find ways to add charges to the account by sending letters out that are TOTALLY FALSE AND PROVE THAT THEY ARE FALSE.

Example..Fee for payment returned unpaid (total lie) £33.00 - BULL**** AND LIES.

Arrears letter charge £23 (again because they failed to instigate the new DD). BULL**** AND LIES.

 

Upon phoning them yet again, they reversed these trumped up charges.

 

My point: they will try ANYTHING to slap LYING charges on the account and will stay that way unless you prove otherwise.

 

This account is my mums, she is pensioner and would not have contested these fkin scumbags charges if I had not stepped in and told them to shove it.

 

Point is: check everything, contest everything this **** send you.

 

Question: even though these false charges are now reimbursed (they better be not on the statement) could I still report them for Negligence, false claiming of charges with prior intent to commit fraud? Its quite obvious that they do this thing on a regular basis, the computer spits any old crap out and the zombies at Swift sign it. See EVERYTIME I PHONE THEM, A LETTER ARRIVE 2 DAYS LATER WITH SOME FALSE CHARGES.

Edited January 25, 2010 by coolchris

[Smarterchick]

Even more reason why EVERYONE should obtain this Actuarial Accrual Account Summary Sheet. That's what they call it on the heading.

[coolchris]

Even more reason why EVERYONE should obtain this Actuarial Accrual Account Summary Sheet. That's what they call it on the heading.

 

Hi. Did Swift charge you for supplying this?

[Smarterchick]

Hi. Did Swift charge you for supplying this?

 

Probably

[coolchris]

Hmm, thanks but I dont think I would be happy [] if they did; as you can see from my posts, I think its fkin outrageous and should be stamped on immediately. They should be made an example of in the courts and be shown to be a warning to anyone else that attempts downright deception and prior intent to commit fraud.

[Dougal16T]

Yet again Swift have tried to do the dirty on our account with them. After phoning about them being total arseholes in handling a simple switch of Bank account Direct Debit, they still find ways to add charges to the account by sending letters out that are TOTALLY FALSE AND PROVE THAT THEY ARE FALSE.

Example..Fee for payment returned unpaid (total lie) £33.00 - BULL**** AND LIES.

Arrears letter charge £23 (again because they failed to instigate the new DD). BULL**** AND LIES.

 

Upon phoning them yet again, they reversed these trumped up charges.

 

My point: they will try ANYTHING to slap LYING charges on the account and will stay that way unless you prove otherwise.

 

This account is my mums, she is pensioner and would not have contested these fkin scumbags charges if I had not stepped in and told them to shove it.

 

Point is: check everything, contest everything this **** send you.

 

Question: even though these false charges are now reimbursed (they better be not on the statement) could I still report them for Negligence, false claiming of charges with prior intent to commit fraud? Its quite obvious that they do this thing on a regular basis, the computer spits any old crap out and the zombies at Swift sign it. See EVERYTIME I PHONE THEM, A LETTER ARRIVE 2 DAYS LATER WITH SOME FALSE CHARGES.

 

Dear Coolchris:

As you will see if you look at my posts I consider that an offence is committed under the Fraud Act 2006, and if you have a look at Sections 2, 3 and 4 they all are clear and in my (humble) view as an ex-pc and former prosecutor. the offence to be charged has to be what is called 'complete', or in today's parlance 'has ticked all of the boxes'. In examining the actions as described I consider that they have not only 'ticked all the boxes', but have provided evidence by their actions of a complete disregard for the Criminal Law.

 

This could be due to two things:

 

a) Either ignorance or no knowledge of the Criminal Law and their culpability under the Fraud Act 2006

 

or

 

b) Complete arrogance

 

Have a look at the sentences that those committing offences under this Act can receive - and remember that officers of the company are individually liable (see S.12 Fraud Act 2006).

 

It really is about time that the Serious Crime Unit were contacted by someone who has suffered at the hands of anyone committing these offences.

 

 

Best wishes

 

Dougal

[sweetjane]

Meeting with 1st MP went well. He's taken all info and promised to look into. Have another meeting this week. Billy Bragg is appearing at Speakers Corner on Sunday talking about Bankers' bonuses:

Time:Sunday, 31 January 2010 13:00

Location:Speakers Corner, Hyde Park, London

NoBonus4RBS | Facebook

 

As many caggers should go along as poss. SJ

[coolchris]

Dear Coolchris:

As you will see if you look at my posts I consider that an offence is committed under the Fraud Act 2006, and if you have a look at Sections 2, 3 and 4 they all are clear and in my (humble) view as an ex-pc and former prosecutor. the offence to be charged has to be what is called 'complete', or in today's parlance 'has ticked all of the boxes'. In examining the actions as described I consider that they have not only 'ticked all the boxes', but have provided evidence by their actions of a complete disregard for the Criminal Law.

 

This could be due to two things:

 

a) Either ignorance or no knowledge of the Criminal Law and their culpability under the Fraud Act 2006

 

or

 

b) Complete arrogance

 

Have a look at the sentences that those committing offences under this Act can receive - and remember that officers of the company are individually liable (see S.12 Fraud Act 2006).

 

It really is about time that the Serious Crime Unit were contacted by someone who has suffered at the hands of anyone committing these offences.

 

 

Best wishes

 

Dougal

 

Hi Dougal.

 

I think that they are fully aware of the Law, so I would go with (b) Complete arrogance.

I would like to know, as you seem clued into this, is: even though they have reluctantly refunded all their trumped up charges, could I still send a complaint into the OFT? The OFT because I think that their business practice is definitely not FAIR on consumers and more evidence to OFT the better. As far as instigating an investigation through the FOS, then I think It wont be looked at in much detail and they will probably come back..."oh well they refunded so there aint anything we can do". So submitting evidence to OFT in the first place seems the best route.

See, I reckon to snare these vipers, we need to concentrate on the Fraud angle of attack. I can prove that they send out letters for fictional charges. Is this a training/software problem or is it premeditated fraud? I obviously believe its the latter, however they can argue the former, but that can also be proven as a falsehood if investigated thoroughly (database management etc). They could argue that they can charge you as its part of the agreement...well NO..because I can Prove that a payment was NOT returned unpayed, therefore the 2 options mentioned previously stand.

[Dougal16T]

Hi Coolchris and everyone,

 

Personally I think a complaint to the OFT is a waste of time. What is needed is a formal complaint to the Police, for them to pass to their Financial Crime Unit.

 

All forces now have access to this type of investigation.

 

My only comment is this: On making the first approach to the Police ask to speak to an officer from CID. If not, leave your details with another officer - NOT a civilian Counter Clerk (beware counter clerks now wear uniform very similar to regular officers!!) - and once you have spoken to a regular officer MAKE SURE you get their name and warrant number. This is to complete the trail in case for some reason it goes 'cold'.

 

Now then, Police officers MUST investigate reports of crime - if they do not they commit an offence themselves, and are subject to discipline which can lead to dismissal from the Force!

 

Once you have the Financial Crime unit on board, then the house of cards created by these sub-prime lenders will collapse VERY quickly.

 

As always

 

 

Dougal

[lesterlass]

Daily Express Monday25/01/2010 HOME OWNERS WIN MORTGAGE REFUND

Near the bottom of the article

 

The FSA is set to release a report later this week and five more mortgage lenders are in line for fines.

Cerris Tavinor, an FSA spokeswoman, said: “We completed our investigation into Gmac and published the results of that case.

“We have made the point publicly that we have referred other lenders to enforcement, so other work is carrying on.”

 

HAVE SWIFT FINALLY BEEN CAUGHT? :D

 

 

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Home owners win mortgage refund

[Sparkie1723]

HI lesterlass & All,

 

Things are afoot;);)

 

sparkie

[Gallahad]

Hi Sparkie, been wondering how you are doing and good to hear from you and see those smileys

G

[sweetjane]

You may have seen this before but I've just had a quick skim of the FSA Mortgage Market Review (118 pages!). Yesterday's charges announcement seems to be the beginning of their resulting actions.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/discussion/dp09_03.pdf You can send your comments on it to the FSA by 31 January.

Particularly interesting about sub prime, private equity funding, charges, arrears, securitisation, fraud etc:

"Some specialist lenders entered the market by targeting customers with adverse credit histories and making lending decisions based to a great extent on the underlying collateral." i.e. never expecting consumers to be able to repay them.

"By making it explicit in the rules that firms must, at a minimum, be prepared to deploy a particular range of hardship tools, we shall make it much more difficult for them to conclude securitisation deals that are at odds with their duty to treat customers fairly"

and

"There has been growing concern at the number of regulated mortgage books being sold by mortgage firms seeking to limit their losses or raise funds. These sales are typically at a discount and have attracted hedge funds and private equity firms." Hello Alchemy Partners!

[Smarterchick]

Swift will certainly have some explaining to do given what we have presented them with of late. Webster says they don't securitise, their accounts say they sold the loans...what am I missing?

[Sparkie1723]

Quote from sweetjanes post

 

"There has been growing concern at the number of regulated mortgage books being sold by mortgage firms seeking to limit their losses or raise funds. These sales are typically at a discount and have attracted hedge funds and private equity firms." ....Hello Alchemy Partners!

 

 

Have now started to complile a commentary to submit to the FSA on what Swift and the Kestrel Companies do with their buying, selling, transfer of accounts and loans and double accounting sytems and double borrowing.

 

Main issue ...How can a Ltd company with only a pound share borrow massive sums of money to buy loans off Swift and why ....why do Swift attempt to convince us that they sell these loans without the TItle charge ......and how Kestrel can borrow without the Titles of property for security for this borrowing...... then say they have a loan book ..........when they do not lend money....I will post up exactly what I send ...even for the benefit of Swift......so that they can dig themselves in deeper by making more false misleading statements in attempts to justify their irregular financial dealings ...............I will be making the FSA aware also of the unsigned and undated "audited" accounts lodged at companies house and ask them to refer to them all within the Kestrel Group.

 

If Swift retain the title why do they not borrow the money themselves......because that would show double borrowing right away by doing it the way they do the double borrowing is concealed.

 

They further conceal it by returning Kestrel NO 2 to a dormant non trading company status with outstanding mortgages within their accounts which are then "hidden"

 

I do not think the FSA will like this one little bit

 

 

 

sparkie

Edited January 28, 2010 by Sparkie1723

[bethsophie]

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just recieved a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

[overdone]

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just recieved a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

serious problem. You need to start your own thread but hang on a bit because someone will come along with some help.

[Smarterchick]

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just recieved a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

 

I think firstly you need to do is get a stay put on this with the court. You need time to sort this out. Ring the court office and ask them what you need to complete. The forms are all on the HMCS website just ask them what you need to send given the circumstances. Then get Swift to provide you with a complete breakdown of their statement of charges, their claim for repossession all their supporting documentation and especially and DO NOT FORGET THIS, a copy of the Actuarial Accrual Account Summary - this is extremely important. You also need a full copy of the agreement they are claiming against so you can understand what it is you are up against.

 

Once you have made contact with Swift and asked for this, explain the circumstances and then come back here with your response when there will be a number of us here to help you. It would be useful to have your own thread if you can but don't be rushing off if you are not sure, just stay on this one for the time-being, I'm sure the original poster won't mind as it is a minefield of information. We'll guide you through this and set you up with a thread thereafter. You have made the first step, that's the important thing.

[Guest blackie]

bethsophie you are in good hands here. These people are truly amazing, they will point you in the right direction and give you all the support you need. I've been away from this site for a while, as I have been unwell. But Swift have driven me to the edge, I borrowed 13,000 four years ago and recently they advised that the debt was now £28,768.00. Got a little legal advice now, and this site is amazing. Hang on in there.

[Sparkie1723]

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just recieved a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

 

HI bethsophie,

 

As overdone says start your own thread....in the mean time I have taken the liberty to send a copy of your post direct to Mr David Blocksidge at the OFT ....I hope you do not mind I copy below exactly what I have sent him

Re Swift Advances PLc

 

Dear Mr Blocksidge,

 

I copy below a post that has been made on the Consumer Action Group forum, this is a prime example to show how ruthless this lender is, and as I have said before their Consumer Credit Licence should be revoked immediately, it is appalling and disgusting that this Lender should still be allowed to continue to act in a manner such as this example .

 

I would like to point out that this is not an isolated case, there are many many more.

 

Yours sincerely

 

sparkie

 

"QUOTE"

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just received a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

[Guest blackie]

Hi Sparkie

Can you bring me up to date, I have been on my own quest with Swift, they failed to attend hearing in December, judge not surpirsed, anyway looks like I have some breathing space to put house on market and get out and away from Swift.

 

How is everything going your end. How are you holding up. What news with your barrister.

[Dougal16T]

HI bethsophie,

 

As overdone says start your own thread....in the mean time I have taken the liberty to send a copy of your post direct to Mr David Blocksidge at the OFT ....I hope you do not mind I copy below exactly what I have sent him

Re Swift Advances PLc

 

Dear Mr Blocksidge,

 

I copy below a post that has been made on the Consumer Action Group forum, this is a prime example to show how ruthless this lender is, and as I have said before their Consumer Credit Licence should be revoked immediately, it is appalling and disgusting that this Lender should still be allowed to continue to act in a manner such as this example .

 

I would like to point out that this is not an isolated case, there are many many more.

 

Yours sincerely

 

sparkie

 

"QUOTE"

Hi

I am new to this forum.

 

My brother died last year leaving a property on which he had a mortgage, and a secured loan with swift advances orginally for £7000, took out 3 years ago.

 

I have just received a letter from the court that an order for posseision had been granted for the property because my brother did not attend to defend it, Swift Advances failed to tell them that he had died, and I did not get any notification of the court hearing. they are now demanding £25,597.58.

 

My parents are still living in the property and have been for 47 years also there is a mortgage on the property and if the house was sold there would only be £15,000 left.

 

Can anyone help where can I go for help

 

Cheers

 

Well done Sparkie and everyone

 

A brilliant move..!

 

We would all be lost without your inspiration........I certainly would not have got as far with this as I have.

 

As always best wishes

 

Dougal

 

PS: Criminal case looms on the horizon for our friends........at last they will be named and shamed!

[Guest blackie]

Dougal, lets hope it comes soon. This past year has been one of the worst of my whole life, Swift keep coming, it's been relentless. I never dreamed when I took out a loan I would end up in so much bother. Central Credit have much to answer, surely they knew how ruthless this company was. I am not religiious but please god if there is any justice in this world, Swift will get their just deserts.

[Sparkie1723]

Quote from Dougal

 

PS: Criminal case looms on the horizon for our friends........at last they will be named and shamed!

 

I can assure all that there is a far bigger shock coming to Swift Advances than they could ever dream of very soon.......as I said I will say no more..........but it is a FACT.....even without the OFT and the FSA .......... all the money they have extorted from customers will not be enough to protect them.

 

sparkie