Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[Doc2527]

Hi Sparkie

 

It's great to hear you back on the site again.

 

Can Swift be retrospective in adding these trading styles onto their Credit Licences? or is it a case of ooopsss !!! too late you've committed an offence??

 

Regards

 

Doc

[andrew1]

"even disagreements" - perish the thought!

 

What I think may be important to remember about all this is that these names appear to be innocent enough names which are an abbreviation to their over all trading company/style of Swift - I mean, who refers to Kelloggs corn flakes as Kelloggs plc? We don't, and companies often use trading styles and life today is all about abbreviating. Swift Advances Plc or Swift or Swift Advances? Who cares we all know who we are talking about....BUT....

 

I did some work for a company in the midlands not so long ago. They were a building company. The owner had a self employed trading style of (I'm making this name up) "Jack the Lad" builders...he also had a Limited Company trading as "Jack the Lad Limited". He also had another Limited Company called "Jack the Lad Training Limited". They all had the same address, they all had the same telephone number, they were all answered by the same people and when they ordered goods from suppliers guess what? They just said this is Jack The Lad calling can we have......

 

The Jack the Lad Limited company went bust owing suppliers tens of thousands, but they carried on trading in their training company using the same old names effectively using all the assets of the bust company and leaving many creditors singing for their money.

 

So, lets get back to Swift - same company, You all call them Swift or Swift Advances, how many of you know what is behind all these trading styles? How many of you know if the one you dealt with has a license to use the trading style and how many of you know what to do about it? How many different bank accounts are they operating and are monies going to the right company and people?

 

We found that 'Swift Advances,' whilst many loans were being underwritten in that trading style, was actually licensed to a completely different company with the OFT than the one you all think is Swift Advances...never take this lot for granted.

 

That's what the OFT are supposed to be for - to tell us, guide us and make sure they do not license companies or trading styles they are not supposed to AND we expect the OFT and Trading Standards to exercise their powers in bringing them to heal when abusing their position. We must keep piling in the information to the OFT, but it would be nice if the OFT would issue a little guidance to some as to whether Swift are about to pay the proce or whether we are all wasting our time. ...Pleeease.

Edited March 15, 2010 by andrew1

[Sparkie1723]

Hi Sparkie

 

It's great to hear you back on the site again.

 

Can Swift be retrospective in adding these trading styles onto their Credit Licences? or is it a case of ooopsss !!! too late you've committed an offence??

 

Regards

 

Doc

 

 

HI Doc nice to be back.

 

You have hit the nail on the head ."tooooooo late" offences have ben committed .......you cant drive a car without a license then tell the cppers that you will get one tomorrow

 

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Take no notice of Andrews woffling folks .........if you came in covered in snow and said its snowing he would HAVE to go out tomake sure:D:D:D

 

 

"So, lets get back to Swift - same company, You all call them Swift or Swift Advances, how many of you know what is behind all these trading styles? How many of you know if the one you dealt with has a license to use the trading style and how many of you know what to do about it?"

 

DECEPTION

 

 

 

 

The OFT have aready stated and the CCA Act says it all sections 34 to 40 that any trading stayle or name MUST be on the OFT register and hold a license if it is to carry out ANY CCA related business ...but I also want the OFT to say it again

 

 

TO ME just as that extra confirmation ...don't need it really the CCA says it all.

 

sparkie

[Gallahad]

It is a fairly common practice for company's to use trading styles for names similar to their actual name. However I would suggest that this should NEVER be applied to a legal document. Good to see you around again Sparkie.

G

[Sparkie1723]

It is a fairly common practice for company's to use trading styles for names similar to their actual name. However I would suggest that this should NEVER be applied to a legal document. Good to see you around again Sparkie.

G

 

Hi Gallahad,

 

I am inclined to agree with that 100% and I form that opinion from the sections of the CCA that goverens licences, ............Thanks ...I'm back "punching fresh air" again mate .....What can be a more legal document than your Credit Agreement??

 

 

BY the way what is the correct spelling of licence(s) / license(s)????

 

sparkie

[andrew1]

Take no notice of Andrews woffling folks ........

 

sparkie

 

I beg your Pardon? Waffling (with an 'a') is my trade mark...however, people should take note as they will realise that what they see is not always what the reality is behind what they want you to see... Woffling indeed!

 

It is deception, you are quite right as it was with the Midlands companies - made me sick thinking they were doing that to creditors ..and I told em so too!

[Sparkie1723]

Section 39 says

(1) A person who engages in any activities for whch a licence is required when he has not a licence ee under a licence covering thise activities commits an offence.

 

(2) A licencee under a standard licence who carries on business under a name not specified in the licence commits an offence.

 

The standard license allows an individual or a partnership to trade under those names listed on the license, and is divided into seven categories:

• Category A: Consumer credit business
  
• Category B: Consumer hire business
  
• Category C: Credit brokerage
  
• Category D: Debt-adjusting and counselling
  
• Category E: Debt-collecting
  
• Category F: Credit reference agencies
  

(3) A person who fails to give the Director or a licensee notice under section 36 within the period specified commits an offence

( specified period is 21 days)

 

( Section 36 is very pertinent to Swift Advances Plc)

 

 

Section 40 is too long to type I'll have copy this from the act on next post

 

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

I beg your Pardon? Waffling (with an 'a') is my trade mark...however, people should take note as they will realise that what they see is not always what the reality is behind what they want you to see... Woffling indeed!

 

It is deception, you are quite right as it was with the Midlands companies - made me sick thinking they were doing that to creditors ..and I told em so too!

 

 

There is "waffling" and there is "woffling"......."woffling" is worse than "waffling"....only us old soldiers know the difference we had a lot of woffle thrown at us in the forces..............and don't mention violins:D:D:D:D:p

 

 

sparkie

[determindator]

Good news the FSA,OFT and FO are taking the step to talk to each other.

 

Thank you Sparkie for raising the spirits and good to see you back.

[Dougal16T]

Thank you Sparkie for raising the spirits and good to see you back.

 

I agree entirely, it is not the same without Sparkie....

 

As always best wishes to everyone

 

Dougal

[andrew1]

I agree entirely, it is not the same without Sparkie....

 

As always best wishes to everyone

 

Dougal

 

I don't - I think he 'woffles' too much

[Sparkie1723]

Just a quickie folks ..If you can prove 100% either Swift Advances Plc or Swift 1st (First) Ltd whichever they say is their correct title ( they have used both at sometime or other) paid a "SECRET COMMISSION" of more than the documentary fee that Mr White states they ONLY pay.......... it will & DOES render the agreement unenforceable............and that is good breakfast food for thought;)

 

 

sparkie

[andrew1]

Just a quickie folks ..If you can prove 100% either Swift Advances Plc or Swift 1st (first) Ltd whichever they say is their correct title ( they have used both at sometime or other) paid a "SECRET COMMISSION" of more than the documentary fee that Mr White states they ONLY pay it will & DOES render the agreement unenforceable............and that is good breakfast food for thought;)

 

 

sparkie

 

based upon what, over my cup of tea?

[Dougal16T]

A very good morning to all

 

In Hurstanger-v-Wilson [2007] EWCA Civ 299 Lord Justice Tuckey said :"Obviously if there has been no disclosure the agent will have received a secret commission" which "is considered to be a form of bribe and is treated in the authorities as a special category of fraud in which it is unnecessary to prove motive, inducement or loss up to the amount of the bribe"....."Furthermore the transaction is voidable at the election of the principal"...(the borrower)..."who can rescind it."..

 

He then referred to : "(Panama & South Pacific Telepgraph Co- v - India Rubber, Gutta Percher* and Telegraph Co [1875] 9 Ch App 515, 527, 532-3)."

 

This it appears is where the right to rescind comes from. (I am always happy to be corrected if I have misread this!!)

 

* No... 'Gutta Percher' is not a small bird that sits on the drainage system from rooftops!!

 

Seems to that a certain finance company might have more going out than coming in soon.....

 

I wish you all the compliments of the season.....(?)

 

Better late than never

 

Dougal

[Smarterchick]

based upon what, over my cup of tea?

 

 

 

Imageview v Kelvin Jack seems to be a better one than Hurstanger I believe. Hurstanger was a half way house, Kelvin Jack goes the whole hog.

AgentLaw - News - Imageview Management Ltd v Kelvin Jack

[Dougal16T]

Morning people...

 

Well what can I say...

 

Nothing apart from 'brilliant as ever SC.....'

 

I agree this does seem to encompass everything....

 

I just counsel caution that it relates to a particular instance, as in the paragraph "Lord Justice Jacob agreed that there were circumstances in which a collateral agreement would not result in a breach of the no conflict rule. However, in this instance he held that Imageview had clearly used its connection with Mr Jack to obtain a benefit for itself; there had been a clear conflict of interest and Imageview had acted in breach of its duties to Mr Jack."

 

Meanwhile I am writing to reclaim the secret commission, and considering the damages rule under the question of fraud......

 

Best wishes no matter what...

 

Dougal

[Sparkie1723]

Tried to post a computer secreen shot from our brokers ( but it comes out too small to redd on the forum) but it shows that shows that they did not approach any other lender but went stright to Swift Advances Plc...........would that not be called that a conflict of interest, and a breach of fiduciary duty??.....especially when they got paid brokers fees by us AND commission by Swift Advances Plc.

 

There is a box that is headed ....Other lenders approached....Its BLANK.

 

Have another 2hr appointment with Counsel at 2 o'clock today...he is going for secret commission (amongst other things)

Mr White said they do not pay commission ....Mr Webster ( after Mark Whte had declered this in court )said they do from time to time but not on our particular agreement.

I have the evidence form Promise Finance that they did and a big sum at that

 

sparkie

Edited March 17, 2010 by Sparkie1723

[frettful38]

Tried to post a computer secreen shot from our brokers ( but it comes out too small to redd on the forum) but it shows that shows that they did not approach any other lender but went stright to Swift Advances Plc...........would that not be called that a conflict of interest, and a breach of fiduciary duty??.....especially when they got paid brokers fees by us AND commission by Swift Advances Plc.

 

There is a box that is headed ....Other lenders approached....Its BLANK.

 

Have another 2hr appointment with Counsel at 2 o'clock today...he is going for secret commission (amongst other things)

Mr White said they do not pay commission ....Mr Webster ( after Mark Whte had declered this in court )said they do from time to time but not on our particular agreement.

 

I have the evidence form Promise Finance that they did and a big sum at that

 

sparkie

 

 

Good luck sparkie for today, lets hope you return with good news. Boy I wish I had a loan with swift so that I could join this fight .

 

Excellent stuff go get em sparkie:D!

[Sparkie1723]

Good meeting with Counsel. He has taken a list of documents (13) I have asked SWift Advances Plc & Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd..........going to get an expert on securitisation equitable transfer and "phoenixing" to look into the sale of our particular loan to the Kestrel company concerned, want all this for our appeal to the appeal Court (3 Judges).

 

Looks very promising................... but fingers crossed!!

 

sparkie

[landy_alert]

Good meeting with Counsel. He has taken a list of documents (13) I have asked SWift Advances Plc & Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd..........going to get an expert on securitisation equitable transfer and "phoenixing" to look into the sale of our particular loan to the Kestrel company concerned, want all this for our appeal to the appeal Court (3 Judges).

 

Looks very promising................... but fingers crossed!!

 

sparkie

 

Hi Sparkie:)

 

That does sound promising - hopefully it will provide the conclusive proof that you need to win your appeal and that it will also benefit the rest of us victims of Swift's dodgy transactions!

 

Landy x

[Smarterchick]

I have a beautiful little 2 yr old grand daughter and one of her favourite little sayings which make us all laugh is " Oh deary deary me"

 

Well today it's Mr Websters turn - Oh deary deary me Mr Webster what have you been saying?

 

Hands up all those with emails and letters or copies of articles Mr Webster has written which says "We keep all our assets on Balance Sheet" or - " We do not securitise our loans" ?

 

Mr Webster, Kestrel Acquisitions Ltd, Mr Barwick, Mrs Brookes and yourself as only directors have not been telling the truth I feel.

 

What did one of our earstwhile MI6 team find? CISX - Listed Security Detail - GB00B3B1WF1 - Kestrel Acquisitions Ltd

 

ooooo, you naughty naughty boy.

 

Now where did all that come from? Kestrel Acquisitions Ltd don't do much as a company so where did all these unsecured loans come from? Kestrel Loans No1 or 3 Ltd by any chance? Swift Advances Plc by any chance?

 

YOU DO SECURITISE LOANS OR PARTS OF THEM

 

Tied in with all these debentures and other loans and all this other money floating about it'll be interesting to know how it all fits together, but we are getting there slowly.

 

This Repo105 look interesting too which you'll know all about with your pedigree.

 

On a more serious note. Given all the trading off between account holders and Swift, and all this time which people who generally have far better things to do than second guess what you lot are up to, wouldn't it have been a whole lot easier to enter into some kind of dialogue to set the record straight and stop all this amateur investigative guess work going on so we can speak with you people on a professional level rather than this tittle tattle?

 

You don't, any of you, answer letters, answer extremely important questions for people who are in the firing line to lose their homes, you won't comment on anything and you just leave the heavy hand of fear creep into so many peoples lives. What the hell are you playing at?????

 

We will continue to pick over your company and undo every stitch there is to find out what you are doing until you are made to account for it all.

 

You could have made this so much easier for us all if you had been truthful in the first place.

 

I don't know what will happen to many of you in there, but you'll deserve the wrath of the law whatever it is.

 

SC

Edited March 18, 2010 by Smarterchick

[Sparkie1723]

2 0f our other"Field Agents" "Eleanor Rigby 00-00" and "Murphy "O" Murphy 0-0 " have paid personal visits to Barclays Bank HQ's with various documents debentures accounts etc etc and Barclays have allocated a special reference Number issued by their own fraud investigation dept to supply any further info, and that it will by pass all other departments and go direct to that team who have now been allocated to investigate what is happening with their mortgages with The SWIFT GROUP!!!?????? and the Kestrel Companies

 

We now await developements from this angle now..

 

We had to give "Murphy "O" Murphy" single agent numbers because he couldnt count past two zeros:D

sparkie

Edited March 18, 2010 by Sparkie1723

[busterg]

Dear Mr Webster,

 

we found this money for you, that you say you know nothing about. So, can we have:

 

a) finders fee

b) a packaging fee as per your non existent agent brokers

c) could you please lower our interest rate payments

 

The channel islands eh. Tut tut tut.

[andrew1]

I note we have a guest. Might that be Mr Webster or Sparkle come to say hallo?