Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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 4908 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 Sparkie,

I have been away for the weekend so missed your response to my post about

Alchemy. I noticed that you made no mention of Swift Finance [uK] Ltd. However in another thread Smarterchick [i think] said that Swift Finance owned Swift Advances which was not the same company as Swift Advances PLC.

 

So here is the conundrum. On the FSA register site if you type in Swift Advances on their company register you get two companies listed

1. [swift Advances plc CM13 3BE Swift Advances Plc

2. Swift Finance (UK) Ltd S12 3GL Swift Finance (Uk) Ltd

 

the register also includes previous names and Trading As names,and under Swift Finance appear these companies

Swift Advances, Swift Finance, Swift Homeloans, Swift Insurance Services, Swift Mortgages, Swift Solutions

 

interesting as Swift Homeloans is registered at the same address as Swift Advances PLc. Coincidence or have the FSA made a mistake?

 

The FSA site is here-

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmSearchForm.do

Edited by lookinforinfo
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

Hi Sparkie,

I have been away for the weekend so missed your response to my post about

Alchemy. I noticed that you made no mention of Swift Finance [uK] Ltd. However in another thread Smarterchick [i think] said that Swift Finance owned Swift Advances which was not the same company as Swift Advances PLC.

 

So here is the conundrum. On the FSA register site if you type in Swift Advances on their company register you get two companies listed

1. [swift Advances plc CM13 3BE Swift Advances Plc

2. Swift Finance (UK) Ltd S12 3GL Swift Finance (Uk) Ltd

 

the register also includes previous names and Trading As names,and under Swift Finance appear these companies

Swift Advances, Swift Finance, Swift Homeloans, Swift Insurance Services, Swift Mortgages, Swift Solutions

 

interesting as Swift Homeloans is registered at the same address as Swift Advances PLc. Coincidence or have the FSA made a mistake?

 

The FSA site is here-

FSA Register

 

Gets confusing doesn't it LFI?

 

Swift Finances (UK)Ltd (nothing to do with our Swift Advances plc on this forum, Alchemy or anyone else as far as we know yet) had as their registered 'trading style' , 'Swift Advances' as you correctly state which means that during the period most of the loans produced by Swift Advances plc under CCA regulated agreements at the very least were not executed by a licensed name. You will find Swift Advances plc dotted periodically on paperwork from them, but all their letter heads state Swift Advances not Swift Advances plc. All you see is at the footer of the page 'Swift Advances is a Trading style of Swift Advances plc' which is a mistatement of fact and the OFT have recognised that. We are just awaiting clarification as to what exactly this means to everyone.

 

Now when it comes to documents being provided for the courts such as default Noitces by Swift Advances plc they conveniently provide 'Copies' which are BLANK sheets of paper with the text spread as per the original may have looked, BUT no header or footer as provided to the account holder originally showing this unlicensed trading style, these documents only have typed across the top 'Swift Advances plc' in what looks like a Times Roman font to give the court the impression this is a copy of the original which of course it isn't. Therefore the Default notices have been tampered with. Over to you guys to tell us what the remedy for this means to the account holders....It's a splitting of hairs technicality, but potentially a lethal one for Swift Advances plc.

 

When you think about the management decisions going on in Swift Advances plc one thing is very prominant about this trading style business.

 

This is not some niaeve error...these people running Swift Advances plc are extremely experienced businessmen and women with a considerable amount of business knowledge, not some small time broker one man band. Someone has consciously made a decision to separate Swift Advances from Swift Advances plc and mention that split at the bottom of the page of their printed letterheaded company stationery and they began using the trading style for a reason.

 

Swift and experienced people like this do not do things without reason and this must not be forgotten. Knowing how important the OFT License is to this business of thiers, does anyone honestly believe NOBODY has checked out the trading styles being used by someone else? I don't think so.

 

Follow the money and you get to the truth, we are not privy to the reasons why they did this, but you can sure as hell be confident that there was a damned good reason. They just haven't thought out the consequences of being found out. So we'll do it for them.

Edited by Smarterchick
Link to post
Share on other sites

It should also be noted that the Swift Finances (UK) Ltd licence lapsed early in 2009. The conclusion I have arrived at ( along with others) as to why they use trading styles that are not registered is......................That Swift Advances, Eastern Counselling Swift Group Legal Sevices etc are not legal entities and in truth cannot be touched by the law.......now if action is taken against Swift Advances Plc and their licence is revoked by the OFT?????? they will cease trading and liquidate BUT .....think about this ................as all our loans have allready been sold to the Kestrel companies, these companies will come forward ( especially the Dormant company Kestrel Loans No 2 Ltd) and carry on as if nothing has happened ....Swift have no assetts .........they exist on borrowed money their creditors get nothing......... in fact there is a concensus that there is approx £200 million adrift "somewhere" in their accounts, this has not been verified as of yet but I believe it will be in the VERY near future by forensic accountants;);)

 

BY the way LFI just for "Information" :) Swift Advances PLc And Swift 1st Ltd are 69% owned by Kestrel Acquisitions Ltd

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for both responses but I think you missed my point or if you did see it, you didn't address it.

The point I made was that Swift Home loans is a registered name of Swift Finances according to the FSA site. However Swift Home Loans registered address is the same as Swift Advances PLC .

Something cannot be right there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for both responses but I think you missed my point or if you did see it, you didn't address it.

The point I made was that Swift Home loans is a registered name of Swift Finances according to the FSA site. However Swift Home Loans registered address is the same as Swift Advances PLC .

Something cannot be right there?

 

Swift Finance (GB) Ltd.....Swift Finances Ltd....Swift Finance (UK) Ltd..........Swift Financial Services Ltd ...none of these companies have any connection with Swift Home Loans Ltd or any of the Swift/Kestrel companies referred to on this thread Swift Home Loans Ltd is at present an active company with dormant accounts ...if that makes sense to folks ...it doesn't to me I must thick like I say!!!!:))

 

"Swift Finances" is merely a trading style/name of Swift Home Loans Ltd if & when they resurrect it...hope this makes things a little clear LFI.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to my own particular case....I have just pointed out to my legal team that the Default notice issued by Swift Advances was issued prior to the proceedings on the 25th JUne 2008 prior to the possession application because we had brached the agreement by getting in arrears....how ever we rectified tha breach by paying off the arrears and paid a further month in advance.

 

This rendered that default notice invaild as we had rectified the breach that default referred to and Swift withdrew the possession application

When Swift re-instated the possession proceedings in NOvember 2009 they did not issue another default notice........I have submitted to Counsel that this prevented Swift Advances Plc from enforcing the agreement and the security they held if I am correct then Swift Advances Plc have had it at my appeal the possession order will be squashed .....fingers crossed for us everyone please

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Hi Sparkie, you just keep fighting, I don't know how you do it. I'm so glad that this time you appear to have good Counsel, lets just hope that the judge sees sense and realises what a bunch of liars this company are. I' have just started to unravel my own paper work, I have discovered that my loan was arranged through a company called Central Credit, I now have all their paperwork. I just hope I have the fight in me to get this all sorted, I have now until August. Keeping everything crossed for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sparkie, you just keep fighting, I don't know how you do it. I'm so glad that this time you appear to have good Counsel, lets just hope that the judge sees sense and realises what a bunch of liars this company are. I' have just started to unravel my own paper work, I have discovered that my loan was arranged through a company called Central Credit, I now have all their paperwork. I just hope I have the fight in me to get this all sorted, I have now until August. Keeping everything crossed for you.

 

 

Thanks Blackie ...BUt you keep fighting....I have some information that I just CANNOT tell folks about at this moment but ....I can say you will all be taken so far aback that you will two weeks to catch yourself up that's a promise;);););):):):D:D:D:D

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

Am I missing something - SWIFT DO NOT own the loan's/mortgages, Kestral do - so how can SWIFT ask anyone for any money? If a company sells to another company any monies is owed to the new company?? surley that is illegal to collect money that does not belong to you?

 

Or am I just being dizzy :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sending this e-mail off to Mr Webster

 

sparkie

 

Dear Mr Webster,

 

I refer you to the e-mail you sent to me on 11th March 2010, I would like you to clarify one or two points that have arisen of late, I am privy to a recorded telephone conversation between one of Swift Advance Plc staff and a customer of Swift Advances Plc, who when asked if you could be spoken with, informed the caller that you were no longer with Swift Advances Plc and had not been since December, it is not illogical for me to question if this is so, how is that you replied to my email as copied below?

 

 

In another telephone converstaon another Swift Advances Plc customer had with Mr Mathew Payne he stated that you were still ( as you have claimed to be) the Chief Executive Officer of "The Swift Group"

It would, in my view be appropriate and prudent for you to make your staff also aware that you are still with Swift Advances Plc and in what exact capacity you are with them, in order that they supply callers and customers with the correct information

 

Could you therefore reconfirm that is correct and will you define which of these Groups you are actually Chief Executive of;

Is it this one?

Name & Registered Office:

SWIFT GROUP LIMITED

DUNSWELL ROAD

COTTINGHAM

EAST YORKSHIRE

HU16 4JX

Company No. 00832994

 

or is it this one?

 

The Swift Group

Global Wealth Management

150 FOURTH AVENUE NORTH

Suite 1700

NASHVILLE, TN 37219-2417

Phone: (610) 320-5455

 

Scott K. Swift, CFM(615) 747-5748Financial AdvisorKathleen S. Schwartz, CSNA(610) 320-5484Financial AdvisorStephen R. Bealer, CFP®, ChFC, CLU(610) 320-5453Financial AdvisorJohn C. Minnich, CFP®, ChFC(610) 320-5479Financial AdvisorAprile D. Seitz(610) 320-5483Client AssociateLindsay L. Dillingham, CRPC®(615) 747-5637Registered Client Associate

 

Or is it the "Swift Group" that does not legally exist?.

 

Thank you

Yours sincerely

 

W.B Grace ( SPARKIE)

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

[ATTACH]17444[/ATTACH]

 

May be of Interest from page 199 and especially para 57.

 

Paul

 

 

Excellent Paul ....the reason why SWift Companies NEVER pass interest rates on is not the reason Mark White explained under oath to the Courts in many cases is answered in this document ............they do securitise and DO NOT have the right to sue as I have been saying from the beginning, I am making my Counsel aware of this document;)

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

[ATTACH]17444[/ATTACH]

 

May be of Interest from page 199 and especially para 57.

 

Paul

 

 

WOW!! - nice one PW.

 

Heavy reading, but Paras 60 - 69 make you wonder if our little birdie use this as a business model.

 

Never heard the term 'Reposession or Disposession' before - Looks like Swifts deliberate actions are there as an actual strategy to dispossess?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent Paul ....the reason why SWift Companies NEVER pass interest rates on is not the reason Mark White explained under oath to the Courts in many cases is answered in this document ............they do securitise and DO NOT have the right to sue as I have been saying from the beginning, I am making my Counsel aware of this document;)

 

sparkie

 

Paul - well done - you Diamond!!!:D

 

 

SPARKIE - RING ME NOW!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!! - nice one PW.

 

Heavy reading, but Paras 60 - 69 make you wonder if our little birdie use this as a business model.

 

Never heard the term 'Reposession or Disposession' before - Looks like Swifts deliberate actions are there as an actual strategy to dispossess?

 

Just PM'd you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting for my accountant're report on the Accrual Summary but he has said: "almost Loan Shark rates, the default and litigation charges are Obscene". No suprises there.

Great post PW - just need a week to read it thoroughly!

SJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry cleaned up version:

 

Waiting for my accountant're report on the Accrual Summary but he has said: "almost Loan Shark rates, the default and litigation charges are Obscene". No suprises there.

 

Great post PW - just need a week to read it thoroughly!

SJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been following this forum, as you all know I are a victim of swifts actions that resulted in high charges and even higher interest rates been charged.

 

My health dose not allow me to get involved with this crusade, however I are with you on this and are supporting you in the back ground.

 

The postings of late have been positive and interesting reading and gets us further to getting justice.

 

Regards to you all Swift Eater.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this is the exact reason that Swift Advances & Swift 1st Ltd NEVER reduce their interest this says it all.

 

Mr White babbles on in the witness stand about rising costs etc etc nd then finally tries to say their rates are governed by Libor, but as is stated in their accounts they pay a fixed sum to Barclays Bank the main funders and ....when they sell our loans to an SPV ...the SPV puts the rate up Swift still pay the fixed rate to Barcalys ......Swift and the SPV then split the extra profit earned from the hike in their interest rates with the SPV ...a pure money making machine that is why it is put up EVERY 2 to 3 months

 

From the Banking Crisis memo

 

6. This is because, the banks have sold the mortgage contracts to the SPVs and it is the SPVs alone, that have the contractual power to determine the borrowers interest rates. Consequently, it is the SPVs that decide whether or not to pass on the interest rate cuts.

It is the SPVs that have decided not to pass on the interest rate cuts.

 

7. This fact is evidenced by the various and respective Prospectuses that the SPVs file at the UK Listing Authority. In general, the bank that originates the loans will make a True Saleof the mortgages to the SPV which means the contractual power to set the borrower’s interest rate is vested in the SPV.

 

8. Following the bank’s True Sale of the mortgages, the bank’s contractual relationship with the borrower is extinguished. The SPV, as assignee, becomes the party that is in privity of contract with the borrower. However, neither the bank nor the SPV inform the borrower

of the SPV’s ownership of the mortgage contract. The SPV will remain concealed. The borrower is unlikely to discover the SPV’s ownership of their mortgage contract because, following the sale to the SPV, the bank and the SPV enter into a contract wherein, the bank agrees to administrate the mortgages on behalf of the SPV and in return, the SPV remunerates the bank for its administrative services. Consequently, whilst the bank has extinguished all its right and title to the consumer’s mortgage contract, the bank’s connection to the consumer’s mortgage is through its administration agreement with the SPV only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

Excellent post Sparkie! :D

 

I think you're probably spot on!

 

Apollo18

 

 

Thanks Apollo,

 

I intend to agree that I am right ....they are cheating everyone.

 

I am also just sending this of to David Blocksidge at the OFT ....I am of the belief that every interest calculation is miscalculated on everyones agreement they have with BOTH of the SWIFT companies.

 

From

Sparkie

To Mr David Blocksidge

The Office of Fair Trading

 

Dear Mr Blocksidge,

I wish to copy you in with this e.mail I am sending the two named people at Swift Advances Plc with regard to the incorrect misleading APR stated on our agreement, calculated as shown, another fact that the courts believed Mr White when I challenged that APR, again showing how Mr White misled the Court.

 

I have many many Swift Advances Plc & Swift 1st Ltd agreements where the APR is miscalculated

Yours sincerely

 

sparkie

 

Dear Mr White,

You made the statement in your witness statement of truth submitted to the Court in the proceedings Swift Advances took out against usthat you had checked the APR on our agreement and found it to be correct (9.84%) ....that was not only and incorrect statement but an incorrect recalulation...... calculate it again in the manner it is supposed to calculated legally, not the Swift Advances Plc ...."special way".

 

APR Calculator

 

Loan amount (£)

Starter / admin charge (£)

Monthly repayment amount (£)

Number of monthly repayments

Extra final charge (£)

 

Results

 

APR15.4%

 

 

You will see above that the APR is 15.4%. not the 9.84% shown on our agreement

 

 

 

Then please note below.

 

Thank you

Yours sincerely

 

sparkie

 

 

 

Regina -v- Kettering Magistrates' Court ex parte MRB Insurance Brokers Limited [2000] EWHC Admin 3204 Apr 2000

Admn

Consumer, Crime, Financial Services A statement of an APR in the sale of a financial services product remained a price indication, and, if it was miscalculated, that was a misleading price indication, and criminal, despite provisions in the Consumer Credit legislation. What was given was a price under the contract. Consumer Protection Act 1987 20 - Consumer Credit Act 1974 170(1)

 

 

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Continuing on a bit from Sparkies post 2798 [bTW the article was written by a Carmel Butler- a lawyer who has specialised knowledge of securitisation]- and SPVs are Special Purpose Vehicles-

 

17. This is where the legal ruse comes into play. It is this “registration gap” that the SPV

unlawfully exploits in order to conceal its ownership and control of the mortgages.

Under the Land Registration Act 2002 (“LRA 2002”), the transferee47 of a registered

charge is required to register at H.M. Land Registry, its ownership of the mortgage that it

purchased.48 Therefore, it is a legal requirement that the SPV register its proprietorship

of the mortgage at H.M. Land Registry. Whilst the law implicitly permits the registration

gap as a matter of pragmatism, the law also implicitly mandates that the registration

requirements are to be observed expeditiously. Nonetheless, in contumacious disregard

for its legal duty to comply with the registration requirements of the LRA 2002, the

contract of sale expressly provides that the SPV will not register the transfer at H.M. Land

Registry indeed, the contract provides that notice of the transfer is to be concealed from

the borrowers and H.M. Land Registry and a fortiori concealed from the world49.

18. The suppression and concealment of this information from H.M. Land Registry is a

criminal offence50, and in furtherance of this offence51, the SPV’s legal title to the

mortgages is also concealed from the county courts and the Government. The Banks

remain registered as the proprietor of the mortgages and accordingly all interested parties

are deceived by this concealment with one exception. The SPV does inform its investors

that the bank sold its legal title to the SPV (to whom, the right to register the legal title to

the mortgages is important). Consequently, the bank appears to be the legal owner, but it is not.

 

In the foot notes to her treatise on securitisation Mrs Butler points out.

42See Q170. Angela Knight of the BBA states in explanation that the housing market reduction is value is “affecting

the risk weighting of those assets...so the amount of capital that banks hold against that risk also increases”. In fact,

the bank have sold the assets and passed that risk to the SPV and therefore with respect, Ms Knight’s reasoning is

defective. In effect, the governments initiatives are supporting the SPVs and their investors and not (as it believes)

the banks. This begs the question, why should the tax payer be called upon to guarantee the return of investments?

Edited by lookinforinfo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry cleaned up version:

 

Waiting for my accountant're report on the Accrual Summary but he has said: "almost Loan Shark rates, the default and litigation charges are Obscene". No suprises there.

 

Great post PW - just need a week to read it thoroughly!

SJ

 

Hi SJ,

 

Any chance your accountants report could be sent to Mr Blocksidge at the OFT?

 

Regards to All

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4908 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...