Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter McCormack says "ambition is big" and Real Bedford's attendances are increasing with promotions.View the full article
    • How does one obtain the permit? The permit team number is only open between the hours of 9am to 3pm Mon - Fri. It says on the website, To obtain an additional 2 hours, the driver must pay a tariff of £3.00 + booking fees in person at our Security Hut, is that how you get the permit also, from the security hut? What a rigmaroll that would be but maybe just another step to take to try and catch people out?
    • Anotheruser0000 bear in mind that not all Judges are equally versed in the PoFA regulations. Fortunately now most of them are but sometimes a Judge from a higher Court sits in who is well experienced  in Law but not PoFA. and so they sometimes go "offkey" because their knowledge can raise a different set of arguments and solutions. It does seem particularly unfair  when the decision is so  bad . it can also be that in some situations the motorist being a lay person is not sufficiently know ledgeable to be able to counter a Judge's decisions in a way that a barrister could.
    • The argument about the date of receipt is now dead because the PCN  does not comply with the wording  of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  First reason Section 9 [2] [e]  "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges;" Second Reason Section 9 [2][a] "specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;" All your PCN does is mark the time you entered and left the car park. It does not include all the myriad things you do in between-driving into the car park, looking for a parking space-perhaps a disabled space or  parent and Child place@ getting the children or disabled person out of the car then going shopping. Coming back; loading the car with shopping [, getting the children or disabled into the car, taking the trolley back to the store; driving to the exit perhaps stopping to let vehicles/pedestrians cross in front of you etc. so subtracting the driving times from before and after parking can make quite a difference from their time to the actual period parking time. So the upshot is now that only the driver is responsible for paying the PCN and the keeper is not liable at all even if the name of the driver is never known by Nexus so well done for not appealing. You obviously want to keep it that way to make it very difficult for them to win in Court if it ever goes that far. Although your question is now moot since  the same objective has been achieved by the non compliant PCN [ie no keeper liability] just  about the only way to dispute the timing of the PCN would be if one kept the envelope and there was a discernible date stamp on it that did not match the date on the PCN. There is a new Act coming out [and it cannot come quickly enough ] and one of the things required is that parking companies will have to prove the date of sending out their PCNs. We are not the only ones who sometimes doubt the veracity of their dates particularly as the later it is sent [unlawfully] the shorter the period motorists have to benefit [?] from the reduced payment. I haven't seen it on your posts but do you know how long you are permitted to park for free?
    • I was so annoyed and frustrated about the fact this case was lost it's been floating around my head all night. Dave962, are you sure that's what the Judge said? .... It doesn't make sense. Did the judge in fact dismiss the case on the grounds that the defendant did not make an appeal within 28 days? Effectively telling the PPC about the error entering the registration number and providing proof of payment at that time? To me, that's an important point.  
  • 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 4903 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

Oh dear, here we go again. But I think Takeiteasy is right. All the people on this forum, including Mr Sparkie are all up their own backsides trying to dodge debt and should be responsible borrowers and live up to what they sign up to, pay it all back and live happily ever after. That's what you are implying of course (and no, you are not winding me up as well).

 

I agree, people should be responsible, honest, not break the law or try and dodge their legal obligations -it's common decency after all, I support you 100% - you're a fine fellow/woman if those values glide through your bones. We'd all subscribe to that.

 

Of course, when organisations with a fiduciary duty, legal obligations for which they are granted license to operate, and a duty of care, who are transparent and who are respected members of the professional business community to who we hold in high esteem as purveyors of all things good turn out to be liars, crooks who do anything they can to weasle their way into repossessing honest (in the main) citizens homes without a care in the world in the name of profit then one can hardly be surprised if someone eventually catches on to their evil ways, investigates and then tries to ask honest and decent questions which are always met with a deadly silence or evasive brick wall. - Enter Mr Sparkie et al.

 

Have you ever tried asking honest and decent questions about something only to be stifled by an ignorant response?

 

Actually, we don't usually feed trolls, but you are obviously someone with a considerable knowledge and as has been suggested, you may even have an insight into the subject matter company. If that is the case and you have any kind of decency within you, come and join us in uncovering the web of deceit that is going on rather than mocking the considerable efforts going on on this thread to uncover the truth.

 

That's all this is about. If Swift told the truth when asked most of the litigation which goes on and all the speculative avenues of advice we try to establish would never have happened in the first place.

 

Look in the mirror whoever you are and ask yourself if any one of the posters on this thread was a member of your family about to be thrown out of their home due to deceit - what would you do?

 

Jump ship - come and join us and be constructive and use some of those obvious talents you have.. ;)

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

Takeiteasy - I personally don't owe Swift a penny, but if I can do anything in my power to prevent this 'company' putting another victim through what they put my family through a while back, then I will do it!

 

Like Andrew1 said, I also believe people should be responsible for their actions and repay what they owe, but if they (through no fault of their own in most cases) become unable to do this, they should be met with compassion not repossession from companies such as Swift :(

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from Andrew1

 

"Oh dear, here we go again. But I think Takeiteasy is right. All the people on this forum, including Mr Sparkie are all up their own backsides ..........."

 

Not sure if I like that!:p:p:D:D:D

 

 

Landy,

 

That's it all the "Swift" people haven't realised yet that compassion and repossession are two different words with different meanings........its follows if you can't do sums properly like Mr White then they are more than likely not to understand English.....even when its "typed with a Liverpool accent":D:D

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from Andrew1

 

"Oh dear, here we go again. But I think Takeiteasy is right. All the people on this forum, including Mr Sparkie are all up their own backsides ..........."

 

Not sure if I like that!:p:p:D:D:D

 

I wouldn't be rude to the Queen and I wouldn't be rude to you sir ;)

 

My argument is not about a company showing compassion although that should be a part of their ethos as when you lend money as a business it is understandable that sometimes people do fall into personal crisis which requires compassion.

 

No, my issue as it has always been is the foundation of ALL business people and that begins with a 'Core term'

 

"ACT WITHIN THE LAW "

 

Do that and the rest follows....all I see on here are Agreements which are incorrectly calculated, draughted or executed, Trading Styles unlicensed and abused and even laughably using someone else's licensed name. Default notices tampered with, signatures faked, Terms and Conditions abused the list is endless and that's before all the alleged lies told in court and so on..

 

Now these people apparently received £400 million's to set this company going. They have a team of legal people who frankly should have gone through all these agreements to ensure they were abiding by the Rules and Regulations to which they subscribe, the Acts of Parliament requirements for the industry sector they are trading within and trained their staff to carry out a professional and legal, law abiding company. I ran a business for 30 yrs and it was all about contracts - I had my solicitors pawing over these all the time watching the changes to legislation from within my industry. So what have these people been doing? That is a very critical question, these are not newbies to their industry either.

 

Please don't come crying on here lecturing the mainly innocent on morals and legalities before getting your own business in order - You abide by the law - so will we. You are in no position yet to start lecturing anyone. Thus far you are bullies, callous, crude, arrogant, lying bullies but your day will come as have others with whom you may not know, but who have walked in your shoes beforehand and perished....don't say you have not been warned (or, been given the chance to avoid ;) )

 

Takeiteasy, as I have said, if you have any conscience search your soul.

 

 

andrew1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,well Mr Takeiteasy, I,m only joining in cause you infuriate me so much. Its not Sparkie on here that put me up to getting a fully quilified consumer credit solicitor involved. It was ME. So lay of the old guys and pick on us younger ones instead. Read my posts on swift and my experiances with them. I,ve not been on here for a while because i,m waiting on a new doner liver aswell as worrying about having my home repossesed. Don,t suppose you carry a doner card do you? Then again would i won,t anything of a heartless t..t like you? My wife is a school teacher and brings in money every month, pays tax and looks after me and 4 kids. Is compation taking our house just because i became ill and can no longer meet our commitments? My solicitor has wrote numerous letters to the FSA and Mr Blockersage and now informs us he has never seen such hi, hidden and devious credit agreements he has ever seen. I wont to go to the high court to face these people! bring them on because even the path the courts will see who,s right and wrong! So go and start your own thread instead of hijacking ours. P.S did you write your message on a swift computer? Was Mr Mark watching over you? I wonder! P.s because life throws all sorts of things at you tell Marky Mark my brother did not enjoy his stay in prison and he was 6"4" and built like a wall. Said christmas tea wasn,t that good either!

Link to post
Share on other sites

by jove sparkie old mate you have put the cat among the swifties.

your 100% my old friend, looks like you have hit a raw nerve, the SPARKLE has gone like Mr John Webster according to the swift switchboard.

in fact they are all trying to bail out, talk about rats leaving a sinking ship. most of the long term staff are already well out.

as for mr steal it easy, I think whats ****ing it of is they were hoping to make a song about white lies but Mr hudson beat them to it

keep it up my friend there is not enough people like you. as for you mates across the water they have enough stuff on these bustards to hang draw and quarter the lot of them

they are joking now about how they once said swifties were a bunch of organised criminals. not they describe them as disorganised criminals ;)

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

THe top the mornin to you pkelly ...........I have missed you on the forum...........all I have got to say at this moment in time is .....If YOU borrow money illegally from a bank by misleading the Bank........and then you lend that money ILLEGALLY to someone else..............what right have you got got to force the borrower to pay it back .........using the Courts ILLEGALLY by misleading the Courts by telling lies?? into making such orders for the borrower to do so:confused::mad:

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

JUst a thought

 

Why do not folks ring Swift Advances Plc & Swift 1st Limited on Monday and ask that as they are of the belief that their loan has been sold to “a” Kestrel company would it be possible for them to be supplied with the bank details of that company in order that they can amend their direct debit or other means of payment to the Kestrel company their loan or mortgage was sold to.

Provided that the necessary OFT licence number details is given including the Credit Reference Agency licence details for processing data and information, and the acceptance holding of clients money is given. and the ICO licence held by the Kestrel company issued by that office.

Tell them that they are aware that Swift Advances Plc can administer the account and if that is so please could they be supplied with the details of that arrangement given by the Kestrel company involved.

Otherwise payments could be with held as it is believed the wrong company is being paid at the moment.

Also ask for the full details of their OFT CCA licence to ascertain the lawfulness of all this

 

Could cause them some problems methinks;)

 

BUt ten again I could be accused of whipping you all up into a frenzy...you know I am the NEW Svengali:D:D

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what Sparkie, that is a fantastic idea, and I am going ot email them asking exactly all you have suggested, but just for belt and braces will send it recorded delivery as well......

 

Would it actually be worth anyone having a suspended possession order writing ot the court and make them aware of this?

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest takeiteasy

The collective responses actually validate my points and I do carry an organ donor card. I can assure you that I do not work for Swift, but I do understand credit, lending and securitisation which is why I can categorically state that most posts on this board regarding technical issues are so factually incorrect that they are dangerous. Not a single post discussing loan sales to Kestrel, securitisation, servicing, accounting, trading styles, company names, etc. are inproper. These areas are 100% legal and virtually every mortgage lending entity (other than depository institutions) employ the same strategy as Swift. Sparkie has this group so whipped up that at various points you have believed Swift are part of a caravan company, they are a large equity fund based in America, every statement in Swifts statutory accounts are false (something their auditors and the Inland Revenue have not picked up on), loan agreement numbers, bank account numbers, company names, default letters and so on are all part of a gigantic conspiracy that involves solicitors, judges, government officials and of course Swift employees.

 

Sparkie -

 

1. How does a company make you borrow more money than you wanted? If they gave you more than you wanted why didn't you either reject the loan or pay back what you didn't want immediately or just say no?

 

2. RBS out of nowhere randomly stole £3000 from your account?

 

3. Black Horse, again randomly, said you owed them money for an non existent debt then put a default against you on your credit file?

 

4. How did it transpire that you originally started on this forum for the sole purpose of helping a friend then you end up also being wronged by Swift?

 

5. What about the conspiracy theory with your solicitor and the judges?

You seriously must be the unluckiest person in the world to have these problems. For all of this to happen to one person is not beleivable.

 

People, none of this makes you think something's going on with him?

 

Next week? Go back and look at old posts from Sparkie and see how he's said the same thing before. Here's what will happen, next week will come and go and there will be nothing major. I think the last time big news was forthcoming he claimed his solicitor let him down. Sparkie will apologise for letting the group down and everyone will tell him to keep fighting and not to lose hope.

 

I honestly hope that anyone who was taken in by Swift under false pretenses or has otherwise been subject to illegal practises by them are successful in your claims. Sparkie is spewing an endless amount of false and misleading information. He is giving you false hope and taking advantage of the very vulnerable. Go back and look at his posts and prerpare yourselves for no big news next week because there won't be any. In this case there is no power in numbers. Do yourself a favour and get a good solicitor and fight Swift to the death just don't rely on information given by Sparkie, he's dangerous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The collective responses actually validate my points and I do carry an organ donor card. I can assure you that I do not work for Swift, but I do understand credit, lending and securitisation which is why I can categorically state that most posts on this board regarding technical issues are so factually incorrect that they are dangerous. Not a single post discussing loan sales to Kestrel, securitisation, servicing, accounting, trading styles, company names, etc. are inproper. These areas are 100% legal and virtually every mortgage lending entity (other than depository institutions) employ the same strategy as Swift. Sparkie has this group so whipped up that at various points you have believed Swift are part of a caravan company, they are a large equity fund based in America, every statement in Swifts statutory accounts are false (something their auditors and the Inland Revenue have not picked up on), loan agreement numbers, bank account numbers, company names, default letters and so on are all part of a gigantic conspiracy that involves solicitors, judges, government officials and of course Swift employees.

 

Sparkie -

 

1. How does a company make you borrow more money than you wanted? If they gave you more than you wanted why didn't you either reject the loan or pay back what you didn't want immediately or just say no?

 

2. RBS out of nowhere randomly stole £3000 from your account?

 

3. Black Horse, again randomly, said you owed them money for an non existent debt then put a default against you on your credit file?

 

4. How did it transpire that you originally started on this forum for the sole purpose of helping a friend then you end up also being wronged by Swift?

 

5. What about the conspiracy theory with your solicitor and the judges?

You seriously must be the unluckiest person in the world to have these problems. For all of this to happen to one person is not beleivable.

 

People, none of this makes you think something's going on with him?

 

Next week? Go back and look at old posts from Sparkie and see how he's said the same thing before. Here's what will happen, next week will come and go and there will be nothing major. I think the last time big news was forthcoming he claimed his solicitor let him down. Sparkie will apologise for letting the group down and everyone will tell him to keep fighting and not to lose hope.

 

I honestly hope that anyone who was taken in by Swift under false pretenses or has otherwise been subject to illegal practises by them are successful in your claims. Sparkie is spewing an endless amount of false and misleading information. He is giving you false hope and taking advantage of the very vulnerable. Go back and look at his posts and prerpare yourselves for no big news next week because there won't be any. In this case there is no power in numbers. Do yourself a favour and get a good solicitor and fight Swift to the death just don't rely on information given by Sparkie, he's dangerous.

 

Just about sick to the teeth with you mate...so I will be drawn

 

Answer to

1

My loan agreement with Swift Advances Plc (note I use their correct title not a trading style/name).... stated at the top .......the amount I asked to borrow.....

The amount that appeared on my credit file borrowed was £3955 more than I applied for.

 

2

The RBS systematically removed sums of money totalling just under £3000 actually in 5 transactions and transferred them to an account I used to hold that has been admitted in court documents to have been closed 13 months earlier....due to the fact I had suffered a serious heart attack while all this was going on I was completely unaware of these transactions two of them .....the two large transactions took place while I was actually in hospital and could not have sanctioned them. They have ADMITTED to one of the transactions....but because they cannot trace where it has gone tried to blame the Norwich Union ...who categorically refute and deny what the RBS say.....they still have not offered to pay this back. ( Ihave a leter from the RBS solictors confirming this fact)

 

The Chief Executive of Manufacturing RBS amitted in front of my MP that serious accounting errors took place on my accounts.and that they had not handled my dispute and complaint in a proper manner...........but cleverly admitted all this as the meeting was a without prejudice meeting at the insistance of the RBS.

 

3

Answer to this is exactly what I have said and will post the letter of apology for this action just for you to see in a few moments.

 

4 Is just not worth answering.

 

5 I have not claimed conspirancy of any descriptuion only facts.

1..The solicitors initial involved have been found at fault by the Legal Complaints Services ........ and those solicitors were ordered to deduct £ 3.600 off their fees which was over half of those total fees ( these have been paid may I add)

The legal Complaints Complaints Service cannot award or investigate for negligence and have advised that court action is avilable agast them to reclaim all I have paid plus compensation ...which will take place when I can possibly do so.

 

The Barrister concerned has been investigated by the Bar Standards Board and that is now in the hands of the Legal Ombudsman who is investigating further....using the information and findings of the Legal Compliants Service together with the Bar Standards Board findings.

 

6. With regard to companies accounts check yourself with companies house ...you will find accounts lodged there ...some are unsigned by their auditors...some are not dated...and each year strangely enough its a differnt comany each year who's accounts are not comlete.

 

So you see "Old sparkie" may be dangerous ....BUT....Who to in reality??

 

I still believe you either work for one of the afore mentioned companies or USED to, I could be wrong ..but you have given no idication for me to assume otherwise.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially for The "Extra SPECIAL ONE"....Mr Fling his hook" as us scousers would say

Note they admit I was in no way responsilbe for this default entry...................... I never say something unless I have a document to prove it.

 

The date it was entered was 31st May 2001 the date they were finally forced to remove it was 23rd December 2003.

 

 

I believe also that there are people with far worse stories to tell of what he calls "bad luck" than me

 

 

sparkie

 

letterofadmittnacebyBlackHorse.jpg

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Take it easy

 

Maybe you could share some of your vast knowledge and experience in these matters with us all......

 

As you have stated .....in your post....you are very knowledgeable in matters of a financial nature:- (Quote TIE)

 

"I can assure you that I do not work for Swift, but I do understand credit, lending and securitisation which is why I can categorically state that most posts on this board regarding technical issues are so factually incorrect that they are dangerous. Not a single post discussing loan sales to Kestrel, securitisation, servicing, accounting, trading styles, company names, etc. are inproper."

 

Perhaps I can ask you again to share your expert knowledge and enlighten all of us on here.....I do enjoy a good factual, open, honest and transparent debate....I am always eager to learn.

 

I ask you therefore to point out the errors and inaccuracies so that we may learn together on the best way forward with this company.

 

I throw down the gauntlet.....I do hope you have the ball bearings to take it up???:lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The collective responses actually validate my points.

How/ Please explain.

I can assure you that I do not work for Swift, but I do understand credit, lending and securitisation..so have you worked for Swift and are you a someone who needs permission to be a member on this site? .. which is why I can categorically state that most posts on this board regarding technical issues are so factually incorrect that they are dangerous.

Not a single post discussing loan sales to Kestrel, securitisation, servicing, accounting, trading styles, company names, etc. are inproper. These areas are 100% legal and virtually every mortgage lending entity (other than depository institutions) employ the same strategy as Swift.

Are you saying that companies who buy

debt in bulk from the original creditors do not need to be licensed by the OFT and the FSA? Sparkie has this group so whipped up that at various points you have believed Swift are part of a caravan company, they are a large equity fund based in America, every statement in Swifts statutory accounts are false (something their auditors and the Inland Revenue have not picked up on), rather a poor argument because of the huge sums of money paid to top auditing companies their greed appears to override their fiduciary duty so no surprise that they keep any reservations to themselves. and as the auditors don't pick up on things, how are the Inland Revenue to know? loan agreement numbers, bank account numbers, company names, default letters and so on are all part of a gigantic conspiracy that involves solicitors, judges, government officials and of course Swift employees.

 

As you are such an expert on securitisation, lending etc. if you were genuinely on the site, you would surely have an interest in correcting any errors of fact as they appear. Far better that than sneering at some one who you think has got matters wrong, but failing to explain where he is wrong in your view. Blanket generalisations are no help to anyone-you included-as we still have no idea if you know what you are talking about or deliberately picking on Sparkie

in a futile attempt to cast doubt on his findings.

 

At least Sparkie does put his findings on to this thread where they can be shot down if incorrect-and he has never claimed to be infallible. You on the other hand have consistently denigrated Sparkie and many others of us on this site but contributed absolutely nothing in the way of

constructive help.

 

If you think Sparkie is wrong on something specific [ and not cheap jibes on caravans] please explain why. Then your views and opinions are open to scrutiny and we can then form our own view as to whether you are an expert in your field or not. If you are not prepared to do that then one would have to wonder what the point is in talking to you.

 

 

{ sorry docman your post beat me to it.}

Link to post
Share on other sites

THank you LFI ........I try to be as open as anyone possibly can be ...even to giving my name and address freely, if I am wrong then I will accept that if it is prooved I am ...and I will accept it and apologise, ....I have been prooved wrong in some instances ...and have admitted it....however contray to what Mr Righteous believes...there will be news next week and not at the end of it either... more like Tuesday and more likely of an important event on Wednesday;)

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest takeiteasy

Doc/Looking - I will do that for you and the group this evening or tomorrow morning at the latest (it will take some time).

 

I will also attempt to unravel Sparkies labyrinth of factually inaccurate and misleading statements. My issue with Sparkie is that what he is telling you is wrong and I think takes away from what you should really be focusing on to get the results you desperately need from Swift. Take some time and read Sparkies posts on this board and many others and I think you'll see several are questionable. What happens after this week passes and you're still in the same boat? Does the cycle start all over again?

 

I don't work for Swift, have never worked for Swift and have never worked for a company like Swift. I did not get permission to post on this board, I didn't know it was required and don't know how to do it.

 

Sparkie - unfortunately, your explanation does little to change my opinion (I'll save you the key strokes - I know you don't care what my opinion of you is). Let's see where things are this time next week and whether or not this week is the week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doc/Looking - I will do that for you and the group this evening or tomorrow morning at the latest (it will take some time).

 

I will also attempt to unravel Sparkies labyrinth of factually inaccurate and misleading statements. My issue with Sparkie is that what he is telling you is wrong and I think takes away from what you should really be focusing on to get the results you desperately need from Swift. Take some time and read Sparkies posts on this board and many others and I think you'll see several are questionable. What happens after this week passes and you're still in the same boat? Does the cycle start all over again?

 

I don't work for Swift, have never worked for Swift and have never worked for a company like Swift. I did not get permission to post on this board, I didn't know it was required and don't know how to do it.

 

Sparkie - unfortunately, your explanation does little to change my opinion (I'll save you the key strokes - I know you don't care what my opinion of you is). Let's see where things are this time next week and whether or not this week is the week.

 

 

If you can afford the airfare take a trip to HIgh Court in Belfast Tuesday 10:30 a.m.

 

THis is not just a County Court hearing...this is in front of a Grand Master who takes no prisoners.

Swift Advances PlcV " 2 Others ...that's if they dare turn up!!! you AND everyone else?????? is in for one hell of a shock.

A chartered accountant has had a look at the accounts in question ( not me) and there is £200m missing somewhere..it has not been traced as yet ........but it will

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest takeiteasy

Sparkie - wouldn't it be better to tell everyone after you get the news you think will be so welcome? You are doing nothing but setting everyone up for dissapointment.

 

This is exactly the problem I have with Sparkie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are doing nothing but setting everyone up for dissapointment.

 

This is exactly the problem I have with Sparkie.

 

Why are you sure Tuesday will be a disappointment?...get a grip old boy.

 

I've been locking horns with **** bag rapacious money lenders myself (starsky and hutch:):):))and I can assure you they are not the pillars of society you seem to think they are.

 

Paul Walton

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey, I leave this place for a couple of days and all hell breaks loose..:p

 

I'd like to see what someone else suggested, a bit of input from this takeiteasy which is constructive rather than knocking poor old Sparkie.

 

I doubt any speculation would have been needed if these gits in Brentwood responded to questions when asked. Nobodys asked any rocket science questions, just what is normal to ask any bank or business who take you through the hoops. They say everything's irrelevant when you ask them so what are we all supposed to do?

 

Read between the lines and help if you can rather than knocking what has gone on...just debate, and by debating you can put your alternatives so we can discuss it. Old sparkie has done some sterling work on here, speculative? - maybe at times, controversial - always :D, but he's only doing what everyone else can't or hasn't the time to and that is research. If ole Webster and the crowd down there actually answered the questions none of this would have even started on here. Most wouldn't have complained at all, but there are some corkers of errors been going on with Swift in factual evidence rather than speculative thoughts we might have, what else they have been doing is only down to researching public documents and that's where people like our sparkie are so helpful.

 

Swift would continue to get away with all this otherwise and that my old sunshine ain't gonna happen no more ;)

 

Or would you rather see people lopped out onto the street? No? Then contribute something constructive. I'll take as your first constructive suggestion cutting Sparkie out of the equation and reckoning. So here on in lets have something else. :)

 

SMC

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4903 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...