Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[busterg]

I thought Swift was a caravan company until I discovered Smirnoff. Hic.

 

Should have seen what I found out after discovery.

[pkelly]

[email protected]

[Guest takeiteasy]

busterg - so you believe that nothing I have posted is true?

[Sparkie1723]

I worked in the UK for 10 years, not I've been working in the UK for 10 years. There is a difference. Perhaps you can ask one of your super duper special secret agent guys to explain the slight difference to you. Drink a warm glass of milk and go to bed, you are becoming loopier and loopier by the hour.

 

So you admit that you are 10 years out of date?? Sorry folks had to say that.

 

I'm off for my warm glass of milk now. Big day tomorrow " UP THE IRISH" Come on the lads in green!!!

 

sparkie

[Guest takeiteasy]

Make that 2 glasses of milk Sparkie and maybe some new glasses. I'll try again (please read at a slow pace, I've placed additional spaces to help you out), I worked in the UK for 10 years not I worked in the UK 10 years ago. Use the special red phone next to your bed and call the Grand Poobah - he will help you, I'm sure of it

[busterg]

busterg - so you believe that nothing I have posted is true?

 

The truth can be twisted to anyone's advantage. I know my situation and my truth! Nice try .....just like many others on here.

 

Niite Nite Svengali - c u 2morrow, all the best the greens!!

[pkelly]

so tie you say that swift will only be beat on their over charging etc

why do you seem to think they have never committed any crime

or even lied in court

mark white the wee runt with his goggle eyes, tattered suit and big swift case, have lied under oath,

its all down in black and White so to speak

its just a matter of time until a joint case will be brought against swift, and they know that

and better still you know that

[busterg]

Make that 2 glasses of milk Sparkie and maybe some new glasses. I'll try again (please read at a slow pace, I've placed additional spaces to help you out), I worked in the UK for 10 years not I worked in the UK 10 years ago. Use the special red phone next to your bed and call the Grand Poobah - he will help you, I'm sure of it

 

oh yeah very funny - i could ****. how's about 999 or 0151 473 0303. They might be able to help you? coz we can't!

[pkelly]

busterg - so you believe that nothing I have posted is true?

can you say without doubt that Swift have never lied in court or had to settle out of court or GAG anyone from spilling the beans:D:D:D

[Apollo18]

Apollo - when Swift raised your rate did they quote both BBR and LIBOR? Unfortunately you are most likely right in what you are saying and it is a disgrace that they have done this. When they are brought to justice, and they will, it will be for things like this just like Kensington and GMAC were nailed for similar injustices.

TIE - Only BBR.....No mention of LIBOR.

 

However, from what others have said on here, if you phone them up they always go on about their rates being dependent on LIBOR. ???

[pkelly]

come on tie no one would in their right mind waste their time sitting on this all night, having just come from Canada, unless they were involved or had something to lose

get a life man

[busterg]

come on tie no one would in their right mind waste their time sitting on this all night, having just come from Canada, unless they were involved or had something to lose

get a life man

 

Hopefully in Bellmarsh.:grin::grin:

[pkelly]

this reminds me of the cb craze thats where I met my hubby, hes long gone now tie any chance of us meeting up. I would love you to show me your rockies;)

[busterg]

this reminds me of the cb craze thats where I met my hubby, hes long gone now tie any chance of us meeting up. I would love you to show me your rockies;)

 

That's one mountain road you don't want t go down.

[Doc2527]

Hi Take it easy

 

I'm rather disappointed that you haven't afforded, to some of us answers to the questions that Smarterchick had posed earlier today.

 

I was looking forward to your replies.

 

All I've read this evening is a "tit for tat" "cat calling" "mud slinging" tirade.

 

I had hoped for better things.

 

Alas it would appear that it is not to be.:?

 

Doc

[Guest takeiteasy]

pk = how do you know he lied/

 

?

 

 

 

 

 

ho do you know he lied? Is he in jail now . what he didnt say is what sparekie said he was going to say theu he's a liar. classic case on Sparkie. All problems are gone tomorrow right sparkie. I wonder what you tell thennn when tomorrow is not the day. A bad judge for sure

[Sparkie1723]

I listen to everyones advice and consider it sometimes I accept it and sometimes I don't...........I ask you ...I have been a member of CAG since November 2006 I can say I have differences with a few members ( there are over 250000 of them ) but I have not really upset any memeber in the way I seem to have got under your skin in how long 3 weeks is it.

 

You do not seem to have a sense of humor that is unfortunate, as sense of humor in life is a very important part of anyones life.

 

For example EVERYONE knows the reference to "super duper special secret agent guys" is and taken by all as a joke ....J.O.K.E. sadly you do not see the funny side.

 

I take all your remarks as a joke.....I do need new glasses this requirement befalls a vast majority of people of my age ( of which I am not ashamed of)...nothing anyone can do about that I hope it does not happen to others as it is expensive but unavoidable.......Milk I have allways drank it as I like it, no problem here also.....and strangely enough I support Liverpool and do have a red phone by the side of my bed. can't argue with that fact either.

 

sparkie

[Guest takeiteasy]

doc = i cant find her post can ir be resent again. I will do it before I go to beg sorry

[Guest takeiteasy]

Sparkie I have a grreat sense of humour and it gets me through every day. I'm not as old as you but need glasses and I hate milk

[Doc2527]

Hi Take it easy

 

Check out post 3041 this has Smarterchicks questions in it.

 

Thanks

 

doc

[lookinforinfo]

Takeiteasy-here's the post from Smarterchick

 

Thanks TIE, that begins to explain a few things, but not being a party to it all this leaves us at a disadvantage and your insight from where ever it comes is much appreciated dispite what others say. You can understand how the speculation accrues though can't you? (Bit like Swifts inte rest rates )

 

.. Can you explain for me how properties can be shown as being 'sold' by Swift Advances plc and Swift 1st Ltd in their accounts (for example, but it could relate to any company) to what you describe as an spv in the shape of Kestrel Loans No1 Ltd.

 

Kestrel Loans no.1 Ltd show in their accounts that they have acquired ALL Loans and mortgages from these 2 companies - so how have they 'acquired' them in your opinion?

 

Whether this is the same group of companies or not I don't think in my limited knowledge makes any diference - the Ltd liability makes them independant legally. If the properties were transfered in trust then no funds would have exchanged hands so why would a consideration have been applied? - all very confusing.

 

It can't be securitisation can it as their ceo states categorically they do not do this - spv's are for securitisation are they not? Is it an equitable Assignment or a straight sale? If they don't securitise what exactly would you suggest they are doing which opposes previous posters ideas of alleged fraudulent activity or a giant cock-up ?

 

A sale is either Equitable or Legal and on what basis would the banks to whom they apply for funding under the spv (or whatever) lend? - on the equitable rights when Kestrel do not hold the title or would it be on the security of the title which should then be in the name then of Kestrel rather than Swift Advances plc?

 

Of course, all this talk of conspiracy derives from the fact that you have all the same 3 directors over the whole operation from Kestrel Holdings all the way down through to Kestrel Loans No2 Ltd - now defunct as previously correctly stated by you. What are your thoughts on that if you don't mind?

 

It all gets a little confusing and I would appreciate your learned skills and knowledge at explaining this so I might understand this a little better...thanks (how did your match go?)

 

SC

[Sparkie1723]

It was goodnight from him and now its goodnight from me.

 

sparkie

[frettful38]

Make that 2 glasses of milk Sparkie and maybe some new glasses. I'll try again (please read at a slow pace, I've placed additional spaces to help you out), I worked in the UK for 10 years not I worked in the UK 10 years ago. Use the special red phone next to your bed and call the Grand Poobah - he will help you, I'm sure of it

 

You are not as clever as you may think you are TIE. Constructive criticism is fine but having personal digs at sparkie is a bit below the belt.

 

Anyway what business is of yours if anyone winds or loses, I mean its not like you have been helping any cagger in their problems, or maybe you have and I can't seem to find your posts .

 

Good luck sparkie, there are many of us rooting for you. Remember a few rotten apples don't make the whole tree rotten. Just look at these negative comments from certain members as rotten apples and chuck them away.

 

You have been through a lot and at your age you are an inspiration to all of us. Now you go get them, we are all waiting for good news mate.

 

regards

 

frett:D

[Marky1701]

just got a link regarding take iteasyfolks and the rest of those buzzards

 

Hi PK

 

Can you post or send the link please?

 

By the way, If any of you do know who TIE is or represents, just post it - at least give him a chance to defend, and we here will know who we are dealing with.

 

Fingers and toes crossed for those in court today - catch us a buzzard!!

 

m

[Guest takeiteasy]

Thanks TIE, that begins to explain a few things, but not being a party to it all this leaves us at a disadvantage and your insight from where ever it comes is much appreciated dispite what others say. You can understand how the speculation accrues though can't you? (Bit like Swifts inte rest rates )

 

Sorry I didn’t get back to you yesterday. I can see how your plight and that of the others has been snowballing and how difficult a position you are in. And as I said before if I can shed any light on anything I will. I have no hidden agenda, do not work for Swift and never have.

 

.. Can you explain for me how properties can be shown as being 'sold' by Swift Advances plc and Swift 1st Ltd in their accounts (for example, but it could relate to any company) to what you describe as an spv in the shape of Kestrel Loans No1 Ltd.

 

Kestrel Loans no.1 Ltd show in their accounts that they have acquired ALL Loans and mortgages from these 2 companies - so how have they 'acquired' them in your opinion?

 

What is probably happening here is that when Swift fund a loan they do it on their balance sheet then either immediately transfer/sell the loan to one of the Kestrel vehicles. The Kestrel companies are probably the SPV’s (SPV’s are not unique to securitisers). If the loan is transferred immediately it’s referred to as “table funded” so Swift proper only holds the asset for a nano second. Alternatively, they can do a transfer to Kestrel at month end or quarterly or when the reach a certain trigger point such as £50 million. There are many reasons a company would use this structure. This is common and in some cases used to separate the various companies.

 

 

Whether this is the same group of companies or not I don't think in my limited knowledge makes any diference - the Ltd liability makes them independant legally. If the properties were transfered in trust then no funds would have exchanged hands so why would a consideration have been applied? - all very confusing.

 

You’re right; no money would have changed hands (apart from possibly a small admin fee). It’s simply transferring the debt (your mortgage) to another company. Another reason this may be done is the type of asset. For example Kestrel 1 may be first mortgages and Kestrel 2 second mortgages.

 

It can't be securitisation can it as their ceo states categorically they do not do this - spv's are for securitisation are they not? Is it an equitable Assignment or a straight sale? If they don't securitise what exactly would you suggest they are doing which opposes previous posters ideas of alleged fraudulent activity or a giant cock-up ?

 

I don’t think in this regard they are fraudulent because it is common to do this. I think one of the reasons many posters have been so vocal that something isn’t kosher is that it is hard to follow and doesn’t seem to make sense. You assume you borrow money from Swift and you pay it back to Swift. Technically that is what happens but your debt may be assigned many times without your knowledge. This is common and there may even be something in your loan documentation that says this. Another area that has led to much confusion is Kestrel. If I didn’t know I would also want to know who they were.

 

A sale is either Equitable or Legal and on what basis would the banks to whom they apply for funding under the spv (or whatever) lend? - on the equitable rights when Kestrel do not hold the title or would it be on the security of the title which should then be in the name then of Kestrel rather than Swift Advances plc?

 

There are a few ways they could do this. In most structures Kestrel would have the legal charge and the bank would have a sub legal charge over all loans within their funding line. What this means is that if Swift/Kestrel went bust the bank would take back ownership of the loans and instead of you paying Swift you would pay the bank directly or their servicing arm. The bank could also take the loans back if a certain percentage of the loans went into arrears. It’s hard to say which structure they employed. You mentioned the name of the title being Kestrel and not Swift – have you seen a copy of your charge? If it was done this way it would show both names.

 

Of course, all this talk of conspiracy derives from the fact that you have all the same 3 directors over the whole operation from Kestrel Holdings all the way down through to Kestrel Loans No2 Ltd - now defunct as previously correctly stated by you. What are your thoughts on that if you don't mind?

 

It seems strange but is also a common practice. Some directors of Swift will also be directors of the Kestrel companies. I don’t believe there is anything wrong with that as it’s common for people to be directors of multiple companies especially when they are under the same umbrella.

 

It all gets a little confusing and I would appreciate your learned skills and knowledge at explaining this so I might understand this a little better...thanks (how did your match go?)

 

SC

 

 

Brown calls for all unsecured lending to fall under FSA

 

12 April 2010 |

Prime Minister Gordon Brown outlined plans in his manifesto today to make all unsecured credit regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

He says over the lifetime of the next parliament, as more affordable lending becomes available, it will clamp down on the interest rates and other fees charged by instant loan companies and payday or doorstep lenders, tackling the very high cost lending that hits low-income communities hardest.

He says: “We will introduce a single regulator for consumer finance to restore confidence and trust with responsibility for the supervision of all unsecured lending being passed to the Financial Services Authority.

 

“And new rules governing how financial products are sold will be introduced with a crackdown on unfair terms in contracts.”