Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So the system is automated and I just need to wait for someone to review the account? Should I definitely get my money back? What are the chances I don’t get it back
    • its just the luck of the draw that the automated system that flags such issues kicked in for you, esp if its something you've regularly done over a long period. not much you can do sadly but wait    
    • Attached below is a settlement offer received from Shell Energy regarding the claim for harassment.   A few points of interest.   The settlement offer is made in full and final settlement and without admission of liability. The claim was issued at the time when Shell Energy had sent three harassing messages to my phone. Shell Energy eventually sent in total 20 harassing text messages. I am unsure whether accepting their offer will forgo my right of action to the remaining messages and currently I do not wish to give this up.   To summarise the options are:   1. Accept the offer, then issue a claim for the remaining 17 messages or in order to keep the claim small a further 3 messages. This risks Shell Energy claiming the matter was settled in full and where they have stated they do not admit liability I can see how they would attempt to construe an acceptance of their offer as agreeing they are not liable, even if I explicitly state that I reserve my rights. 2. Reject the offer, continue the claim and should it be successful this makes the likelihood of success in respect of the remaining messages much higher. Considering Shell Energy have already used the opportunity of an offer to dodge one hearing I do not intend to provide them with an opportunity to do the same again. Shell Energy have accused me of being vexatious, as a result of their accusation it is now significantly more important that I secure a successful judgement and present this to the Court in response to their defence in other matters. Despite Amy Franks writing the letter for Shell Energy she does not appear to be an employee of Shell Energy and instead appears to be a senior associate solicitor for Eversheds Sutherland. This is probably an indication that Shell Energy are taking advice on the matter rather than using their in house compliance manager who submitted and signed their defence. Shell Energy state that settlement has been offered for economic reasons, maybe that is true or maybe they have been advised that they will lose or that no one will take their case for the sums involved on a claim allocated to the small claims track. As with the Ombudsman I now expect that Shell Energy will duck out of any future hearing and instead eventually notify me much closer to the time that they have appointed a representative. I propose the following reply.     CAG - SE - Harassment - Settlement Offer 10.05.22 - Redacted.PDF
    • Yeah the transaction says to reconcile as a debit transaction.   It shouldn’t raise much suspicion as the same amount of money gets sent back so there is not much different in the in/out.   On those other threads they didn’t ask.   The only other issue could be that my friend sells things on eBay for me as I don’t have an eBay account and then transfers me the money - the same payee that I’ve had for 5 years so shouldn’t be a shock   This happened on Thursday 
    • reconcile simply means you at present have zero access to any of your accounts under their wing until they have finished their investigation   as long as you can validate this £2-3K continual bouncing around on your accounts or externally to others, if they ask you to do so, you should see it resolved in a few weeks. the quickest i've seen here is 10days.   not a good idea to have all your money with one financial institution .then it can't hurt you so much if it happens. use differing providers in the future then the whole lot won't get locked up.   PS when did this happen?   dx
  • Our picks

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


overdone
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4199 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

Our Card payments show on statements as going to Swift Advances,Brentwood. When they've sent a settlement figure (unrequested) they ask for the money to be paid to Barclays Bank plc sort code: 20-72-89, A/c no: 20755818.

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

Our Card payments show on statements as going to Swift Advances,Brentwood. When they've sent a settlement figure (unrequested) they ask for the money to be paid to Barclays Bank plc sort code: 20-72-89, A/c no: 20755818.

 

 

As Sparkie has shown in some of the above ( and that's scratching the surface ) the devils in the details and whatever, and I mean whatever is exactly stated is worth putting on here or PM ing me or Sparkie with.

 

With or without 'plc' any names used and the different bank accounts - the more we get on here the better no matter how small the differentials - we need to know!.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparkie - This is all extraordinary stuff.

Is John Webster still at Swift? - his FSA register file says "Inactive" It seems that Messrs Slade, Barwick, Bridges & Punch (since Jan 2010) & Mrs Brooks are Swift 1st directors and Barwick & Brooks (Money Laundering Reporting since 3.2.10) are the only two FSA listed directors of Swift Advances. Swift 1st is "unable to hold client money" according to Notices. SJ

FSA Register

 

 

 

Oh Yes sweetjane Webster is still the CEO of Swift....he has confirmed that..........all this means with FSA is that

a)......... He removed himself from the register or....

b)..........He was removed.

 

 

He has also confirmed that he is the CEO of the SWIFT GROUP there is no such entity in this country so how can he be the CEO of it???:D:D

 

Just a point you ( and they do) refer to Swift Advances .......there is no such name as this name is no ton the OFT CCA licence of Swift Advances Plc any business letter heads with this name on are unlawfull documents, and have no validity in Court:D

 

 

Swift First Ltd is unable to hold clients money because they do not hold a CCA licence and theyare not on SwiftAdvances Plc licence:D

 

In future anyone posting anything make it clear that where the correspondence came from

 

Swift Advances Plc...Swift Advances .....Swift....or The Swift Group

 

 

P.S My E-mail to Mr Webster has now been opened 18 times including 4 this morning.

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of our correspondence is from "swift advances" - that's what the letterhead says. The footer states "Swift Advances is a trading style of Swift Advances plc, Swift Advances plc is an appointed representative for insurance mediation activities only of Swift 1st Limited which is authorised and regulated by the FSA . . . Reg office Arcadia House . . . Registered in England No 1800474" The original Agreement is headed Swift Advances plc, the court docs were Swift Advances plc and my FOS complaint is against Swift Advances plc. What's with the "trading style" letterhead?

SJ :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of our correspondence is from "swift advances" - that's what the letterhead says. The footer states "Swift Advances is a trading style of Swift Advances plc, Swift Advances plc is an appointed representative for insurance mediation activities only of Swift 1st Limited which is authorised and regulated by the FSA . . . Reg office Arcadia House . . . Registered in England No 1800474" The original Agreement is headed Swift Advances plc, the court docs were Swift Advances plc and my FOS complaint is against Swift Advances plc. What's with the "trading style" letterhead?

SJ :confused:

 

If you look at your agreement ....I think you will see the name Swift at the bottom right hand side....in law this would mean that this agreement although in the name of Swift Advances Plc.....it was arranged and set up by Swift an unknown trading style of Swift Advances Plc but never the less a trading name / style they are using , also if you look at your SDAR info you will most likelysee that it was processed by Swift Advances although at the top it says Swift Advances Plc.........( Mine does) ......If you look at the latest letter advising you about reduction in some charges ....you will see it is from Swift Advances the trading style of Swift Advances Plc .....The tariff Charge Sheet is issued by the Swift Group....all thse documents have been compiled whilst committing a criminal offence and will be unacceptable in any legal proceedings ( possessions) .......but it is now that we have found all this out.

 

 

I sent all these documents to the OFT last night.

 

See again below from the OFT

If a licencee conducts licensable business under any other trading name(s), they must apply for the name(s) to be added to their licence.

 

Please note it is a criminal offence to carry out any activity that requires a consumer credit licence under a name that is not on a licence.

 

P.S My E-mail letter has been opened a furthe 5 times since my last post

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tick tock, tick tock Mr Websters watching the clock tick tock tick tock Mark Whites ready for the chop tick tock tick tock Matthew Payne will be out of a job tick tock tick tock soon enough they'll be all in the dock tick tock tick tock :D

 

You can't say they haven't been warned can you? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now here is a letter that confirms our account is being administerd by Swift Advances

SWIFTADVANCESLETTER-1.jpg

 

 

With regard the above I might just ring the FLA and tell them that the complaints they have received about Swift Advances Plc & Swift 1st Ltd and they said neither of these companies in their view had done anything wrong means that they are a waste of space and are negligent in not investigating Swift in the First place before they let the crooks be a member of their association.

Here is the notice of Swifts Groups changed tariffs

 

SWFTTARRIFFOFCHARGES5.jpg

 

 

Here is the envelope the Tariff charge notification came in ....from the Swift Group

SWIFTGROUPENVELOPE.jpg

 

 

No mention of Swift Advances Plc except on the bottom of the first image ...the usual reference to the Trading style of Swift Advances, all these have gone to the OFT

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now here is a letter that confirms our account is being administerd by Swift Advances

 

 

 

With regard the above I might just ring the FLA and tell them that the complaints they have received about Swift Advances Plc & Swift 1st Ltd and they said neither of these companies in their view had done anything wrong means that they are a waste of space and are negligent in not investigating Swift in the First place before they let the crooks be a member of their association.

 

No mention of Swift Advances Plc except on the bottom of the first image ...the usual reference to the Trading style of Swift Advances, all these have gone to the OFT

sparkie

 

 

No License Sparkie - No License = No debt?, It's a Criminal offense using a trading style not on the license isn't it? oh dear.

Edited by andrew1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote Andrew1

"No License Sparkie - No License = No debt?, It's Criminal offense using a trading style not on the license isn't it? oh dear."

 

 

Sorry officer I know I haven't got a licence ...But...I promise I'll get one as soon as I can;):D

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Nettleingham - compliance officer. I believe he may have left now.

 

Attack of conscience maybe?:confused: Fear of clink and mushy peas?;)

 

I'll post some trading style letters I've received tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Nettleingham - compliance officer. I believe he may have left now.

 

Attack of conscience maybe?:confused: Fear of clink and mushy peas?;)

 

I'll post some trading style letters I've received tomorrow.

 

Then he may be one of the 9 employees that were made redundant by Mr Webster, who claimed by doing this he saved over £ 1.3 million pouds in wages and salaries..I asked him in an E-mail once how he did that as I thought he had been taking lessons off Derren Brown;):rolleyes::D

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this in Swifts court bundle they submitted ("old sparkies" slipping again into the twighlight zone :) ) .....it appears that I had TWO brokers involved in our loan application

Promise Finance Ltd & Promise Solutions Ltd...... this is my driving licence Proof of Identity with Promise Solutions Ltd stamp........... the copy of my credit file submitted is also stamped Promise Solutions Ltd,

...But all the other Broker docs are Promise Finance Ltd ..now gone bust and dissolved. so the question here is Did Swift Advances or Swift Advances Plc pay TWO lots of Commission?????!!!

 

sparkie

 

PromiseSolutionsLtd.jpg

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then he may be one of the 9 employees that were made redundant by Mr Webster, who claimed by doing this he saved over £ 1.3 million pouds in wages and salaries..I asked him in an E-mail once how he did that as I thought he had been taking lessons off Derren Brown;):rolleyes::D

 

sparkie

 

Morninig Sparkie

 

Lessons off Derren Brown - Mr Webster is certainly a magician in maths:

 

unsuspecting customer + his cut + difficult calculations

= repossession + over inflated interest rates

=10 to 14 :-D

 

Im off to follow up on some things. Will keep you posted.:-D:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Nettleingham - compliance officer. I believe he may have left now.

 

Attack of conscience maybe?:confused: Fear of clink and mushy peas?;)

 

I'll post some trading style letters I've received tomorrow.

 

 

I came and visited London all the way from jolly ole Telford recently and went to the original ' Clink ' my god they have some grusome gadgets in there they used to use for torturing people in debt - thumbscrews, racks, and a metal boot which they put some poor devils foot in and stuck it on the fire with the foot wedged in :eek: ...isn't it good life has moved on and the only toruture we get now is Swift Advances Plc :D I tell you, there's a few of these gadgets might fit Mark White ya honour!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I came and visited London all the way from jolly ole Telford recently and went to the original ' Clink ' my god they have some grusome gadgets in there they used to use for torturing people in debt - thumbscrews, racks, and a metal boot which they put some poor devils foot in and stuck it on the fire with the foot wedged in :eek: ...isn't it good life has moved on and the only toruture we get now is Swift Advances Plc :D I tell you, there's a few of these gadgets might fit Mark White ya honour!

 

Morning SC

 

I believe Swift Advances, Swift 1st and the rest them are proficient in the are of these tactics. Gruesome Gadgets- Mark Swift, Thumbscrews - Swift APR, Metal Boot - Repossesions.

 

How sure are we that the "original clink" isn't their business address under the guise of Arcadia House? :eek:

 

I have an active imagination, but nowhere near as imaginative as Mr whites statements of truth and calcualtions. Now that really is Derren Brown meets Walt Disney.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The E-mail letter I sent to Mr Webster (on post 2519) has now been opened 45 times, .......it seems he is having to open it so many times because he can't read it properly at one read because of the tears in his eyes:)

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

The E-mail letter I sent to Mr Webster (on post 2519) has now been opened 45 times, .......it seems he is having to open it so many times because he can't read it properly at one read because of the tears in his eyes:)

 

sparkie

 

 

baby-crying.jpg :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The E-mail letter I sent to Mr Webster (on post 2519) has now been opened 45 times, .......it seems he is having to open it so many times because he can't read it properly at one read because of the tears in his eyes:)

 

sparkie

 

He better get used to it, plenty of that where he's going. Plenty of other things as well I believe. Ha Ha ha Bubba Webster.:D I think he better buy a sack of onions and get some practice in.

 

He'll no doubt charge it to someones loan/mortgage because we'd never know would we?:D:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

Has Mr Nettleingham left? Did he leave or was he pushed?

 

If he did leave because he could not sleep at night working for these bandits, he would make a powerful ally with the inside knowledge he must have.

 

If you are out there Mr. N, contact us !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

Has Mr Nettleingham left? Did he leave or was he pushed?

 

If he did leave because he could not sleep at night working for these bandits, he would make a powerful ally with the inside knowledge he must have.

 

If you are out there Mr. N, contact us !!!

 

Funny you mention that...........lets wait and see:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Swifties

I was chasing our Swift PPI reclaim yesterday, which is now with the FSCS because London Scottish / Easyloans (the broker) have gone bust, and was told by Deloittes (who are processing it) that the accounting information provided by Swift has discrepanciesand has been referred back to Swift for clarification. Well there's a suprise! I'm getting my accountant to check our Accrurial info and will report back. SJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Swifties

I was chasing our Swift PPI reclaim yesterday, which is now with the FSCS because London Scottish / Easyloans (the broker) have gone bust, and was told by Deloittes (who are processing it) that the accounting information provided by Swift has discrepanciesand has been referred back to Swift for clarification. Well there's a suprise! I'm getting my accountant to check our Accrurial info and will report back. SJ

 

 

Ah, well, you see Mark White who turns these things out only has a Bsc in Economics, not Accounting so there you have the discrepency excuse. :D Economists and Accountants never sit at the same tables and are at the opposite ends of the magnet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sparkie sorry if this has no relevance to this thread but have found something very interesting and was wandering what yours or anyone else's thoughts were.

 

 

CONSUMER CREDIT

The Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004

Made 5th June 2004 Laid before Parliament 9th June 2004 Coming into force 31st May 2005

 

 

In paragraph 10 it states:

 

1. All types. (Agreements)

 

(5) Where the credit is being secured on land the words "secured on" followed by the address of the land shall be inserted at the end of the heading.

 

Forms of Statement of Protection and Remedies Available under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to Debtors under Regulated Consumer Credit Agreements

 

All types.

MISSING PAYMENTS Missing payments could have severe consequences and make obtaining credit more difficult.

 

All agreements which are secured on land. YOUR HOME MAY BE REPOSSESSED Your home may be repossessed if you do not keep up repayments on a mortgage or other debt secured on it.

 

Basically what I make out of the above is that your loan agreement must contain these statements in them. My loan agreement which I have looked through with a fine toothecomb has nothing whatsoever relating to the above. Just another few things to point out to my solicitor, who incidentally I have heard nothing from since 2 weeks.

 

There is no reference to missing payments nor my home may be repossessed if I do not keep up my payments on my loan agreement, also the legal charge does not have my Land Registry Number on there. My loan agreement is stated that it is a mortgage agreement but I did not take out a mortgage. I took out a secured loan.

My loan agreement refers to me as the mortgagor. I am still waiting to see what my solicitor has to respond with all the questions I have sent him.

 

These are just more points that need to be addressed and I am doing a lot of research myself, in case my solicitor comes back with not much hope.

Edited by frettful38
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all you legal eagles looking in, in case your all new to some of the stuff I posted ages ago here it is again it help shed light on whats going on just now,

Southern Pacific Mortgages which is owned by Lehman Brothers investment bank was forced to buy back £13m of mortgages it had sold on after discovering they had all been sold fraudulently

Embargoed until 24 th April 2007 Swift announce appointment of Nigel Ingram as Chief Operations Officer Swift Group, the specialist mortgage and loans lender, has announced that Nigel Ingram is to join as Chief Operations Officer next month taking over the responsibilities from retiring Managing Director, Bernard Barwick. John Webster, Chief Executive of Swift Group said; "I'd firstly like to pay tribute to Bernard and his outstanding work at Swift Group. He has made a significant and meaningful contribution towards building the business into the success it is today. Unfortunately as these changes are announced Bernard has found, quite by chance, that he needs major surgery and so his plans for more time in the sun have been delayed. Nevertheless Bernard has been looking forward to his long-planned retirement and he leaves with the best wishes and thanks of everyone at Swift. "I'm also delighted to announce the appointment of Nigel Ingram who will be taking over control of a number of the crucial operational elements of the business. Nigel joins us from Lehman Brothers where he has been since 2005. He joined Preferred Mortgages as Chief Operations Officer and was subsequently appointed to the Mortgage Capital Division Executive of Lehman looking after operational affairs of Southern Pacific Mortgages and London Mortgage Company, as well as Preferred. Nigel's previous roles have also included positions with Portman Building Society, Royal Bank of Scotland, Master Card, NatWest and KPMG Consulting. " "Although Bernard will step down from his current role we shall continue to maintain access to his extensive industry knowledge and experience as he will remain on the board of directors in a non-executive position. " ENDS For further information, please contact: John Webster CEO - The Swift Group 0845 072 8902 / 07879 618190 Richard Hurst - RCH Communications0774 705 0 706

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4199 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.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...