Jump to content


Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


overdone
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4035 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

Good Morning Sparkie,

May I make an obseration to you last post ?

Another thing that everyone of Swifts customers can challenge under Section 140 the Unfair Relationship

From personell expieance this has all ready been exploured by recomended solisitors of this site. The result was I was advised that the costs/charges would out wiegh what the potencial claim would be worth.

Are you sugessting doing this a different way ?

 

P.S. If there is a way to do this with out obsorbing high costs ( have repaid the loan now ) please PM me. I wold be more than happy to by you a drink/meal or something else to cover your time.

 

Regards

 

Swifteater.

 

It is only now that judges have got their head round section 140 as seen by the deal in the high court of late.........there is so much power in that section that the courts are only just beginning to realise how much.

 

sparkie

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

Indeed I know what you are saying Sparkie, and I have much respect for you and what work you are doing here.

The fact remains that the leagal costs of persuing this could out wiegh the potencial return of the claim ?

Borrowed 49 K toatal repaid was nearly double in a five year pieriod. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Swifteater, if we could get enough people together perhaps a Barrister would take on our case as one, the cost could then be spread and hopefully anyway we would be awarded costs. Any thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Swifteater, if we could get enough people together perhaps a Barrister would take on our case as one, the cost could then be spread and hopefully anyway we would be awarded costs. Any thoughts.

 

Yes count me in, how many would we need ?

 

But what is the draw down should things not go our way ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon everyone,

 

Count me in as well, just for info, Peter Mahy has already told me that if I can get enough people together...

Here is an extract from an email in the last three weeks, by Mr Mahy to yours truly....

 

I think the chances of getting an agreement re-opened are not good but as previously advised I would need to look at this in more details and get counsels opnion [as things move so quickly] to give firm advice. The question is whether you want to spend money on what is likely to be negative advice. If there are a number of you costs may be low and it might be worth it. If not you may want to put it behind you.

 

([email protected])

 

Howells are the Sheffield solicitors who were successful against Swift as reported in the Sheffield Star {April 24th 2006.}

Perhaps he would be worth approaching jointly?

 

Kind regards as always

 

Dougal

Update: 2013 Following our recent (9/7/13) hearing about Bank Charges at the Court of Appeal, and refusal to grant permission to Appeal; an Application has just (23/10/2013) been made for a fresh hearing and the Court Location is yet to be confirmed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

I would be in as well. I'm sure we could get a rough costing from these Solicitors, there must be many people in our situation who would welcome some professional advice. Lets see how many we can get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

This is the guy that Swift employ when in court, we would really need to know our Barrister knew his/her stuff. Obvioulsy with the fees and charges Swift make to their customers they can afford these sort of Barristers. But together as a group I'm sure we could sort something out.

 

Damian Falkowski

 

Date of call: 1994 Gray's Inn

 

After his first career as a professional violinist, playing with orchestras including the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields and the London Symphony Orchestra, Damian Falkowski was called to the Bar in 1994.

Primarily, he practices in the fields of commercial law and property.

Currently he is instructed in a US $500 million international fraud tracing claim obtaining freezing injunctions and Norwich Pharmacal orders. He regularly advises on matters with an international dimension and a significant proportion of his instructions are from abroad. His commercial practice includes disputes relating to civil fraud, tracing, joint ventures, charges and guarantees.

He undertakes litigation and advisory work in all aspects of the law of real property, including commercial and residential landlord and tenant, enfranchisement, easements, restrictive covenants. He frequently advises on these issues as they arise in the context of planning law and as they affect local authorities. He was recently instructed in litigation in the Chancery Division (settled) where the question of whether a local authority, as landlord, could refuse consent to a sub-letting where the proposed sub-letting would harm the economic viability of the city centre.

Damian Falkowski has appeared in a number of important mortgage and consumer credit cases since the leading case of Falco Finance Ltd v Gough, (1999) 17 Tr. L. R., [1999] CCLR 16, the first reported case on the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1994 (now 1999). He recently appeared for approximately 200 borrowers in “group managed” litigation against one major lender and has advised on Consumer Credit issues instructed by large interest groups. He also acts for institutional lenders and merchant banks.

He is the co-author of a book on remedies for anti-social behaviour which is scheduled to be published by Jordans in March 2006.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

See our friend is back on line, wonder what Swift are up to now. Obviously this thread is building strength. God I can't wait for them to get what they deserve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Big New Flash

 

JUst had a nice converstaion with "my colleagues" in N.Ireland as Mr Webster called them in an e-mail to me..they have a meeting with their Barrsiter tomorrow where they will be handing over some more very sensitive confidential information.

 

After that they have an appointment with the producer of Spotlight , the N.Ireland equivalent of Panorama at 2.30 for lunch on Thursday all paid for by Spotlight who have already gathered their own info about Swift.

 

Swift will wish they had treated these two with more respect than they have in the past..............Trust Me I know.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Big New Flash

 

JUst had a nice converstaion with "my colleagues" in N.Ireland as Mr Webster called them in an e-mail to me..they have a meeting with their Barrsiter tomorrow where they will be handing over some more very sensitive confidential information.

 

After that they have an appointment with the producer of Spotlight , the N.Ireland equivalent of Panorama at 2.30 for lunch on Thursday all paid for by Spotlight who have already gathered their own info about Swift.

 

Swift will wish they had treated these two with more respect than they have in the past..............Trust Me I know.

 

sparkie

 

I thought you said they were your 'associates' Sparkie? :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

If everyone is serious about Barrister costs I am meeting with my new solicitor in December, so I could perhaps ask re costs etc. This will give us some idea of how much and how many people really want this. Well done to Sparkie for all the hardwork and time put in, lets just hope that the decent hardworking people get their just deserts in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on the costs, this will determine if I can afford to be counted in. As Im a Carer on Carers allowance and Income Support, obviously my funds are very limited, but if the costs that are shared are reasonable, then I may be able to chip in...just to see these Animals go down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Thanks coolchris, the list is growing of those who want to be included, lots of pm's as well. Wondering whether we could put a notice in one of the newspapers asking for people to contact me if they have had problems with Swift. Would need to reach a wide audience, so would need to be national.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem. Yer, I reckon it has to be National. The more coverage the better. Make an example of these animals and it might just make others in this industry wake up and take the customer seriously. Then again, knowing of the arrogance of these THINGS, I still have my doubts unfortunately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

I know what you mean, this time last year I nearly gave up, but to be honest it was Sparkie who spared me on, and now I have a decent solicitor, who is really on the ball, and is currently going through my original loan agreement, and the paperwork from Central Credit who arranged the loan, at the moment nothing is adding up. We are due back in court in January, but if my solicitor thinks we have real grounds for serious action then we may ask the court to postpone the hearing. Swift are only winning because they can afford to employed these s****y barristers, (which by the way we are paying for from the excessive fees Swift charge)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

Breaking news - just had a letter from our fave financiers this morning. It is a schedule of revised fees and charges effective January 2010.

 

Are they in a flap?

 

After a quick glance most charges lowered, but its all to do with acounts in arrears (well mostly anyway) so no help for those of us not in arrears who are just being shafted by high interest rates.

 

But a positive step nevertheless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey people,

 

My parents recall being excessivly charged for moving away from Swift. The fees they charged for moving to another company for their mortgage cost them a few thousand, solicitors fees etc.

 

They have also remortgaged to generate spare cash in the bank, asking for xxxx amount and ending up with just hundreds after processing charges etc with others.

 

Ive skimmed over the thread - but will the FSA be looking into these scenarios for repayments of excessive charges too?

 

pointers to any other relavent threads would be appreciate ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Sparkie, with regard to Kestrel I found this with regard to assigning loans

Where a facility agreement required the prior written consent of the borrower in order for the loan to be assigned, the Court of Appeal has held that in order for an assignment of the loan to be valid prior actual or deemed consent must be received.

A facility agreement contained a clause allowing the lending banks to assign all or any part of their rights and benefits to any one or more bank or other financial institution provided that any such assignment may only be effected with the prior written consent of the borrower. Such consent was not to be unreasonably withheld and was to be deemed to have been given if no reply to a request for consent was received from the borrower within 15 days. A lending bank sent a request to the borrower for consent to an assignment and the assignment was executed by the parties prior to the 15 day deemed consent deadline. The borrower did not respond before the expiry of the 15 day deadline and never subsequently responded to the request for consent. One of the questions which fell to be determined by the Court of Appeal was the validity of the assignment.

By a 2-1 majority the Court of Appeal held that the assignment was invalid because there must be actual or deemed prior consent. However, they agreed that it would be possible for a borrower to waive the need for consent in circumstances where the borrower knew that an assignment had been made before any deemed consent period had expired. Waller LJ in a dissenting judgment held that the assignment was valid because consent could be given retrospectively after the date of the assignment. By not replying within 15 days of the request the borrower had given valid deemed consent to the assignment.

This decision emphasises the importance of carrying out comprehensive legal due diligence before purchasing debt on the secondary market. If there has been a previous assignment of the debt, as part of this legal due diligence, a purchaser will need to check whether borrower consent was required for such an assignment. If so, it must be determined whether consent was given (either express or deemed) prior to the assignment being executed, or whether the borrower waived the consent requirement.

While this case concerned an assignment of bank debt the rationale is also likely to apply to any consent requirements for assignments in general and novations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If everyone is serious about Barrister costs I am meeting with my new solicitor in December, so I could perhaps ask re costs etc. This will give us some idea of how much and how many people really want this. Well done to Sparkie for all the hardwork and time put in, lets just hope that the decent hardworking people get their just deserts in court.

 

 

I too would be interested in a group action but I am only in receipt of benefits due to long term illness so it would be very dependent on costs. I really do think this company needs to be stopped from trading and made to answer for their dodgy practices and those in charge made accountable. Hopefully it would help a lot of us who are living day by day on a knife edge less anxious about the future. It would definitely be an even bigger bonus if we could get back the unfair charges and be charged a reasonable interest rate or better still agreements deemed unenforceable where appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4035 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...