Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • 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 4909 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

Guest blackie

The problem here is that Judges really do not like the ordinary man acting for himself, they have little regard for us. The judge here would not have been interested in the whether or not Sparkie had a good case for Fraud or anything else he was only there to decide whether a possession order should be granted. This is his only purpose on the day, my friend believes Sparkie should have been given an adjournment and advised by the judge to get legal advice. He also believes that as a collective we have more chance of fighting these people. I know I I have read some where on this thread that a lawyer in Sheffield won a case against Swift. Why don't we make an effort and contact her and see if she can help. If there are enough of us, surely it has to be worthwhile. My friend also said never, ever go into court without legal counsel. He does feel however that Sparkie was not given a fair hearing. Anyone, any thoughts. Swift must be laughing up their sleeves at the moment, so we have to stop them now!!!

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

The firm of lawers in shefeild i am currently using. Sparkie has seen the response i have had from them because he has read the emails i recieve. There view is we have to sink them through the FSA and other governing bodys. We do have a case and they are currently plotting an attack for myself. I was due in court this month but i managed to pay the arrears for now on there advice. I,m not here to criticise but i also think that judges don,t listen to the ordinary man. Sparkie has got some evidence but we just need to know how to use it. The more you look into them the more you find. It is sad that sparkie lost but he's a fighter and fight he will. All swift did yesterday was make us even more determined to get them. So just watch out Swift as the war is only just begining. Cheers Daz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

I know what you mean, but sticks and stones, won't break their bones, but the authorities might. So yes you are right, get everyone to put pen to paper this weekend, even if they have written ten times before, ask them what is going on, why isn't the complaint being dealt with, when can they expect the complaint to be dealt with, write to Newspapers etc. If we all put this last concerted effort in it might just work. By the way my MP Angela Eagle, has been more than helpful with regard to my dealings with Swift, can not say anymore at the present time, but she is interested......I pass on most of my correspondence to her, let just say she has been amazed and most helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on everyone!!! Renewed pressure on the FSA and OFT.

 

Get those letters in the post this weekend

 

White, Swift & Co, when you read this you might consider you are ok. Yes you are all slippery SOB's but one day...............

 

Hi Marky:)

 

Well I, for one, sent complaints regarding Swift and Kestrel to both the FSA and the OFT during November. Their responses were as follows -

 

OFT - 'Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, most businesses that offer goods or services on credit or lend money to consumers, have to be licensed by the OFT. The OFT can refise or revoke the firm's credit licence if it engages in 'unfair or improper business practices, whether unlawful or not'. This includes second-charge mortgages and I have passed the details of your complaint to our Licensing Enforcement section for their information.'

 

FSA - 'The action we take can range from an informal discussion with the firm, up to, in the severest of circumstances, withdrawing the firm's permission to trade. The scale of the action we take will depend on the seriousness of the alleged breach and the risk posed to consumers as a whole. I have passed a copy of your letter to the department responsible for the supervision of Swift Advances for its consideration and to take any action that it may believe to be appropriate.'

 

I agree with Marky's comments above - anyone that hasn't already done so, should get letters of complaint sent off to both the OFT and the FSA in the first instance. They are more likely to do something once they have received a deluge of complaints.

 

I am also going to fire off a letter to the Financial Services Consumer Panel as recommended by Sweetjane.

 

We must keep fighting and not let Swift think they have beaten us - united we stand!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Edited by landy_alert
Added something!

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

Guest blackie

5 guests. We still must have them worried. A word of caution for us all. We need to play our cards must closer to our chest. We have been to open and Swift are watching. PM people wherever possible. Sparkie has done all the hard work, now WE ALL MUST PLAY OUR PARTS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have an appointment next Thurs at 9 am with law firm ....to appeal against decision for possession.says first impression if I can give him just a hint of of lie under oath in case as serious as this .HE WILL do the rest

 

Whenyou write to the OFT make sure you tell them about the Kestrel companies as they do not know they exist

 

I will not be posting much from now on Thanks again everyone

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

My MP has shown great interest too. He is particularly keen to know more, not just about Swift, but also the way the regulators are failing people in our situations. I think it is also worth writing to FSCP, Treasury Committee, The OJC (Office for Judicial Complaints), CAB Parliamentary Team, Financial & Legal journalists at national papers, Consumer Focus etc etc. Something has to be done about the miscarriage of justice which is happening when members of the public represent themselves. Sparkie's experience would be of interest to journalists. Onwards and Upwards. We were angry, now we're mad. :mad::mad::mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 guests. We still must have them worried. A word of caution for us all. We need to play our cards must closer to our chest. We have been to open and Swift are watching. PM people wherever possible. Sparkie has done all the hard work, now WE ALL MUST PLAY OUR PARTS.

 

 

I agree with this, Swift know far too much and that gives them time to get there lies sorted out. When they are presented with findings that they think no one knows about and don't have time to act on it then they will crumble.

At the minute they know whats coming and they have time to work on it and find a cover up.

 

Maybe Sparkle has the right approach. SAY NOTHING;);)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I face now I have got my head together is................. that now Swift have got a 28 day possession order..........It means that We have got to pay them the whole mortgage off including all their penalties etc etc.........they will not let us pay just the arrears of that I am absolutely certain ...because of the way and manner I have fought them......they will push for it all.

 

They also know that because of our age we will never get another loan to pay them off.

A fact that they never worry about because they have their sights set on your/our homes.

 

This is why they lend to people of our age (we were 70) when we applied for our loan.( vast majority spent on increasing the value of our home)

 

They saw our value at that time as £240.000 its now gone down like evryone elses to £ 220.000.

 

So I have to go after Mark White and is falsehoods in his statements of truth ..this time with a Barrister on an appeal

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this, Swift know far too much and that gives them time to get there lies sorted out. When they are presented with findings that they think no one knows about and don't have time to act on it then they will crumble.

At the minute they know whats coming and they have time to work on it and find a cover up.

 

Maybe Sparkle has the right approach. SAY NOTHING;);)

 

 

I agree in a way but what ever .on disclosure you must tell them what you intend to rely on ( about 6 weeks before in any event) you cannot use anything after this date ........unless specific consent is given by the court and that seldom happens............As I found out to my Detriment.............if it was lke the States where you could bring evidence in at the last minute .Swift would fall...but sadly that's not the case over here ...........I tried it........... at my first hearing the Judge Blocked every move.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree in a way but what ever .on disclosure you must tell them what you intend to rely on ( about 6 weeks before in any event) you cannot use anything after this date ........unless specific consent is given by the court and that seldom happens............As I found out to my Detriment.............if it was lke the States where you could bring evidence in at the last minute .Swift would fall...but sadly that's not the case over here ...........I tried it........... at my first hearing the Judge Blocked every move.

 

sparkie

 

I personally think that its unbelieveable that the court system is the way it is today. The law sucks.

Sparkie, I dont think it would have mattered how long you had your reliance papers in, the judge had no intentions of listening to you from the very beginning. I wonder if Swift got consent to show things after the 6 weeks, I bet they did, probably 5 mins before they went in:roll::mad::mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Don't know whats going on here. But last time I was in court, the lawyer for Swift kept phonng them asking questions and then prepared the defence in the court waiting room. All my side had was Mark white's witness statement, etc. But he kept bringing up other things, I thank god for the judge I had. It was as if he had an impression of what Swift where up to. The lying lawyer for Swift stated that their valuation of my house was £100,000 less than the actual valuation and they said I actually owed the whole amount of their valuation. Even the judge laughed at that.

 

Sparkie you have done a brilliant job, but there must be something we can do for you, no one can surely be so cruel as to give full possession or ask you to raise that sort of money. Where are we living, this is the UK, where we are supposed to be civilised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi blackie,

 

Firstly thanks for your continued support.....that is exactly what happened to me as I said the JUdge had to excuse himself as he was a diabetic and had to have some sugar as happens with diabetics ..........but just before this this Barrsiter had gone on about secret commissions and the fact that Mark Whte had alraeady convinced the Court that they do noy pay commission...................outsie in the waiting area ...I presented this Barrister with the computer screen shot from our broker/.... Swifts Agents showing they had paid commission and this screenshot proved it ............He got straight to the phone to Swift Legal.........when we went back in I also gave a copy to the JUdge prooving that commission had been paid ....the JUdge just had a quick look at it and pushed it aside .that was the end of that

THere is no doubt Swift HAVE FULL POSSESSION >>>>IF I DO NOT PAY them off within 27 days now ............We will be evicted. Swift will make sure of that.

 

But so far we cannot obtain the money to pay them off because we are both coming up to 73.

That's what this country is.whenyou are our age we no longer matter.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sparkle, arnt you going to give an input? Nothing to say??? I hope you are ashamed of yourself and the animals that you work for or with or alongside or whatever.

I hope someday you are in a position like Sparkie is but you know what??

You wont be because YOU WILL BE IN A WORSE POSITION ALONGSIDE YOUR FAITHFUL MAGGOTS.

 

Sorry for the outburst everyone else but it disgusts me that they could do this on a 73 year old couple at this stage of their lives and not give a damn. There time will come and by *** I will be there relishing in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as a collective there is so much we can do....

 

can the site team set up an account similar to fighting libel case and we can each maybe stick a few pounds in.... we should rally together and get this sorted. find out sparkie mp name and bombard him with letters about what is going on in his area.... let us not give up this fight even if sparkie gets enough money to pay barrister or something.... this site has done so much for the many so let us all do our bit for the few who have tried so hard ...

Only direct action by the masses will work....

 

Look at all successes they have never come from negotiation!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sparkle, arnt you going to give an input? Nothing to say??? I hope you are ashamed of yourself and the animals that you work for or with or alongside or whatever.

I hope someday you are in a position like Sparkie is but you know what??

You wont be because YOU WILL BE IN A WORSE POSITION ALONGSIDE YOUR FAITHFUL MAGGOTS.

 

Sorry for the outburst everyone else but it disgusts me that they could do this on a 73 year old couple at this stage of their lives and not give a damn. There time will come and by *** I will be there relishing in it.

 

 

NOW NOW mmcourt,

 

You will be having a heart attack like I did in !997..."Calm down Dear Calm down".......... as Michael Winner says:)

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Government has issued new guidelines to the courts to put more pressure on banks to repossess homes only as a last resort.

Before repossession is granted, banks will need to show that they have offered options such as repayment holidays of 2-3 months, adding arrears to loans or reducing monthly payments by extending mortgage terms or switching from repayment to interest-only.

In August, the Financial Services Authority, FSA, warned banks that they could face large fines if they put undue pressure on struggling home owners

 

 

SWIFT HAVE NEVER OFFERED ANYTHING JUST DEMANDS AND THREATS

 

 

Again this Judge didn't ask any of these questions of Swift.

 

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've written to Watchdog, Moneybox, Guardian, Observer, Sun, Mirror, Sunday TImes, Consumer Direct . . .

 

 

WOW!! sweetjane you have been busy, I think everyone should I wrote to watchdog a while back .nothing happened...maybe if a few more did they may.

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sparkie, may I suggest you ring Shelter for immediate practical advice on repossession. Their homeowner helpline is 0300 3300 515. They deal with repossession cases every day and will give you free advice on what you might be able to do. Tell us who your MP is and we'll all write to him/her on your behalf. Your local Council may be willing to intervene with Swift as well. There are many people on this site who will not accept that you are about to lose your home. We're not giving up. All the best matey. x

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4909 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...