SPML/LMC anyone claimed for mis selling and unfair charges?

[Crapstone]

Crapstone ...you mentioned in your post, the block building insurance...are you on it ?? i know i am. A thought has popped into my head..!!!

 

B-o-2

 

I remortgaged from Nationwide to SPML in 2003 and the broker put us on block insurance that I neither needed or wanted. It took months to sort out despite giving them more than adequate proof of my own insurance and each year it has been the same again. They charge £100 to check that your own insurance is to their standard and they have rejected some policies I've sent as being 'unreadable' when faxed by myself and the insurance company and 'lost' when sent to them by recorded delivery.

 

They then start to add their own insurance fees. In the event of trying to claim on either insurance with 2 policies running I'd imagine it would be a nightmare to get either of them to pay anything other than to the mortgage company.

 

I'm not trying to hijack the thread but hopefully just sharing my experience with these idiots. My last post was just to say what I had been through so far with them and to let everyone know they are not on their own.

 

I have some legal and economics experience, (I wished I'd had them when I took out the mortgage!) and have managed to battle my way through on my own and I know where I am going to from here, although their statements have given me a major headache trying to work through them.

 

In my case, SPML/Capstone refused to provide a list of fees to the Ombudsman and as a result they couldn't rule that they were fair or unfair. By refusing and not providing the tarriff of charges the Ombudsman ruled that SPML had not justified them and so were unfair.

 

Also, it was found that SMPL had agreed to the courts decision that £50 would be paid on top of usual payments to clear the arrears. By adding fees they had breached that and shouldn't have agreed to the £50 payment if they knew it wouldn't all go towards the arrears but instead would be swallowed up 'extras'. In other words they had the opportunity to say how much would be needed to reduce the arrears in court but they didn't and agreed to an amount they knew wouldn't touch them and lead me more into debt with them.

 

Hopefully that makes sense. Like other people reading this I tried to seek legal advice in the beginning but didn't find anyone that knew enough about sub-prime mortgages and how they work. It was just a fob off that you have to tow their line as you signed the contract and are at their mercy.

 

So I have to chuckle at the regular consumer advice to approach your lender and ask for this and that.... Say this in court and say that... They have no idea what is going on and the Judges are just that -Judges-. Judges are not economic experts and just want to go home after dealing with us 'silly' people that have signed up for a lifetime of misery but it's far easier to forget the other side of the arguement and use the rubber stamp in favour of Goliath.

 

Rant over.

 

I'm more than happy to respond off-board regarding the Ombusmans decision in full and all my points of contact so far.

 

Best regards,

Crapstone.

[Crapstone]

I would say if you have any points of contention on an account with SPML or their associates to follow up the complaints process and then go the Ombudsman even if you think it's a minor complaint that hasn't been put right.

 

Whilst the account is in dispute it makes it very difficult for them to take you to court for repossession even if you already have one suspended. And as it's taken me 2 years to get a final decision from the Ombudsman it's obviously a lengthy process.

 

Without saying very much that should speak for itself. Time.

[Last of the Mohicans]

I remortgaged from Nationwide to SPML in 2003 and the broker put us on block insurance that I neither needed or wanted. It took months to sort out despite giving them more than adequate proof of my own insurance and each year it has been the same again. They charge £100 to check that your own insurance is to their standard and they have rejected some policies I've sent as being 'unreadable' when faxed by myself and the insurance company and 'lost' when sent to them by recorded delivery.

 

Welcome to my world - albiet with a different company.

 

 

 

Also, it was found that SMPL had agreed to the courts decision that £50 would be paid on top of usual payments to clear the arrears. By adding fees they had breached that and shouldn't have agreed to the £50 payment if they knew it wouldn't all go towards the arrears but instead would be swallowed up 'extras'. In other words they had the opportunity to say how much would be needed to reduce the arrears in court but they didn't and agreed to an amount they knew wouldn't touch them and lead me more into debt with them.

 

Hopefully that makes sense. (snip)

 

I'm more than happy to respond off-board regarding the Ombusmans decision in full and all my points of contact so far.

 

Best regards,

Crapstone.

 

I'm in the situation you describe with them, and about to take them to task. I'd be grateful for anything you can PM me on it.

 

Cheers

[agatha c]

my case is complicated, my husband never told me so I was evicted overnight, he said it was because I had chronic arthritus and my termanally ill mother was living with us. Going to send an s.a.r. to find out exactly situation. They have sold my home too cheap, I told them it was a listed building, they ignored me, new people having to reinstate old chimneys etc.

 

An offer had been put forward for 25,000 over the price offered in a private notice, but something very dodgy the guy who wanted to buy

never received confirmation of his offer from mortgage lender, only the letter confirming the offer. He told me the estate agent tried to put him of buying the property, contacted my husband to ask was the property listed, estate agent had no idea, to cut a long story short, my property was left by bailiff or estate agent unsecured, paint was missing (we had four storage units so no idea if anything else is missing) squarters could have moved in, it was my home four 24 years. I was told it was my fault as I should have taken them the night of the court case, I was told around 4.30pm, collapsed and taken to my sisters have not been able to return, my mum has been in an out of hospital and said this is the worse thing that has happened to her, which is so upsetting as she has lung cancer, an anurism and brittle bones, yet she was so brave and with my family yet this has destroyed her. The solicitors of LMC have more or less said I am a liar and I must have known. My husband sat outside our home

for over an hour before he told me, he was grey and I know he had two choses and we all know the other chose he had.

 

He had no legal rep with him, they would not let him add arreas to mortgage, would only agree to an amount that was impossible for him to meet. Anyone out there can give advise would be gratefull, I know 1st step is the s.a.r but I also feel that they have a duty of care to sell my home at a reasonalbe price, not 150.000 less or at least let me try to sell ourselves.

If I had of known of this I would have looked at all my options and not spleeping on people sofa's in acute agony.

[Nightmare4banks]

Agatha c,

 

Welcome to the forum!

 

I was very sorry to read about your problems in your post

 

However,you have come to the right place and we should be able to help you here.

 

In reply to your post:

 

The lender has a duty to sell at the best price.

 

You need to telll us more details and if you prefer,please feel free to send me a PM.

 

I will then send you back a suggested reply to use.

[enoughisenough]

Jesus These People.

 

Preying On The Vulnerable Or What?

When You Touts Read This Go Hang Yourselves (not Your Heads In Shame) I Really Mean Hang Yourselves. Go And Get Real Jobs That Don't F**k People Over. What An Absolute Disgrace. Probably Manufactured Charges At That.

[Crapstone]

Agatha C.r

 

You should have had some notice and it seems your husband has to take some of the blame for keeping it from you for so long and not contacting them. I was 'kept in the dark' but eventually I did see a letter and took action to fight them despite my partners 'head in the sand' attitude.

 

Purely my own fault, I signed the contract and had a duty to make sure it was paid and made the assumption that it was. You too need to take some of the blame as you are well enough to post her and complain.

 

However if your post is being concealed that is illegal as you should have had notice prior to being evicted and ample chance to put your case to the mortgage company or the court if you have an interest in the property and a pretty good case to stay if you have severe illness.

 

Your first step should be to get all the concealed letters from your husband and then do an SAR or perhaps report him to the police. One of the last letters sent is open to any occupiers of the property and that's how I found out. All other mail had been redirected to another property . You need to get hold of a copy of the legal paper as it's not a 1 step automatic hearing before being evicted.

 

You list a whole lot of health problems and 'missing paint' . They do have a duty of care to sell your house but you haven't given the arrears or fees charged or the value of your house. Your case doesn't ring true for some reason.

[JonCris]

OP much of what you say indicates that you been badly treated by everyone including the courts however your so far down the road & need prompt (active) assistance I suggest you seek legal help direct from a legal aid lawyer asap

[littledotty27]

Back in court end of april,order states payments to be made mid and end of march,hearing date to sort out payment of arrears.

 

So been to LR,court dont know what the hell im on about,cant afford a solicitor...what next steps can I take?

[supersleuth]

Hi Littledotty,

 

Write out concisely and clearly your point to make sure that the judge understands - it seems he is already in agreement with you that something is not quite right about the LR so he will be conducive to trying to understand your point. Try it along these lines:

 

 

First, the register is wrong. It is wrong because SPML have filed an incorrect mortgage deed against your property. The register must be wrong because you did not sign a mortgage deed dated XXX and you did not sign a mortgage deed for £50K - therefore, the charge that is registered against your property is an incorrect entry. Accordingly, SPML cannot maintain an action against you based on an incorrect entry on the LR. In view of these fact, you request that the court to order that SPML evidence the ORIGINAL mortgage deed and in the event that SPML fail to evidence the ORIGINAL mortgage deed, that this claim be struck out for failure to prove its claim. (Note: if SPML cannot evidence YOUR original mortgage deed, then they have no deed to assert against you and therefore no claim).

 

In the alternatively, if SPML want to maintain that the LR is correct and/or the court allows SPML to proceed on the assumption that the LR is correct, then you request that the court make a declaration in a court order to declare that in accordance with the LR, that the mortgage advanced against your property is £50K and that your mortgage account is recalculated in accordance with that deed that is filed against your property. (That should shake them up!!! this one could work for you!!)

 

Second - in any event, even if SPML do evidence the original mortgage deed, SPML do not have a claim against you because SPML have sold your mortgage to Eurosail. Therefore, the register is also incorrect because Eurosail are the legal owners of your mortgage. The LRA 2002 s.27(3) and (4) mandates that following SPML's transfer and assignment of the mortgage to Eurosail, the law requires that Eurosail must be registered as the proprietor of the mortgage at the LR. As Eurosail are the legal owners of your mortgage, they should be, but are not yet, registered as the proprietor of the mortgage at the LR. It also follows from these fact that you are not in privity of contract with SPML given that SPML have transferred and assigned its title to the mortgage to Eurosail. It follows from these facts that at law, only Eurosail have the legal standing to bring claim against you which means that SPML have no lawful grounds on which to ground a claim against you as you are not in privity of contract with SPML. (Use the prospectus to prove this factual point re the transfer/assignment of your mortgage).

 

For these two reasons, the LR is inaccurate and incorrect and accordingly, SPML cannot maintain an action against you based on inaccurate and incorrect entries on the LR. Additionally, SPML cannot maintain an action against you on the grounds that you are not in privity of contract with SPML.

 

Accordingly, SPML are put to strict proof to prove that they are (1) in possession of the ORIGINAL mortgage deed and therefore, you request that the court order that SPML make available for the court, the ORIGINAL mortgage deed and (2) that the representations made in the Eurosail prospectus that testify to SPML's sale of the mortgage to Eurosail is not true. In the event that the prospectus is not true, then SPML maybe the lawful owner. (Note: making SPML prove that the propectus is not true puts them to a real burden - they can't go against what the prospectus said - they'd be admitted to fraudulent misrepresentation - they may bring up the "we only sold the equitable interest" crap - but see my previous posts on that issue so that you have the answer to that nonsense ready).

 

In the event that SPML fail to prove that they have lawful grounds to bring claim against you, that the claim is struck. In the alternative, in the event that the court does not order any correction to the LR, that the court declare that the advance against your property is £50K in accordance with the entry on the LR and order that your mortgage account is re-caluculated on that amount as in accordance with that LR entry.

 

(Note: You do not want them to merely evidence a certified true copy of the deed - you want to see the ORIGINAL document that you signed - they must have actual possession of the ORIGINAL mortgage deed if they wish to assert the deed against you.)

 

Remember littledotty, I am not a qualified lawyer and therefore, this is just a suggestion based on the information as I remember and understand it - so ignor it or adapt it as is necessary to be factually correct. Hope it helps you move forward.

Edited March 24, 2009 by supersleuth

[Suetonius]

Sorry if I have missed it, but has it been established that it is the mortgage and not just the charge that has been transferred to Eurosail ?

[littledotty27]

Just had a thought!! not been many of them at late

 

When spml responded to our witness statement,they said that our contract was not a contract but a mortgage offer.

We obtained our contract from solicitors archives.

So,if its not our contract and that is the only copy that spml have produced....could it be there is no contract?

[supersleuth]

Sorry if I have missed it, but has it been established that it is the mortgage and not just the charge that has been transferred to Eurosail ?

 

Suetonis, do Explain!? What do you classify as being a "mortgage" and what do you classify as being a "charge"? And could you let us know what you understand as being the difference between the two?

 

 

Littledotty, if SPML said it was only an offer and not a contract - they probably meant it - or else, why would they say it?

[Last of the Mohicans]

Just had a thought!! not been many of them at late

 

When spml responded to our witness statement,they said that our contract was not a contract but a mortgage offer.

We obtained our contract from solicitors archives.

So,if its not our contract and that is the only copy that spml have produced....could it be there is no contract?

 

On the face of it, in a strict legal sense, yes.

[kegi]

Originally Posted by Suetonius

Sorry if I have missed it, but has it been established that it is the mortgage and not just the charge that has been transferred to Eurosail ?

Suetonis, do Explain!? What do you classify as being a "mortgage" and what do you classify as being a "charge"? And could you let us know what you understand as being the difference between the two?

 

In reply to the above is it possible for the two things to be classed as seperate entities allowing one to sell the title deed to a spv and retain the charge or in the reverse to keep the title but sell the charge giving two bites of the cherry in their favour.Is that their get out of jail card ,they must have one in my view or they would not publish docs which openly state they have no intention of registering with the LR or informing us of the change in ownership if this is a criminal offence it must surely be the duty of the police to investigate such matters. Anyway I digress in the case of a loan taken out and secured on the property in my daurs case this consists of a doc titled mortgage deed in favour of matlock and reading the terms seems to be saying they have signed over the title yet they are not the mortgage lender.Two seperate things which can lead to the same ending .If any of this makes sense let me know:)

 

kegi

[lizilou]

my mortgage is with capstone but letters are from spml

[littledotty27]

Littledotty, if SPML said it was only an offer and not a contract - they probably meant it - or else, why would they say it?

 

This is what they sent after we S.A.R them,but now they are saying it is only a mortgage offer,even the solicitor sent the exact same copy,so how can it only be an offer and not a contract?

[supersleuth]

Hi Littledotty,

 

If they said it was only a mortgage offer and not a contract then that is actually fantastic for you. They have effectively admitted that there is no contract. If there is no contract then there is no contract to enforce against you in court. If there is no contract then you can get the action struck out on the grounds that they have said there is no contract.

 

You may be looking at what you believe (with very good reason), is a document that LOOKS like a contract - but there are certain legal requirements that have to be met in order for a contract to be enforceable in a court. If those contract law conditions are not met - then whilst the document may look like a contract to a lay person, a lawyer (and a judge) may find that the contract is unenforceable because the formal legal conditions necessary to have a LEGAL AND ENFORCEABLE contract are not met.

 

First thing - could you post the exact text of the paragraph that they sent to you where they say that it is only an offer? - and could you let us know the context of what you had written which prompted them to say that it was only an offer?

 

Second - it will be necessary to actually look at the documents (this one will be a bit tougher - so may need to do it in a PM). But let's establish first whether you have got yourself a fabulous confession from them that there is no contract

 

This could really be great news for you Littledotty....and, as the SPML documentation would be the same documents used for other CAGgers with SPML contracts...it could be good news for everyone.

[enoughisenough]

This is an outstanding development!

 

All eyes on this one.

 

Cheers EIE. Keep the faith.

[scedminc]

my mortgage is with capstone but letters are from spml

 

Hi and welcome,

 

Your mortgage is with SPML and Capstone administer it for SPML. However if you read this thread you will soon learn that SPML infact no longer owns your mortgage.

[Smarterchick]

I can't really add much to this other than perhaps, at the very least you could question the right of SPML to have taken action and get this put on hold by the court?

 

I really wish you good luck with this Littledotty.

[scedminc]

Hi LittyDotty.

 

Did you ever hear anything back from ITN?

[littledotty27]

Hi everyone

 

Scedminc...itn still waiting for there lawyers,reading over the securitisation.

 

Supersleuth..I will post details of where they state its only mortgage offer later today.

I hope something good comes of this,as im fed up with them!!

Will post letter and our so called contract on here later this afternoon...keep your eyes posted!!

[JonCris]

"only a mortgage offer":eek:

 

Gawd clearly there's some............ 'lets dig ourselves out of the legal minefield we have gotten ourselves into & before one of us commits perjury & ends in the pokey'............. going on behind the scenes

[littledotty27]

Here is the docs I said I would put up

 

mortgage contract/offer picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

mortgage001.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

mortgage1002.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

mortgage1003.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

mortgage1004.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

docs003.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket

 

this is the doc that states it is a mortgage offer only.

 

docs004.jpg picture by littledotty27 - Photobucket