Jump to content


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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1059 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

WELL POSTED MIDGE

REPO 105

His long-awaited report, which took more than a year to prepare, contains allegations about an accounting "gimmick", known as "Repo 105".

This is a legal accounting device that involves shifting around assets to reduce the size of a company's balance sheet, and effectively reduce the size of debt.

It was a gimmick that Lehman used increasingly as its problems mounted, the report showed.

Mr Valukas said Repo 105 was used to "give the appearance that Lehman was reducing its overall debt" levels in 2008 when in reality it was not.

Lehman used Repo 105 to temporarily remove $50bn of assets from its balance sheet in 2008.

The report says that E&Y and Lehman had received warnings about the practice. But "E&Y took virtually no action to investigate the Repo 105 allegation," the report says.

An attorney for Mr Fuld said on Thursday that the former Lehman boss "did not know what those transactions were".

"He didn't structure them or negotiate them, nor was he aware of their accounting treatment," his attorney Patricia Hynes said.

 

 

ALL THE USUAL SUSPECTS ARE APPARENTLY INVOLVED IN THE SAME PRACTICE HERE.

55M into a company sppl apparently abandoned by the 100% shareholder and parent resetfan

25M from the parent Mable 3 weeks before going into Admin into RESETFAN and so on in circles all around this group and along the line.

This is really something to get our teeth into and get complaints off to CIB,Insolvency ,HMRC etc and its supported fully by the BBC article. Debt shifted or written off by members in the same group to give the appearance of solvency,then dumped into sppl.

Lord Cagger where are you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidently the practice was legal under english law,wouldn't you know it.

The big difference is that this is POST the parents insolvency so there are creditors of the parent who may well be losing out.

AS STATED BEFORE SO MANY TIMES THIS GROUP IS STILL TRADING AND CARRYING OUT ILLEGAL REPOS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE ARE TRADING WHILST INSOLVENT.

MORE HERE

British law firm cleared way for Lehman cover-up - Times Online

 

The long-awaited report, which cost $38 million to produce, is likely to give ammunition to shareholders suing Lehman as well as to government prosecutors.

Compiled with the help of a team of 70 attorneys, it is based on more than 250 interviews, five million documents and 26 million pages of company e-mails.

Hector Sants, chief executive of Britain’s Financial Services Authority (FSA), was the only person to decline to be interviewed.

However, the FSA did provide detailed, written answers to specific questions regarding the FSA’s involvement in the weekend before Lehman’s collapse and in the Barclays transaction that would have been posed to Mr Sants.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Success !

 

Well, semi success at least.

 

I went to court this morning, got instant hearing. judge obviously not sympathetic to lender, but equally obviously constrained by limits on court's discretion.

 

BUT judge fudged issue by saying she did not have sufficient information to make a judgement and adjourned case for eight weeks to allow me to to pursue mortgage rescue scheme & Ombudsman complaint etc.

 

So, no eviction on Monday after all.

 

Thank you all very much for your help, without which I'm sure I wouldn't have succeeded.

 

So, I will be spending the next eight weeks doing everything I can to nail these unpleasant thieves.

 

The FSA issued report this morning which will help in that regard.

Edited by rocket1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK That's a massive relief....

 

Well done Rocket1. Under the very difficult circumstances we can chalk that up as a qualified victory. Phew...

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Rocket1,thats brilliant news!! Also well done to everyone who helped Rocket :)

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s, of the investigating & prosecuting organisations:

 

DO NOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen. 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633 

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643 

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 (part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : tel#0207 637 6236  

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Subprimefees/#detail

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocket

Thank God for that, have you got to let them know? as they might turn up on monday with the bailiffs?

Get the mortgage rescue scheme and your benefits sorted out FIRST then nail the b.stards eight weeks will fly by and then if its not sorted they will be at you again.

Can we chalk up Caggers 4 Capstone 0 ?

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye and what about this -

 

What have we been saying about E&Y

 

Think we have a very strong possibility of a real breakthrough here

 

Ernst & Young faces legal action over Lehman collapse - Times Online

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know I'm sure the FOS is the trump card here, its the common denominator in all these cases and as soon as theyre mentioned the court adjourns pending their decision.Had this happen to me several years ago ,lender just caved in and did a deal in the end which without the mediation of the fos they previously wouldn't agree to.

Don't forget uneverdid on her own thread hearing next week,will mention fos if she hasnt already got a complaint in.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Will ask sced to post up the accounts again if he still has them on file.

then a chart can be drawn up showing who owes who.

As the late lamented itbg said:

FOLLOW THE MONEY.

ISN'T IT ABOUT TIME THE RED CARD WAS LIFTED?

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news Rocket, well done.

 

Apologies to EIE and Ryde who PM'd me. I was unable to respond due to work commitements but glad you got this worked out for Rocket.

 

Ryde, I can upload the accounts if you like and I remember promising this last week but totally forgot. Which ones do you require??

 

Sced

Link to post
Share on other sites

SCED

IN YOUR OWN TIME

all the latest 2008 if you could just post the pdf link,whatever you havent got will see if i can fill in.

We need to look at the group as a whole from resetfan downwards to see the linked debt liabilities and the use of repo 105.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A good friend just sent the relevant law re repo 105

 

 

 

E&Y are upto necks in this, as we always knew, in the US and UK.

Pass the word, another email on this section 239 by everyone to :

[email protected]

Preference Transactions (Section 239 Insolvency Act 1986)

A preference transaction is any transaction entered into between a company and a third party which has the effect of placing the third party into a better position than he/she/it would otherwise have been (had the transaction not taken place) in the event of the company going into liquidation. One of the most common type of preferential transaction is discharging a debt to a favoured creditor shortly before the company goes into liquidation. The creditor is preferred because he/she/it receives payment of the debt in full whilst other creditors may only receive payment of a percentage of their debt (if anything) from the company in liquidation.

An Administrator or Liquidator may only seek orders setting aside the preferential transaction (or other order under the section) if it was entered into 6 months prior to the “onset of insolvency” which will usually be the date upon which a formal insolvency procedure was commenced.

If however the transaction is between the company and a person “connected” with the company then this time limit is extended to 2 years.

A person (which includes a company) is “connected” with an insolvent company for the purposes of this section if he or she is:-

1) A director or shadow director of that company;

2) An associate of such a director or shadow director;

3) An associate of that company.

An individual person is “associated” with another individual if he/she is the spouse of that individual or a relative (siblings, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces or children step children or adopted children) of that individual or in partnership with that individual.

A company is “associated” with another company if the same person has control of both companies. Broadly speaking a person (which includes another company) has “control” of a company if the directors are accustomed to acting on his/her directions or if he/she/it owns more than a third of the voting shares in that company. There are also further rules governing groups of individuals who have linked shareholdings in companies.

If an individual or company is “connected” with the company making the preference then the burden of proof also shifts against the connected party in relation to the other requirements under the section which need to be established for the transaction to be successfully challenged.

follow the money

shut 'em down

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent this off to E & Y regardingbtheir recent "audit" of SPMLS accounts

. You can see the previous message & reply!!

 

----- Original Message -----

From:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To:

Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 2:24 PM

Subject: Re: Fw: Assurance query

 

 

Michael,

Thank you for this anonymous reply. Without your surname I cannot contact you by phone! I am still awaiting a reply to the first e mail. Perhaps this might have to do with today's news that your company may be facing legal action over the whole Lehmans saga.Am I right or do you just take an age to reply anyway. I will seriously consider taking this matter further if I don't receive a reply shortly.

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: [email protected]

To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:46 PM

Subject: Re: Fw: Assurance query

 

 

 

Dear Mr xxxxxxxxx,

 

Thank you for your email. One of my colleagues will respond to your query in due course.

 

Kind regards.

Michael

 

 

"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

24/02/2010 14:35

To

cc

Subject Fw: Assurance query

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please let me know that you have received this e mail and are dealing with it

----- Original Message -----

From: xxxxxxxxxxxx

To:

Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:06 PM

Subject: Assurance query

 

Pleasae can you tell me whether the attached document is genuine ie it is from you, and the name of the person who audited the accounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From here, in full:

 

Ernst & Young faces legal action over Lehman collapse - Times Online

 

 

Ernst & Young could face legal action after a damning report into the collapse of Lehman Brothers accused the British accountancy firm of professional negligence over a number of years before the catastrophic downfall of the 158-year-old American bank in 2008.

 

A 2,200-page report into the collapse of the once highly respected institution also uncovered evidence that the bank had used an accounting practice known as Repo 105 to remove temporarily up to $50 billion of debt from its balance sheet, without telling investors or regulators.

 

Lehman’s auditor Ernst & Young is criticised in the report, “for among other things its "failure to question and challenge improper or inadequate disclosure in those financial statements".

 

Dick Fuld, the former chairman and chief executive of Lehmans, and some of his closest lieutenants are also facing legal claims for breach of fiduciary duty after using the “lazy accounting gimmick” to hide the fact that the bank was insolvent.

 

Anton Valukas, of Jenner & Block, who was appointed as examiner by the judge handling Lehman’s bankruptcy, paints a damning picture of the bank’s final two years, branding it as a hothouse institution so obsessed with growth that senior executives said openly they did not want to hear “too much detail” about the risks they might face in case it held them back.

 

The examiner concluded that while Lehman’s top management chose to disregard or overrule the firm’s risk controls on a regular basis and while certain of their risk decisions were “unwise” and represented poor “judgment”, this did not amount to a breach of fiduciary duty.

 

The Repo 105 practice had been in use by Lehmans since 2001 but it was in the bank’s final two years that it was regularly used to alter public perceptions of the balance sheet.

 

In the run up to a reporting period, Lehman would enter an arrangement to sell and then repurchase financial assets. Normally, such deals are accounted as “transactions” but by adding a cash element Lehmans was able to call them “sales”.

 

The bank’s balance sheet could therefore be pumped up with cash from the sale and this would also reduce its leverage. At the beginning of a new quarter, Lehman would borrow more money and repurchase the assets to put them back on its balance sheet.

 

In 2008, just before Lehmans filed for bankruptcy, it transferred $50.38 billion in a Repo 105 arrangement, reducing its leverage from 13.9 per cent to 12.1 per cent.

 

“Lehman’s failure to disclose the use of an accounting device to significantly and temporarily lower leverage, at the same time that it affirmatively represented those “low” leverage numbers to investors as positive news, created a misleading portrayal of Lehman’s true financial health,” Mr Valukas said.

 

He noted that the sole function of the Repo 105 transactions was “balance sheet manipulation”, adding that even Lehman’s own accounting personnel described them as an “accounting gimmick” and a “lazy way of managing the balance sheet”.

 

Mr Valukas concluded that there were “colorable claims” against Mr Fuld, Christopher O’Meara, Lehman’s head of risk, Erin Callan, the chief financial officer and Ian Lowitt, who replaced Ms Callan as chief financial officer.

 

He described a “colorable claim” as one for which “there is sufficient credible evidence” to support a finding in a court.

 

Mr Valukas also said: “Ernst & Young, the firm’s outside auditor, was professionally negligent in allowing those [Repo 105] reports to go unchallenged.” He added that there could be a colorable claim for professional malpractice against the accountancy giant.

 

Mr Fuld’s lawyer said last night that the former Lehman boss did not know what the Repo 105 transactions were or their accounting treatment.

 

Ernst & Young said: “Our opinion indicated that Lehman’s financial statements for that year were fairly presented in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and we remain of that view.”

 

When Lehman filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008, with about $600 billion in debt, its collapse contributed to the freezing of credit markets worldwide and to increasing the depth of the global recession.

 

Judge James Peck, who is handling the Lehman bankruptcy in the Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York, appointed Mr Valukas a year ago to investigate the events that led to Lehman’s collapse, including any possible “fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct, mismanagement, or irregularity”.

 

On Thursday, Judge Peck unsealed Mr Vulakas’s report, which had been presented to him last month.

 

The meticulously researched document describes Lehman’s aggressive growth strategy which, Mr Vulakas said, was intended to take advantage of the sub-prime mortgage crisis that broke in 2006 by increasing its exposure to real estate at a time when others were cutting back.

 

While Mr Vulakas concluded that Mr Fuld and other senior executives may have a case to answer in the use of Repo 105 arrangements, their management of Lehman’s aggressive expansion and attitude to risk were not so “reckless and irrational” as to give rise to a breach of fiduciary duty.

 

Mr Valukas also concluded that after Lehman’s collapse Barclays may have received “a limited amount of assets” improperly when it took control of Lehman’s core US brokerage.

 

He added that Lehman could have potential claims against JPMorgan Chase and Citibank in connection with demands for collateral and certain changes made to guarantee agreements in Lehman’s final days.

 

The long-awaited report, which cost $38 million to produce, is likely to give ammunition to shareholders suing Lehman as well as government prosecutors.

 

Compiled with the help of a team of 70 attorneys, it is based on more than 250 interviews, 5 million documents and 26 million pages of company e-mails.

Hector Sants, chief executive of Britain’s Financial Services Authority (FSA), was the only person to refuse to be interviewed.

 

However, the FSA did provide detailed, written answers to specific questions regarding the FSA’s involvement in the weekend before Lehman’s collapse and in the Barclays transaction that would have been posed to Mr Sants.

 

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone

I started reading this thread 2 days ago and got to around thread 2000 then i realised i had to join in to share my story.

Firstly i must say great thread started by Little dottie great contributions by supersleuth (Wish i had you in court with me), enoughisenough. compari to name but a few but really good work. A lot of digging done by all, sorry i cant name you all.

When i get time i will continue catching up on the threads i missed.

I may not have much to offer but my story may be of interest to some of you.

Where do i begin? well in 2000 i aquired a mortgage from SPML, i had to use them as my credit history was not the best and i was self employed. I Quote from thier Customer Booklet

 

"An honest and even handed approach.SPML believes that past credit problems should not stop people from obtaining finance on fair terms.It is our belief that such people, whose financial circumstances have improved, should have the opportunity to put these problems behind them."

 

So with this in mind off i go thinking foolheartedly that if i got into financial difficulties they were there to help as they understood people can, as before end up again with "Credit Problems"

 

My payments have always been a bit hit and miss but always seemed to catch up with paying on arrangements set by SPML, i suffered the charges as it states in the T&C section C25

" The borrower must pay all expenses on demand from the company.If the borrower does not pay them, the company will debit the expenses to the borrowers loan account under clause 13 of this section and charge the borrower interest on them until the borrower pays them"

 

This worked for me, they were added to my loan and i paid interest on these charges just as it was part of my loan.

 

Then CAPSTONE comes along................ I find that charges are then applied to my arrears account monthly, interest on my arrears added to my arrears monthly and the next month and every month charged interest on the interest already charged as it was now part of my arrears.

This may seem logical to you but not having a very legal minded i could only see the obvious that every thing was added to my arrears and i was paying interest on interest.

 

Hopefully not too boring but anyway,work for me was not regular over the years and as of last August i am out of work with no benifits but with £4,000 savings i continued as best as possible with payments but CAPSTONE decided to go to court to repoccess on the grounds that i was £4,000 in arrears and was not keeping to my arrangements to pay £200 additional each month, I knew that due to ill health i was only clutching at straws and they would get thier way eventually as it is soo obvious that the buissness of repo is more profitable (Supersleuth) so put the house on the market for sale, to be fair if i sell i will come away with around £70K so im one of the lucky ones.

Paid £1.400 off arrears 18th Feb asked for court to be cancelled as i had arrangement in place again (Mortgage plus £200 As i had offer on house)

Was declined as i failed too many previous arrangements.

11th March 2010 date of court, started reading here 10th so decided to ask questions before court just to annoy them.

My arrears at 2nd March £2,600 this included my charges over the period with interest on interest!

 

I asked to speak with my lender(who they state is SPML no reason to doubt them i wish i had) was told that i cant as they dont have offices and are only an off shore company?

Asked about fees

1) Arrears Management Fees charged at £50 and not £40 as stated so £280 owed back

2) Debt Councillor Fees Charged at £115 and £110 both times we refused and now we find that this is something never listed on their sundry fees list

another £225 owed back

3) Litigation fees £125 on 4 occassions. Sundry Fees State "14. Litigation Fee...Charged to the account when a solicitor is instructed to send a 7 Day letter" never had letter from solicitor so another £500 due back

4) Returned DD fee £25...found that when my DD was returned on 1st of month i was charged £25 ok but they represented the DD twice in the month on 10 occassions so another £250 owed back with interest which they had charged and the interest on that lol

 

This has only been confirmed by phone so ill let you all know if it materalises but to me it was a stalling tactic as the house is still not sold.

I asked was my mortgage securitised (I did not fully understand but just wanted to know if the guy on the phone knew what i meant lol) he said yes but that my mortgage was not sold on, i just thank myself that he did not ellaborate on securitization ( i cant even spell it)

I requested by recorded delivery a copy of My Mortgage statement to take to court as on repo court cases they only supply Statement of Arrears and recieved it 11th (Shock)

 

at 10;30 on 11th 30 mins before court i had a phone call from CAPSTONE saying my case would be adjourned to allow for my account to be brought up to date.

I arrived at court as prepared as could be with letter of offer on house, arrangement in place, lots of questions prepared (Thanks to all of you) and in the knowledge it was being adjourned,went in and their solititor stated that he requested an adjournment on the grounds that i had an arrangement in place with conditions applied that i keep up the payments WOW i seen red and asked the judge not to adjourn explaining why and that the solicitor was either lieing or had been misled.

The judge asked if i wished we could carry on which i did. The solicitor could not answer any question on fees or any thing to do with SPML only legal terms on repoccessions. the judge asked him who instructed him to reposent SPML he said Capstone the judge said he wanted a full explaination of how Capstone fitted into all of this, the solicitor tried explaining making matters worse for him.

Finally the judge said no adjounment would be granted and that the solicitor should report bact to SPML or CAPSTONe that he must have a full breakdown of who is involved with SPML before he will listen to anymore claims for Repo from them in his court and dissmissed the case.

 

I'm New her so i hope for one i have posted this correctly and was not too boring but it was a great day for me, im still selling but 1 up for the little guy i felt

 

 

Thank You all for your help

 

I can only say that i feel for all facing repo but i do believe LittleDotty has helped with this GOOD LUCK ALL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know I'm sure the FOS is the trump card here, its the common denominator in all these cases and as soon as theyre mentioned the court adjourns pending their decision.Had this happen to me several years ago ,lender just caved in and did a deal in the end which without the mediation of the fos they previously wouldn't agree to.

Don't forget uneverdid on her own thread hearing next week,will mention fos if she hasnt already got a complaint in.

 

 

I am in total agreement here...If anyone who thinks they may get problems further down the line this year you must,make your complaints to Capstone, give them eight weeks , and when they haven't responded satisfactorily, get it in front of the FOS.

 

Judges are well known for not making decisions they don't want to such as the unlawful charges lark. They'd be a lot happier then when your defence is. "I'm afraid it's currently under investigation by the Ombudsman."

 

And as we all know that can take months. Cheap and easy way to buy some peace of mind...:)

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Class MWSPML! And welcome on board...

 

A judge who won't hear ANY of their Repo claims. Now that's what I call a result. Have our DJs wizened up...? Let's hope so.

 

Oh and by the way, an admission that Capstone instruct. Can we have that in writing please and can we also have the originator's agreement with Capstone as per their right to collect and their locus standi...Just so we all know where we stand...

Edited by enoughisenough

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

WELL POSTED MIDGE

REPO 105

His long-awaited report, which took more than a year to prepare, contains allegations about an accounting "gimmick", known as "Repo 105".

This is a legal accounting device that involves shifting around assets to reduce the size of a company's balance sheet, and effectively reduce the size of debt.

It was a gimmick that Lehman used increasingly as its problems mounted, the report showed.

Mr Valukas said Repo 105 was used to "give the appearance that Lehman was reducing its overall debt" levels in 2008 when in reality it was not.

Lehman used Repo 105 to temporarily remove $50bn of assets from its balance sheet in 2008.

The report says that E&Y and Lehman had received warnings about the practice. But "E&Y took virtually no action to investigate the Repo 105 allegation," the report says.

An attorney for Mr Fuld said on Thursday that the former Lehman boss "did not know what those transactions were".

"He didn't structure them or negotiate them, nor was he aware of their accounting treatment," his attorney Patricia Hynes said.

 

 

ALL THE USUAL SUSPECTS ARE APPARENTLY INVOLVED IN THE SAME PRACTICE HERE.

55M into a company sppl apparently abandoned by the 100% shareholder and parent resetfan

25M from the parent Mable 3 weeks before going into Admin into RESETFAN and so on in circles all around this group and along the line.

This is really something to get our teeth into and get complaints off to CIB,Insolvency ,HMRC etc and its supported fully by the BBC article. Debt shifted or written off by members in the same group to give the appearance of solvency,then dumped into sppl.

Lord Cagger where are you?

 

I wonder if ALL of those employees, past or present who received large bonuses based on these figures realize that they could also find themselves being sued by investors for the return of that money..... this is gonna run & run AND run:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

MWSPML

Great result to what could have ended up another tale of despair and woe at our" friends" hands.If you've got info from this site sure you wouldn't mind us chalking up CAGGERS 5 CAPSTONE 0.

WHAT AN UNDERSTANDING DJ

YOU HAVE AN ABSOLUTELY PRIME CASE FOR AN FOS COMPLAINT SO IT IS SUGGESTED YOU START ONE ASAP.

All the info about how to go about this is on site,as pointed out it seems if you have an ongoing complaint (which usually takes about 18months to 2 years!) its like a suit of armour at any hearing and you stand an excellent chance of getting a large refund..

anyone who hasn't got an fos complaint in progress would be well advised to start one.

I WAS TOLD THE LENDER HAS TO STUMP UP £500 EVERY TIME A COMPLAINT IS MADE AGAINST THEM,SO ENOUGH COMPLAINTS?

Edited by ryde
overoptimistic
Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidently the practice was legal under english law,wouldn't you know it.

The big difference is that this is POST the parents insolvency so there are creditors of the parent who may well be losing out.

AS STATED BEFORE SO MANY TIMES THIS GROUP IS STILL TRADING AND CARRYING OUT ILLEGAL REPOS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE ARE TRADING WHILST INSOLVENT.

MORE HERE

British law firm cleared way for Lehman cover-up - Times Online

 

The long-awaited report, which cost $38 million to produce, is likely to give ammunition to shareholders suing Lehman as well as to government prosecutors.

Compiled with the help of a team of 70 attorneys, it is based on more than 250 interviews, five million documents and 26 million pages of company e-mails.

Hector Sants, chief executive of Britain’s Financial Services Authority (FSA), was the only person to decline to be interviewed.

However, the FSA did provide detailed, written answers to specific questions regarding the FSA’s involvement in the weekend before Lehman’s collapse and in the Barclays transaction that would have been posed to Mr Sants.

 

They may have cleared it but we are talking about the US here & they won't care IMHO they will not only go after Lehman's but also their advisers cos they should have checked that it complied with their laws. In a world economy we can't have laws which act in isolation allowing a company to claim sanction from another jurisdiction for criminal acts in their country

 

Remember the Nat West 3 We would not prosecute cos their offense wasn't illegal here but the Yanks did extraditing them to stand trial there

Edited by JonCris
Link to post
Share on other sites

Comity n.

 

...when one court defers to the jurisdiction of another in a case in which both would have the right to handle the case. Usually this is applied to a federal court allowing a state court to try a criminal case (either exclusively or first) in which both a state and federal crime has apparently been committed. Murder which also violates civil rights, kidnapping across state borders, murder of a federal official, fraud involving violations of both federal and state laws are examples of cases to which comity may apply.

 

Or just ship Attia and her accomplices off to Camp X-Ray...:D

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAGGERS 5 CRUDSTONE 0

 

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...