Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • new thread created for this claimform please post here now for anything to do with it now . pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’. Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time. You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID. You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . .use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt or Util debt]  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything .do not ever use or give an email . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? lowell Solicitors : Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment? May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Mortgage Securitisation - Preferred


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4512 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

This is going to sounds like the mutual appreciation society, but I feel the comments made by JC in relation to "unfair relationships" rather than Superslueth's legal title arguments are the way to proceed.

 

If s.136 of the law of property act does apply to securitisation, then without a notice of assignment, legal / aboslute assignment cannot be achieved.

 

However, if we look at the unfair relationship angle, there are valid points that can be made.

 

Lets look at the information that is publically avaliable (prospectus)

 

"If, following a Product Switch of any Mortgage Loan in the Mortgage

Portfolio, such Mortgage Loan has caused the Seller, as a result of such Product Switch, to be in breach of any of the applicable representations and warranties and/or conditions contained in the Mortgage Sale Agreement, the Seller will, in accordance with and pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage Sale Agreement, be required to repurchase such Mortgage Loan from the Mortgages Trust on the immediately following Trust Determination Date."

 

This basically means that if a lender offers a fixed, tracker or discount rate etc (product / rate switch) to a consumer and that offer is accepted. The lender must buy back the equitable interest of that individual mortgage.

 

Now the question is, would this requirement make a lender less willing to offer a product switch if the mortgage had been securitised ?

 

It is does, then the securitisation process would have had an adverse effect on the lender borrower relationship.

 

I think your last comment hit's the nail on the head in that it must adversely affect the borrower in that there is no benefit whatsoever for the lender to change the status quo.

 

Now we only have to convince a judge which won't be easy as the determination of what constitutes an 'unfair relationship' has not yet, to my knowledge, been determined in a major case

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Sorry if i've lost the plot here but does anyone else have any comments on the power of attorney documents i have posted. Are these going to have a major effect on me and others with a Preferred mortgage and if so then in what respect.

 

Thanks in advance for your responses

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we only have to convince a judge which won't be easy as the determination of what constitutes an 'unfair relationship' has not yet, to my knowledge, been determined in a major case

 

I have been looking everywhere, since you first mentioned it.. Just can't find a case that says an unfair relationship is this.... :evil: I will keep looking

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are favourable County Court Judgments in this regard usually based on exorbitant interest rates but none that have gone above CC level & of course some lenders where this argument has been put forward have settled out of court not wanting to publizise their defeat Nor wanting to take it further & set any kind of precedent

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/ms/articles/artnov04.pdf

 

Just found this don't know if it will help with re to debate.

 

 

It ALL helps Littledotty provide a picture just like this I found in the Evening standard (London Paper)...Now I might appear a Little dotty myself (no offence LD :p ) but what would happen if WE went and purchased OUR notes like this:...Don't you just love all this synergy? :D

 

“Canary Wharf buys back its debt for a song

HUGO DUNCAN-Evening Standard

THE owner of Canary Wharf today revealed it has bought back nearly £120 million of its debt for as little as 21p in the pound.

Canary Wharf Finance 11, a unit set up by Songbird Estates to finance its investment in the Docklands development, repurchased £119.8 million of securitised debt from bondholders.

It paid just £35.5 million to buy back the notes with the price varying between 21.6p in the pound, 30.3p in the pound and 46.8p in the pound.

The substantial discount highlights the lack of faith investors have in corporate debt and the property market.

There is very little liquidity in the market for such debt and prices have plunged as investors shun hard-to-value securities amid the fallout from the subprime crisis.

Canary Wharf said the deal represented “an attractive investment opportunity” and reduced the company’s debt. It is expected to keep the notes rather than cancel them, effectively paying interest to itself.

The 30 year notes were issued in April 2007 close to the peak of Britain’s commercial property market.

It follows a similar move by buyout firm Terra Firma Capital Partners which recently moved to profit from the credit - market turmoil by buying up its own debt at depressed prices.

Hugh Osmond, head of zombie fund Pearl Group, is considering an offer to buy back bonds at just 12.5p in the pound—around half the price of the Canary Wharf deal.

Songbird, which owns 16 of the 30 buildings at Canary Wharf last month admitted it has “minimal headroom” on its £880 million loan from Citigroup after the value of its properties lost £1.8 billion last year.

It is now in talks over how to overcome the debt burden and has appointed Rothschild to advise on its options.

 

 

Now, where was that sales document I was looking for...:-D

 

SC 12.5p in the pound for my house mmmm..sounds appealing..

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/ms/articles/artnov04.pdf

 

Just found this don't know if it will help with re to debate.

 

Good find

 

 

This looks interesting,

 

Securitisations and loan transfers pass on the monetary and legal interest in all the loans within the portfolio to the purchaser.

 

Not sure if that just refers to legal title in equity or not though..

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boy you are a busy bee.. Another good find..

 

Slide 14 stands out;)

Originator transfers the residential mortgages to the SPV by equitable assignment, at an agreed upon value plus an amount of deferred consideration;

Edited by Suetonius
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this IS getting interesting........well done folks ...........Incidentally as an aside re Canary Wharf did you know that it's alleged that much of the Brinks Mat robbery gold (approx 21m) was laundered through it's building contracts....... so you see now'ts changed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find

 

 

This looks interesting,

 

Securitisations and loan transfers pass on the monetary and legal interest in all the loans within the portfolio to the purchaser.

 

Not sure if that just refers to legal title in equity or not though..

 

Irrespective of equity surely the passing of the legal interest means just that in that the true owner should be the one to litigate

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found this.. Although not an ideal source, still a source nonetheless

 

Loan securitisation and risk transfer

 

It does seem to imply that a notice would need to be sent to the borrower

 

 

Taking into consideration the size of Lovells and the fact that they advise all the parties involved in the securitisation process. I think the above should be read carefully and the content noted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought whilst reading what you have found Suetonius.

 

When last in court we questioned the assignment from matlock to spml.

Spml's legal reps stated and I quote 'The borrowers where sent a letter and a copy of the assignment on 20th May 2006'

DJ asked if a copy was available,the answer was no but one can be obtained.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought whilst reading what you have found Suetonius.

 

When last in court we questioned the assignment from matlock to spml.

Spml's legal reps stated and I quote 'The borrowers where sent a letter and a copy of the assignment on 20th May 2006'

DJ asked if a copy was available,the answer was no but one can be obtained.

 

The notice is one of the important things that make an assignment legal / absolute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...