Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • 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.<<**IMPORTANT**  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 CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Sub Prime Mortgages Call For Evidence Before The Treasury Select Committee


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5381 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

Your story is an absolute shocker Agatha. And the Sad But True story is that tens of thousands are being turned over like this. I will do my utmost to get this appalling abuse stopped. I can't do it myself because I have no individual influence. But we keep on going because they declared war

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

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Dougal

 

just caught your cryptic post. Any chance of a pm on this. Got mine

in under the radar!

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 EIE

 

You don't know the half of it, dodgy estate agent, putting people off of

buying home, putting sale board up when not actually sold. Someone

put in an offer for £25,000 more, have prove of letter offer. BT told me new owners had taken over our phone line, house still for sale.

 

I need to get non complience from SPML. I will take them to court,

nothing to loose.

 

Agatha c (I think I prefer Granmma):cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to let you know the Courts do not have to abide by any decision made by the FOS.

 

The FOS is not a regulatory body, it is a dispute resolution service.

 

As far as I am aware they do only deal with individual complaints. However, I understand that certain types of complaints can be dealt with under a "wider implications" (i will check this further later) criteria. Where an Ombudsman makes a decision about one complaint and that decision is then applied to all identical complaints. Much like the recent Lehman Brothers Inventments.

 

However, the complaints would have to be identical.

 

Hi Suetonius,

 

Perhaps I am wrong but I always thought that the FOS decision would have sufficient weight in court under ADR legislation. The final decision is binding on the company but not on the consumer if they choose not to accept or need to enforce.

 

That's what the ADR legislation is there for and the decision is taken into account. The courts encourage it's use before taking up their valuable time and smile upon those that do. If I'm wrong then I'll have to take that up with Trading Standards as that's what their handbook says and is included in the training.

 

My thoughts are more on what they mean by 'individual'. It can't mean a person in the singular because of joint accounts. It can't mean under one account number as they can consider several under any complaint.

Edited by Crapstone
Link to post
Share on other sites

To use ADR as a group woudn't be that unusual if we all agree to the same points of complaint being raised. It's just a thought as I haven't yet seen it mentioned and if there is a loophole we can use at the least cost to ourselves then it's worth a look at.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agatha c. (granny)

 

We are working on it, all individually and together to bring them down a peg or two.

 

Your experience has been terrible and is shocking. Criminals get treated better with at least a roof over their heads and meals provided. But make the mistake of being in debt then you are out on your own.

 

I don't know about the sane part but if kicking your own a**e was an Olympic sport we'd win a gold for sure and knowing it's a team effort makes it that bit better.

 

Congratulations on your good news! You bloomin' well deserve it and it's something to look forward to. I can't wait 'til it's my turn to be a Gran but I think I'll have to wait a few years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agatha C,

 

Congratulations granny!

 

An irritating thought sprang to mind when I read your story and Crapstone's truism that "criminals get treated better". How about this story for possibly, the greatest example of ironic 'justice':

 

True story:

A solicitor who works for a law firm that represents repossession lenders gets paid (and takes, lots of money) to use her legal skills to put innocent non-criminals out on the street i.e., she takes money to make people homeless- - - that same solicitor then received a public award in recognition of her kind "charitable work" because she gave her legal skills for free to get homes for criminals when they leave prision!!!!!!

 

It would be funny if it wasn't true, but alas, this is the mindset of the scummy lawyers who assist these lenders and is testament to their skewed sense of justice. In fairness to criminals who have served their sentence, they too deserve and should have, somewhere to live, but equally, innocent people who've committed no crime also deserve to have a home. How incredible it is that a solicitor takes money for making innocent victims of her client banker crimes homeless whilst at the same time being publicly recognised and commended for her pro bono work housing criminals!!! What deprived sense of justice does that solicitor has....

 

So Crapstone is right...criminals ARE treated better.

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All:)

 

I know what you mean Supersleuth - this is slightly off topic but in a not dissimilar situation, we were forced to sell our dream home which we had spent many years and many thousands personally renovating from scratch, after narrowly escaping repossession by Swift Advances. The buyer was a well-known acquitted criminal who had served many years in prison before a retrial acquitted him. His notoriety in the press led to his being in a position to write his memoirs and marry a millionairess who used her cash to purchase our home (and that's apart from the half a million compensation he is apparently suing for:eek:)

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

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

This was interesting: link to coverage of Tuesday's Treasury Committee discussing Mortgage arrears - not specifically sub-prime but did include some details.

Player It's about 2 hrs long but great evidence from Shelter, CAB and Which. It made me feel like someone was listening.

I got so angry reading your story Agatha. We will all fight on to stop these crooks destroying lives. Be strong. Victory will be sweet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Suetonius,

 

Perhaps I am wrong but I always thought that the FOS decision would have sufficient weight in court under ADR legislation. The final decision is binding on the company but not on the consumer if they choose not to accept or need to enforce.

 

That's what the ADR legislation is there for and the decision is taken into account. The courts encourage it's use before taking up their valuable time and smile upon those that do. If I'm wrong then I'll have to take that up with Trading Standards as that's what their handbook says and is included in the training.

 

My thoughts are more on what they mean by 'individual'. It can't mean a person in the singular because of joint accounts. It can't mean under one account number as they can consider several under any complaint.

 

Sorry, I could have explained myself much better.

 

A Final Decision ( given by an Ombudsman and not an Adjudicator) is legally binding upon the applicable institution, if accepted in full by the person making the complaint.

 

However, that Final Decision would not be binding on a Court in cases of a similar or an exact nature.

 

As far as I am aware, an individual is any person or business with a turnover of less than £1,000,000. Each complaint is dealt with on an individual basis be it a individual person or an individual account (including joint accounts)

 

The FOS will only "bundle" complaints from more than one individual (account or person) under the wider implications banner

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Suetonius

 

Good to also have you back making your contributions. They certainly test the argument, which is always in the general good, in addition to which you have an excellent knowledge of the regulatory framework.

 

As all will now know the book is closed. However there are circumstances under which the committee will allow a further seven days, usually by prior agreement I think, and probably only from agencies.

 

AS A MATTER OF URGENCY

IF YOU HAVE HAD YOUR SUBMISSION MARKED AS PERSONAL AND THEREFORE INADMISSABLE...

 

I URGE YOU WITH THE MAXIMUM SPEED YOU CAN GALVANISE

 

TO GET DOWN TO YOUR LOCAL CAB AND ASK THEM TO SUBMIT ON YOUR BEHALF

 

THE CAB MIGHT JUST BE ABLE TO SQUEEZE THAT EXTENSION WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL CONSUMER CANNOT

 

Keep the faith, EiE.

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

Thanks Suetonius,

 

It was worth a look and considering the wider implications avenue.

 

I'd like to ask your thoughts on court orders and waivers of the terms by the claimant. Would a non-waiver clause still be effective or would they have to apply for a variation?

 

As an example; If a claimant was granted a suspended repossession order and the defendent was required to meet the terms imposed by the judge. If the defendent or claimant vary those terms without court consent is it a breach of the order? Particularly in the case of the claimant. Would they still be able to rely on the court order and any previous or post contract non-waivers if they initiated the varied terms either written, orally or via their conduct?

 

I think I know half the answer but would appreciate a 2nd opinion. Hopefully you'll be able to understand what I've written as it's not always easy to convey what you mean, (when it's sweltering hot despite the fan on max!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome back Supersleuth,

 

All I've ever asked for is to be treated fairly and it's just not happening. It's hard to stomache when you have worked hard for what you have but when times get tough you don't fall into safety net provided to people that haven't, don't and never intended to contribute to society one bit when they are capable.

 

There seems to be some unwritten code that says if you could ever afford home ownership in the first place you must have assets and can just pack up and go to rental or downsize if repo'd, or you can afford to defend it.

 

We were encouraged to buy our homes and now we are being punished for it.

 

Totally off topic but we all need to have a moan now and again to keep us sane and united.

Edited by Crapstone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - my understanding (following valuable info from Carmel) is that breaching the court order applies to both sides. My lender is doing same thing, but, as the breach involves adding more charges I also believe that no-one can get a repo order based on fees and charges, only what is owed in actual payments - which has always had me wondering whether interest is being calculated with these erroneous sums included? (hope that makes sense)....

 

 

We were encouraged to buy our homes and now we are being punished for it.

I used this in my original defence against my lender:

Residential Mortgage Repossessions and The Administration of Justice Acts, 1970 and 1973 – A case for Reform. L. M Clements, B.A., LL.M, Lecturer in Law, University of Hull.

 

“It is widely recognised that mortgage finance is extremely important to our economy and that it should continue to be freely available to persons having a broad spectrum of incomes. In order to ensure that this continues to be the case, Banks, Building Societies and other secured lenders clearly need assurances that their security is relatively safe. Nevertheless, the trend towards owner-occupation and the economic misfortunes of the past raise the issue whether increased protection should be given to mortgagors of residential property. Mortgagors do need protection not only against lenders who use their commercial weight to advantage, but also against external factors such as the consequences of economic recession. This article examines the current problems with mortgage repossessions and argue that reform is needed which will guarantee to mortgagors the protection of a court order in line with the protection afforded to residential tenants, whilst at the same time giving increased powers to the court in possession proceedings”…”There is no doubt that the State has played an important role in encouraging home ownership; but, having been encouraged to enter into home ownership by the State, mortgagors are then reasonably entitled to expect some degree of legal protection from the State. This is particularly the case when outside factors over which individuals have no control lead to wide-spread hardship and homelessness”.

The rights in the tenancy area being different.

Clements, 'Residential Mortgage Repossessions and The Administration of Justice Acts, 1970 and 1973 - A case for Reform.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

A final thanks to all those who submitted and to all those who offered advice on submissions. Whether you were accepted as evidence or not I'm sure all contribtions will be valuable as they are still being made available to committee members and I feel sure that the head of fsa mortgage compliance is going to get a deliciously uncomfortable grilling from some quarters of the committee. Lets hope Angela (something of the) Knight does too.

 

Thanks once again. TSC updates as and when they happen. In the meantime use this thread to post your sub prime abusers (oops sorry mortgage provider's) behaviour RIGHT HERE.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

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

I have just spoken (1300 July 3rd) to the Treasury select committee and you might be interested to hear that they told me they have very few submissions - they mentioned fifteen !.

 

There is still time until July 8 to submit, they said. They are themselves behind time, so the deadline of July 1 was a bit false and they are happy for more submissions.

 

They also said that the reason they would not put personal mortgage stories online and as official evidence is purely for 'safety' or 'hassle' reasons as it is possible to imagine all sorts of problems that might ensue when people identify themselves directly in connection with a particular 'story'.

 

 

However, the very same mortgage story, written differently as a non personal, non identifiable generalised account of a typical example of the 'sort of thing that commonly happens' would be used as official evidence and put online etc by the Treasury Committee.

 

I personally have a slight mental hiccup about how to turn 'my' story into something that abstract, and I'm sure others do too. But perhaps it will become easier when I start writing it.

 

So, it would be a good idea to try and publicise this a bit more and persuade some more submissions out of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Rocket1. This is a very useful contribution.

 

THE DEADLINE IS EXTENDED TO JULY 8TH

 

THE COMMITTEE ARE STILL INVITING SUBMISSIONS

 

EVEN IF YOURS HAS BEEN REJECTED YOU CAN RESUBMIT

 

WRITE ABOUT SUB-PRIME LENDERS IN GENERAL

 

DO NOT MENTION YOUR LENDER OR BROKER

 

DO NOT USE 'I' OR 'WE' USE THE TERM CONSUMER/CONSUMERS

 

ADD FOOTNOTES WITH REFERENCE TO RELEVANT ACTS, REGULATIONS OR AUTHORITIES

 

EACH OF US HAS OUR OWN EXPERIENCE. TAKE THAT AND TELL THE COMMITTEE ABOUT WHAT SUB PRIME MEANS FOR USERS IN GENERAL FOCUSING ON YOUR EXPERIENCE

 

ABOVE ALL TRY TO PAINT A GENERAL PICTURE RATHER THAN A THEY DID THIS TO ME TYPE OF APPROACH

 

LOOK AT THE SAMPLE PARAGRAPH BELOW

 

" Upon repossession many consumers of sub prime mortgage products will find that the unfair treatment and aggressive practices they experienced prior to possession continue long after they have been, probably unlawfully, evicted. They are hounded for 'arrears' comprised of charges there was never any lawful basis for (8); often have their goods seized and stored (paying handsomely of course for this 'service'); charged extortionate estate agency marketing fees; experience crippling interest on the 'debt' for so long as the possessed property remains unsold; charged a whole litany of additional fees for locksmiths; property mothballing and maintenance, valuation and management fees; and then ultimately the equity is stripped from the property in the form of an unlawful and unlawfully excessive early redemption charge."

 

(8) Unfair terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations, 1999

 

OK, so recognising that this is not perfect, it is nonetheless of the style to get your submission in, and past their filters. So guys. As Alf Ramsay said to the winning 1966 World Cup team just before extra time.

 

"You've beaten them once. Now you're going to have to go back out and beat them again!"

Edited by enoughisenough
typos

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

Good luck 2nd time round. I stripped mine of all personal references and it got through.

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

Did you read the mail on Sunday. This stuff is starting to get through. nobody even questions the mortgages were securitised anymore. If the tsc accept my evidence then that will be big news.

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

Dont usually get the mail, only watch news every other day (so repetetive).

 

Im just taking a look at how easy it would be to raising this to a better level of publicity than we are getting at the moment. Anyone have any ideas?

 

Perhaps a submission to local radio channels wherever we are?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That This Is Money article over the weekend said there are 250 reposession orders granted per day and somewhere I read that this was only a small proportion of the amount of cases being brought to court by the lenders.

 

Therefore what about all this Facebook and twittering thing eveyone is apparently using? They seem to get all sorts of public attention.

 

Did a facebook campaign or something not stop of of the banks charging student fees or something a while back?

 

No idea how they work, all a bit beyond me!!

 

T :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chargebiter

 

Here's the link to the Mail on Sunday Story.

 

Haunted by the ghost lenders behind string of repossessions | Mail Online

 

What you have to remember is that the media range from liberal to conservative, in the main the latter, and that stories involving celebrities and car crash tv are the norm.

 

We've been trying for ages with a succession of journos to get this more prominence but their editors are very jumpy about stuff like this, even when the journo is sympathetic. No more sub prime mortgages and bang goes all that juicy advertising revenue, that fills up the scandal sheets and keeps them profitable. No more cash till pay day companies? Bang goes their advertising revenue as well. So it's difficult, but the more serious broadcasters and newspapers will run with it. Heavens above, if the Mail will publish it then there's hope for us all.

 

What would certainly raise the profile is a visit from plod. Now that is newsworthy.

 

Like I said. I share your frustrations but we can't be unrealistic. I even wrote a tabloid style expose on one of the other threads in the hope a journo might pick it up and run with it. It's real slow getting this sort of thing pushed up the agenda because too many powerful groups have a strong vested interest in ensuring it doesn't. Anyway the vast majority of the media are owned and controlled by huge companies with massive cross diversification of interests and holdings including yes...you've guessed it...the financial industries. This is a really tough nut to crack, but it will get through. Do some digging. Find out who owns your local radio station. Then find out who owns the owners of your local radio station. Then find out who owns the owners of who owns your local radio station. And lastly look at how many pies they've got their fingers in. You'll be shocked.

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...