Swift Eater v Swift (of course)!

[Swift Eater]

Hi all,

I have been following this for many months and decided to contirbute.

Like most in here I have a secured loan with these people.

So intrest rates only go up and rearly ever come down now paying nearly 15% on a £50K secured loan = £650 per month

When I requested in December 2008 why there intrest rates have not declined in line with libbor rates they replied and denied that that libbor rate had decreased since December 2007.

So from 2005 when BOE rates were 5% our loan with swift was at 9% our loan went to 15% on BOE rate increases and never declined. By my judgement Swift should be charging about 8% and not the 15% they are curently.

In five years we have repaid over £37k and they still request a settlement of £42K of a £50K loan.

You see a varible interst rate is supost to be varible with BOE intrest rates so I was lead to believe as it is with other lending banks/insittutions.

Varible to Swift is to increase the rate and not to decrease it.

This is clearly been done for proffit and solution to put an end to there dealings are needed to be adressed.

Sparkie and Overdone and others have contributed some brilliant stuff.

Early this year a solistor delt with Swift on our behalf, they were very shy in the subject to access request and did not forward the important under writting document.

We all are aware that Swif is owned by a venture capital company, I suspect that one company charges the other company for services and bye sirversa so Swift can apply such high charges.

I will be obtaining all accounts from companies house over the last 3yrs and by doing ananysis it can be worked out how much they have been paying for there finance.

Looking forward to the Birmingham meeting that is planned, be good to meet some of you people.

Regards

Swift Eater

[Doc2527]

Hi Swift eater

 

A good place to start would be to post up your agreement with Swift on your own thread, so that those who are knowledgeable on such matters could take a look at them and then offer some advice on how to proceed next?

 

Have you missed any payments? How much arrears do you have? Are you being repossessed? do you have a court date as yet?

 

good luck

 

doc

[caro]

Hi and welcome Swift Eater. I've moved your post to your own thread to start you off. I've met a couple of Swift victims at cagmeets including Overdone, and look forward to meeting you in Brum too.;-)

 

I'll leave you in peace to answer Doc's questions and set the ball rolling.

[Swift Eater]

Hi Doc,

Have some arears £1500 missed 2 payments.

No court date as yet, but how long would this take for them to get a date ?

Will post the agreement on here later today, be very greatfull for any assistence.

Regards

[Doc2527]

Hi Swift eater

 

Welcome aboard!

 

Have you been sent a default notice as yet?

Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended) places statutory requirements on second charge lenders when dealing with customers in arrears.

When a borrower is two months in arrears with their second charge mortgage like yourself, the lender is required to send a formal Notice of Sums in Arrears.

 

Thereafter,the Notice will continue to be sent every six months until the customer is no longer in arrears or when a court order has been granted.

 

Have you received any of these notices, perhaps you could post them up on the site with your other docs (anonomised of course.) so we could check these also.

Your lender Swift comply with the Pre-Action Protocol for Mortgages, they are bound to this under their membership of the FLA.

 

The Protocol was introduced by the Ministry of Justice in November 2008.

 

The Protocol requires lenders and borrowers to act fairly and reasonably with each other.

 

It is aimed at encouraging more pre-action contact between the parties to seek an agreement and to facilitate the efficient use of the court’s time, where an agreement cannot be achieved.

 

The Protocol also provides additional protection for homeowners. For example, under the Protocol, a lender should consider postponing the possession action where:

 

1. A claim has been made under a payment protection policy and this is expected to be accepted by the insurer.

 

2. The borrower can demonstrate that reasonable steps have been or will be taken to market the property at an appropriate price and in accordance with reasonable professional advice.

 

3. A genuine complaint has been made to the Financial Ombudsman Service about the potential possession claim.

 

Prior to the introduction of the Protocol, lenders may have sought a suspended possession order from the court to reinforce an alternative payment arrangement agreed with the borrower.

 

Under the Protocol, they will only be able to seek a possession order once all reasonable options have been discussed with the borrower and these have failed to resolve the position.

 

Together, these legislative remedies provide additional protection to consumers facing possession action.

 

 

This should give you a reasonable amount of hope that Swift won't take possession of your home under the Protocol arrangements, however as I'm sure you're most likely aware , others have had possession orders placed on their property without very much contact or communication from Swift. This raises further questions around how well Swift are adhering to the Protocol and their FLA membership rules. Perhaps a call to the FLA might raise awareness of this.

 

I look forward to seeing your docs, others on the site will be very helpful in adding their tuppence worth and advising were neccessary.

 

good luck

 

Doc:-)

[Sparkie1723]

Most lenders are taking notice of the Governments guideline not to pursue possession applications until the borrower is 6 months in arrears........but as you rigtly say Swift are Venture Capitalist backed..............they are driven by greed and do not consider anything except the colour of money, tarnished money,.... tarnished is used in the meaning of " by greed"..

These people all have golden Buddas in their gardens to whom they pray every day to.

 

sparkie

[Swift Eater]

Hi everyone.

Yes have been issured with a default notice.

So borrowed £49,000

Paid so far £ 37,000

 

This morning have recieved a redemption statement for £47,000

 

I have requested a full break down of how this fugure has been calculated.

 

These really do take the P***

 

How will post what ever I can to assist others and myself on here.

 

Kind Regards

[Smarterchick]

Hi everyone.

Yes have been issured with a default notice.

So borrowed £49,000

Paid so far £ 37,000

 

This morning have recieved a redemption statement for £47,000

 

I have requested a full break down of how this fugure has been calculated.

 

These really do take the P***

 

How will post what ever I can to assist others and myself on here.

 

Kind Regards

 

They'll also charge you for the redemption statement...get a comprehensive statement like a bank statement, not just some bunch of figures that are meaningless and unreconcileable .

 

SC

[Swift Eater]

http://s593.photobucket.com/albums/tt14/swagers/?action=view&current=SwiftAgreement1017.jpg

 

http://s593.photobucket.com/albums/tt14/swagers/?action=view&current=SwiftAgreement016.jpg

Edited July 17, 2009 by Swift Eater

[Swift Eater]

I only applied for £45,000 then they gave me £49,000 now i know why ....

[Smarterchick]

Can you post up a copy of the letter that accompanied this document Swift Eater, the 'welcome letter, which outlines all the details of the £49k - taking the necessary precuations of ID as before of course?

 

SC

[Swift Eater]

Of course smarterchick

What ever will help me and any others who have had the misfortune to have business with these loan sharks

 

Aplication picture by swagers - Photobucket

[Smarterchick]

Of course smarterchick

What ever will help me and any others who have had the misfortune to have business with these loan sharks

 

Aplication picture by swagers - Photobucket

 

 

Whip that off SE, it's got your account numbers on...

 

what I meant also was the letter which they sent you giving the breakdown of the loan....

[Sparkie1723]

I only applied for £45,000 then they gave me £49,000 now i know why ....

 

Exactly what they do with all these agreements ...you applied for £45K

they made you borrwow £49K ...your agreement dose not clearly state that is what you borrowed and it does not tie up with your application

 

Exactly my case

 

sparkie

[Swift Eater]

Hi Sparkie ( much respect for the work you have done on this site )

I can see that my aplication differs to the amount of the loan.

Then again I see where you are commng from as the amount borrowed was £49,000 minus other deductions (ie brokers fee, repay other debt, ect ) Correct me if I are wrong is this not correct ?

Bearing in mind when I signed this in 2004 this was an unregulated agreement what should of been drawen up as a multiple agreement am i right ?

 

Thanks for you comment Smarterchick, I can see account numbers are on there it dose not mean nothing as no one can use this information for anything.

[Smarterchick]

Take a read of this pages 1-4 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/171037-multiple-agreements-falling-within.html

 

and have a look at the letter Dazpen has posted here....that's what I'm after..http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/swift-advances/209542-dazpen-swift.html#post2295593

[Swift Eater]

Indeed Smarterchick.

One small problem for me is that my loan was over £25K so the agreement was unregulated and falls outside of the CCA 1974

If yours is below £25K any help I can give please ask.

[Smarterchick]

Indeed Smarterchick.

One small problem for me is that my loan was over £25K so the agreement was unregulated and falls outside of the CCA 1974

If yours is below £25K any help I can give please ask.

 

Doesn't matter how much over £25k it is...

 

It's the amounts which make up the various categories that count.

 

If cash is less than £25k - Unrestricted Use...

 

Loan to pay off ABC loans Ltd under £25k Restricted use

 

Mortgage arrears under £25k possible combined with above depending on how it was done, but if combined total is above £25k that could be still enforceable - Restricted Use

 

Charges etc...

 

You have what is known as a Multiple Agreement regulated by the CCA '74 if it's earlier than when the new 2006 CCA came into force which I think was some time in 2007/8 so older agreements are still regulated by the '74 act.

 

You need 2 categories of credit to make a multiple agreement so read up on that thread I posted and familiarise yourself - once the penny drops, you'll realise exactly what I mean.

 

One word of warning though...Multiple agreements are not yet in our pocket and have still got a hurdle to jump in October when the Heath vs Southern Pacific comes to the Appeal court..whatever happens there will be the case law for multiple agreements but I know of one judge who said an agreement was unenfoceable as far as he was concerned, but couldn't rule in the defendants favour just yet as the appealed case quoted was appealed before and lost (although most believe to be wrongly decided) so you can use this to stave off repossession for sure and wait the appeal.

[Swift Eater]

Dear OFT.

I have a Secured Loan with Swift Advances.

Since 2004 ever time interest rates increased so did there’s in line with the increase of the BOE base rate.

When we started this agreement in 2004 we were paying 9% when BOE base rate was 5.5%

During current levels of BOE base rate Swift Advances have kept there interest rates at the highest interest rate ever.

Now BOE base rate is 0.5% swift advances are charging 15%

When requested for the reason why interest rates have not declined I was told in a letter that not all there lending is relied on BOE base rates ( or libbor rates ) but when rates were rising that was reflected in customers interest rates immediately.

This really is unfair to increase interest rates when BOE rates interest rates and to take a different view when interest rates decline.

Over a 5yr time period I repaid over £39,000 of a £49,000 loan.

Today after requesting a redemption figure it came in at £47,000

Is this a fair agreement ?

[Smarterchick]

Something I would like to ask certain people with Swift accounts to do before sending off letters to OFT Swift et al...let us know what you want to send and try to consolidate our actions. A united but cosistant campaign to get these blighters to adhere to the law is what we need. We have seen many of their staff telling alledged 'untruths' in court, we all know that we are sitting on a company that have the majority of their agreements with something wrong with them and potentially uneforceable, many people have had their homes repossessed as a result of inperfect agreements and therefore should not have had them repossessed. What is needed is a gathering of this information, which, sadly, might be too late for some but some restitution could be gained from this for them too. Credit Agreements CAN be opened up again, it's not easy, but it is possible if an injustice has been done. All we need is to find the right legal advice as to how to do the right thing. Swift are not abiding by the law, I found this with the Debt Collection Agencies. 3 years ago the debt collection business was running riot on debtors, but being at the centre of a campaign to make them abide by the laws of the land as I was led the DCA world to change beyond recognition and if Swift have any sense they will refer to Wescots who are all a part of the Alchemy empire and ask them what they have done over the last 3 years as a result of Consumer pressure ...well my friends, it's because of me and a number of other dedicated people in a highly focussed team who brought the OFT down on the collections business like they'd never imagined and they have changed beyond recognition ( well most), Now it's Swifts turn, they wont like it, they won't expect it, but it's coming and they won't realise until it hits them. So,

 

Gather up your agreements people, post them up for us to view, we'll try and formulate a template of what is right and what is wrong, don't leave it all to us, join in and we'll put Swift to the test and see if their schemeing ways can be changed using the forces available to us. We'll do EVERYTHING according to the law, and we'll make sure they do too...something they are not used to. [EDIT]

 

SC

Edited December 14, 2009 by alanfromderby

[andrew1]

Something I would like to ask certain people with Swift accounts to do before sending off letters to OFT Swift et al...let us know what you want to send and try to consolidate our actions. A united but cosistant campaign to get these blighters to adhere to the law is what we need. We have seen many of their staff telling alledged 'untruths' in court, we all know that we are sitting on a company that have the majority of their agreements with something wrong with them and potentially uneforceable, many people have had their homes repossessed as a result of inperfect agreements and therefore should not have had them repossessed. What is needed is a gathering of this information, which, sadly, might be too late for some but some restitution could be gained from this for them too. Credit Agreements CAN be opened up again, it's not easy, but it is possible if an injustice has been done. All we need is to find the right legal advice as to how to do the right thing. Swift are not abiding by the law, I found this with the Debt Collection Agencies. 3 years ago the debt collection business was running riot on debtors, but being at the centre of a campaign to make them abide by the laws of the land as I was led the DCA world to change beyond recognition and if Swift have any sense they will refer to Wescots who are all a part of the Alchemy empire and ask them what they have done over the last 3 years as a result of Consumer pressure ...well my friends, it's because of me and a number of other dedicated people in a highly focussed team who brought the OFT down on the collections business like they'd never imagined and they have changed beyond recognition ( well most), Now it's Swifts turn, they wont like it, they won't expect it, but it's coming and they won't realise until it hits them. So,

 

Gather up your agreements people, post them up for us to view, we'll try and formulate a template of what is right and what is wrong, don't leave it all to us, join in and we'll put Swift to the test and see if their schemeing ways can be changed using the forces available to us. We'll do EVERYTHING according to the law, and we'll make sure they do too...something they are not used to. Mark White, Webster, Matthew Payne and all your compatriots beware my friends, we're coming to get you.....and the likes of Falkowski won't escape either...:grin:

 

SC

 

I think you're wasting your time. Companies like Swift have more money than anyone to defend and they'll protect their staff. I've seen this too often.

 

Do you think Swift Advances are scared of a bunch of consumers? - get a life..

[Swift Eater]

Some very relevent information.

The broker used was Capital Finance, a Mr M White talked me through the procedure. I stilll have the business card. Will post it on here tomorrow.

[Swift Eater]

I think you're wasting your time. Companies like Swift have more money than anyone to defend and they'll protect their staff. I've seen this too often.

 

Do you think Swift Advances are scared of a bunch of consumers? - get a life..

 

I have to say Andrew this is what I have found so far.

Employies of Swift know that this business is been conducted unfairley, but know that its custermers do not have a chance of challenging them due to the costs involved.

 

Its not if justice is done with Swift its when ?

Every dog has its day

[Sparkie1723]

Some very relevent information.

The broker used was Capital Finance, a Mr M White talked me through the procedure. I stilll have the business card. Will post it on here tomorrow.

 

 

Hi Swifteater,

 

Was the broker First Capital Finance Ltd and not just Capital Finance?

 

 

 

sparkie

[Swift Eater]

Hi Swifteater,

 

Was the broker First Capital Finance Ltd and not just Capital Finance?

 

 

 

sparkie

 

Yes that was right and I still have Mr Whites business card.