Blemain finance

[Former Sins]

Reports today said that those people who had completions in the pipeline would be helped out by GMAC RFC ( I think this is a good company - formed by General Motors I think ).

 

Those already with Victoria wasn't mentioned, but seeing as the current problems are about a lender finding new capital streams, I would have those that those already with Victoria would continue to pay and finish off their loans. But to be perfectly honest, I really don't know! I'm sure they will contact their existing customers.

[midge61]

Had another letter from BF yesterday, from an E Chung saying my last letter ad been passed to her to deal with and could I send her all the relevant info on my complaint!

 

I have only been sending it on a regular basis for the last 6 months! Incompetents!

 

Have given her until 21st to sort it and offer a gesture of goodwill for their incompetence or will go to court. Also told her I am going to file claim for their non compliance of my SAR.

[groovycaz]

Go get em girl, your on a roll here, bet they're fed up with you by now, every one together now Ahhhh do we feel sorry for them, not bloody likely,

As for the American crisis with sub prime lending, ive been told by a financial adviser of mine that some of our banks are in deep s**t, apparently they invested heavily in sub prime lending in America and those who cant keep up their repayments are simply walking away and leaving their properties, he said the Bank are desperately borrowing to keep them afloat, dont know which banks he was relating to cause they all have their hands in so many pies...Gc

[midge61]

This is something to do with what your friend is on about

 

Banks scramble for £4.4bn BoE relief fund - Times Online

[midge61]

Morning all.

 

well this morning I recieved a letter of apology and a cheque for £250 so a result. Only taken 6 months!

 

I now need to file a claim for non compliance of my sar.

[groovycaz]

Hi Midge, just catching up, well done, after all this time £250 in your pocket, enjoy it hun, it was a long hard slog getting it back, wel done for your persistence, I bet they think they're rid of you now ..ha ha..Gc

[midge61]

Thanks gc

 

As arnie says............I'll Be Back!

[Former Sins]

The recent 'credit crunch' caused by defaulting mortgages in the USA could bring Blemain to its knees. Already, because of this Victoria Mortgages has gone into administration and Kensington have closed their doors to new business.

 

What lenders like this do is arrange a group of mortgages, lump them together and sell the bundle onto an investor. The mortgage payment interest being shared between both investor and lender. The thing is that because there has been so much defaulting in the US, no investor in their right minds is prepared to put their money in such a high risk investment. This means lenders like Blemain cannot find additional funds to write new loans.

 

So what will Blemain do? I think they will become more cautious on who they lend to and so write less business - which is good. But I also reckon they'll put up rates because of the increased cost of them getting money - which is bad.

 

Lets hope this affects them really badly, and also that the government acts and heavily penalises Blemain and others like it for behaving irresponsibly.

 

'I think they will become more cautious on who they lend to and so write less business - which is good'

Blemain adjusts LTVs - 17 September 2007

 

'But I also reckon they'll put up rates because of the increased cost of them getting money - which is bad.'

Blemain Group raises rates - 24 September 2007

 

Jokingly I should be an analyst, but seriously I hope the 1% rate increase is new business only!!!!!

[midge61]

Well that has put a damper on my day:(

 

 

I shall expect a letter in the post any day now then. Suppose they decided to settle my complaint as a sweetner then.

[Former Sins]

fingers crossed it won't affect you - after all, what is costing them extra is sourcing new money to lend out rather than money they lent out years back. But who knows what this dubious operation will do.

[patrickq1]

what they need is a default against them then it will cost them a percentage more in their borrowing over and above the rate they borrow money for

[midge61]

Have just found this in an old article on moneyxtra.com

 

Earlier this year, Blemain Finance, an associate company of Ocean Finance, Britain's biggest loans broker, was forced to agree not to impose charges on its unregulated mortgage loans, in accordance with the Rule of 78, after an intervention by the Financial Services Authority. The FSA said: A term may be unfair if a consumer is required to fulfil his obligation or pay a disproportionate sum in compensation. The use of the Rule of 78 calculation method is not an appropriate calculation method as it effectively overstates the costs to the mortgage lender.

Blemain's loans taken out before 1997 not only charged the full rate of interest in accordance with Rule of 78, but also reserved the right to add another six months interest-rate charges on loans of between £15,000 and £60,000 .

[midge61]

have just got hold of the settlement figures from my previous loans.

 

rebate was calculated under rule78

[groovycaz]

have just got hold of the settlement figures from my previous loans.

 

rebate was calculated under rule78

 

HI Midge, ive got a letter from Howard Laddin who confirmed that my settlement figure was calculated using the rule of 78 which he claimed that any loans under £25.000 could still contain the rule and that Blemain were not in breach of UTCCR, my loan was taken out in 2001, Gc

[midge61]

Hi GC

 

Given that the 2004 regs replaced the 1983 ones on 31/5/2005 then you can contact TS about this get them to check it and contest it.

 

You could check with FSA as well as they made them promise not to!

[Former Sins]

don't quote me on this cos I'm prob out of date. £25,000 marks a bounday between what comes under the CCA and Full regulation - so Howard Laddin may be saying that they can still use rule78 if the loan comes under CCA.

[midge61]

But if it comes under the cca then the 2004 regs apply surely, so they were incorrect to use rule 78.

[Former Sins]

you're prob right - i'm unsure about this

[greedfighter]

Like all people on this site I have not had much joy either with BF, the OFT, FSA or the FOS.

 

I redeemed my mortgage in 2001. The redemption figure used was based on the rule of 78 plus six months interest, they have in fact confirmed this by letter at the outset of my dealings with them.

 

I only found out about the FSA undertaking about unfair penalties this year.

 

I wrote to Blemain asking for the relevant refund, enclosed a SAR request but all they have done is ignore any any correspondence apart from telling me they do not have any documentation relating to the transaction given it's historical nature. The redemption figure was about £9000 on a £40000 mortgage.

 

I complained to OFT who just gave me the blah about not dealing with individual complaints, the FOS who said it was not in their remit given the redemption date, The FISA who said Blemain weren't members when the mortgage was redeemed and the FSA who simply said complaints should be taken up with the company.

 

This may seem a bit greedy but I estimate that under the circumstances they overcharged me about £7500 as a redemption penalty and I now want it back.

 

My main problem of course is without any documentation I cant show any of it and Blemain are clearly not going to provide copies. I have written to the Solicitor and the Mortgage company whom I took out the new mortgage with to see if they have any relevant paperwork and am awaiting an answer.

 

Anybody any thoughts or suggestions please ? :mad:

 

If this post is on the wrong thread somebody feel free to move it - I am not that computer literate, thanks

[midge61]

Hi greedfighter

 

Have you put in a complaint to the ICO about BF not complying with your sar request?

 

I have done this and am waiting for their reply. The only other option is to file a small claim against them for non compliance.

Hope this helps

[Former Sins]

£9000! they really are ****!

[greedfighter]

Thanks midge, I havent written to the Information Commissioner but I did ring the Information Commissioners Office - got nowhere so didnt see the point writing - basically said if they didnt have any information held didnt see how they could supply it unless I could show of course they did have it !!!!!!!!!!.

[midge61]

What a load of tosh!

 

If you had a mortgage with them then of course they have data on you AND they have to hold it for a certain number of years.

 

I would write to the ICO with a complaint and also add what you were told when you rang them. If you quote the mortgage account number that should be enough.

 

ICO are just another toothless regulator!

[greedfighter]

Anybody any idea how long mortgage paperwork has to be kept - a reference would be fantastic !!!!!!

 

I read somewhere that it has to be kept indefinitely in which case I could ask Blemain why they dont have it - I could perhaps then file some sort of claim based on presumptive loss ( if they cannot show I wasnt overcharged perhaps somehow I could just contest that I was) I could work out from bank statements etc how much I paid in repayments , the initial mortgage amount etc. I am thinking about this sort of argument but need to research it a bit more.

[midge61]

Hi

 

Found this in the mortgage forum sticky's

How long can I claim back for on mortgages?

 

S.20 Limitation Act 1980 provides that the time limit for actions to recover money secured by a mortgage or charge or to recover proceeds of the sale of land

(1) No action shall be brought to recover--

(a) any principal sum of money secured by a mortgage or

other charge on property (whether real or personal); or

(b) proceeds of the sale of land;

after the expiration of twelve years from the date on which the right

to receive the money accrued.

 

This means that if any charges have been added to the principal sum you can claim back 12 years. However, be careful as unless any charges have been capitalised they have not been made part of the principal sum and therefore the normal 6 years will apply.

 

If you are wishing to claim back fees beyond 6 years which have not been added to the principal sum you would need to invoke s. 32 of the Limitation Act. It is suggested that you only do this if you are fully prepared to research and fully understand the implications before commencing on any court action.

 

I did try to look on the ICO website but it's down at the moment.

 

Hope this helps