Jump to content


welshperson3 v blemain finance - 140A Unfair relationship -started court proceedings


welshperson3
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1835 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

WP3 thank you for all your help and advice you have already pointed me in the right direction without you knowing it.

 

I have now got a Consumer Law Solictor looking at all our paper work.

 

We have CCA Loan from 2005.

 

Had problems with Monarch, and almost every issue you guys have been speaking about.

 

Due to go to Court on the 6th feb for reposession Blemain have asked for it to be suspened with a chance to restore.

 

We have paid in full any arrears plus this months payment by the 22nd January.

They told me last friday they had canceled the hearing now Wednesday the letter came to say they had asked for it to be suspended.

Cannt trust anything they say

 

.Waiting to see what solictors say hoping they can help at last to put the Bad Guys Down.

 

I have MS and they have made our lives hell over the past 7 year;

Just had paper work off them

ie Statement of Payments- Statments of Debits to Account ( they do not match documents i have already this is really strange none of the dates match )

 

then We asked for Interest added to the account and

 

they sent us a letter to send the Tax office with the sum of £21,000.00 about on which added up are the payments made over the past 7 years.

 

Our Loan still stand at £31,000.00.

 

so Like you said earlier looks like we will never pay it off .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 544
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Hi WP3, don't know if you have used the UTCCR's yet which as far as i'm guided covers all consumer contracts http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Unfair-Terms---Regulation-by-statute.php. Section S11 refers to the burden is on the party seeking to enforce the term to show that it was fair and reasonable. Needs to be read in full to locate the relevant points which can be used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HazePaul

 

Its nice to know you have solicitors helping you, as you say the amount they claim you owe them is £31k, then if you add interest to this for the reminder of the loan, and divide by the amount you are paying monthly you will find that it is not going to get paid by the end of the agreement, even if they stop adding their unfair charges now.

 

There is going to come a point in this agreement where you are going to have to make a decision, and they are.

 

1 pay Blemain off all that they are claiming

2 extend the length of this agreement (this is what blenain want, and you possibly end up paying three times the amount stated on your agreement)

3 Complain to the financial ombudsman services (sometimes works sometimes not)

4 you take them or they take you, but end up in court.

 

5 Blemain remove all charges and you pay what you thought you were signing up to. ( just whish full thinking on my part, we all know blemain don’t do this)

 

 

If the solicitors you have are any good then hang on to them and try to push them into dealing with this now.

 

Dealing with BLEMAIN is like having a tooth out, you may put it off but eventually you have to do something about it.

 

I have lots of documents and information on this company, if you need any just ask.

 

wp3

Edited by welshperson3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HazePaul

 

Its nice to know you have solicitors helping you, as you say the amount they claim you owe them is £31k, then if you add interest to this for the reminder of the loan, and divide by the amount you are paying monthly you will find that it is not going to get paid by the end of the agreement, even if they stop adding their unfair charges now.

 

There is going to come a point in this agreement where you are going to have to make a decision, and they are.

 

1 pay Blemain off all that they are claiming

2 extend the length of this agreement (this is what blenain want, and you possibly end up paying three times the amount stated on your agreement)

3 Complain to the financial ombudsman services (sometimes works sometimes not)

4 you take them or they take you, but end up in court.

 

5 Blemain remove all charges and you pay what you thought you were signing up to. ( just whish full thinking on my part, we all know blemain don’t do this)

 

 

If the solicitors you have are any good then hang on to them and try to push them into dealing with this now.

 

Dealing with BLEMAIN is like having a tooth out, you may put it off but eventually you have to do something about it.

 

I have lots of documents and information on this company, if you need any just ask.

 

wp3

Thank You WP3 for replying early days been trying since 2008 been to FOS before with another company but they were out for their own ends Ive just found out. FOS said because they werent part of the FOS until 2007 they couldnt help I would have to take this matter to court myself. Problem is the cost involved and ofcourse Blemain nows this only to well with most of people in the same situation. But fingers crossed this time I am hopeful Ive found the good guys they have won some high profile cases so far and they know of Blemain well. Ive just remembered something about somthing I read on one of the forums not sure which one though, from a former employee of Blemain in around 2007 2008 something went on about the interest they were chargeing and this person stated that Blemain paid over time to add the interest onto the accounts of the customers before a certain deadline will have a scout around and see if I can find it. Also I was lucky I kept all my Orginal paper work and some which I should not have had at all came through to me marked not for Public Domain from the broker by mistake I think .

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a copy of what I read on the other forum regarding charges and Blemain :

 

((exblemainstaff

08-10-2010, 10:54 PM

 

Hi

 

this is unusual im ex staff, in 2007/2008 blemain carried a massive task, they realised alot of accounts had not got the charges on the accounts. due to the change in FSA guidelines clients had to sent annual statements if the charges were not highlighted on statements then they could never be re-applied, i would suggest you take this to court, these have been applied accross all companies, blemain, cheshire, lancashire. they paid the staff double time to complete these over 6months. in exces of £5,000,000 was applied to accounts.))

 

Im not sure but round this time I seem to remember I started to get regular monthly Statements with interest added especially as I look back on 2008 one Ive got nothing before that though could that be why they are not willing to send all information out on the SAR. I have not done one yet myself the company that did my PPI I think did one but neversaw any paper work myself but from what solicitor has said so far even that has not been done right because on our loan it should have been put back to a State where we had not got the PPI so we would have no loss. But the Company that was working for us did not fight that part of the claim so Blemain are still charging us for the PPI durantion of the loan plus the interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have taken a week to read all your Threads and at one point I cried to hear what heartache you and your family have and are going through but you have helped me so much with what info you have put on hear more than you realise even down to finding a solicitor because Ive tried all over the country to find one to take the case on and it ends up right at my backdoor by knowing it was a Consumer law Solictor We needed. How your case going when are you in court now? All the very best to all your family as well Hun x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some information that may be helpful there are different documents over the years the older ones used to mention commission to the brokers, the newer ones call it “ Excellent remunerations “

 

Google this

 

Blemain underwriting and processing guide

 

wp3

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blemain underwriting and processing guide

 

 

BUILDING FIRE AND STORM DAMAGE INSURANCE In all first or second charges, we need to note our interest on the customer’s buildings insurance policy.

 On a first charge with Blemain Finance or Cheshire Mortgage Corporation, where customers have arranged their own insurance, we must have details of the insurance company, the current insurance cover and confirmation in writing that the relevant Blemain Group company has an interest in the property on a Noted on Insurance Form. This should be included before completion.

 For all second charge Blemain Finance applications we will contact the customer post completion to obtain this information and note our interest. Should the customer not provide insurance cover with our interest noted we reserve the right to insure ourselves and pass this cost on to the customer’s account.

 For all commercial applications with Lancashire Mortgage Corporation we require a copy of the building fire and storm damage insurance in all instances prior to funding.

 

Ask yourself why the above only requires first charge loans to have insurance before the loan is granted.

 

As we all know they will do anything to add costs to the loan, and whatever you do blemain will find you haven’t done enough, or deny receving documents you send.

wp3

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi wp3 i have studied what constitutes a regulated loan and my stumbling block is this. the loan was to finish our house (1 of 3 the other 2 were 99% finished.)and to finish a triple garage 1 per dwelling All three were on the same title deed. so i could not just put one house as security it had to be all three so at the time the loan was entered into i was occupying two propertie. and i thought that was it. however because we did not intend to remain occupying 2 houses it means that 2 must of been to either sell orto let . = unregulated

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi wp3 i have studied what constitutes a regulated loan and my stumbling block is this. the loan was to finish our house (1 of 3 the other 2 were 99% finished.)and to finish a triple garage 1 per dwelling All three were on the same title deed. so i could not just put one house as security it had to be all three so at the time the loan was entered into i was occupying two propertie. and i thought that was it. however because we did not intend to remain occupying 2 houses it means that 2 must of been to either sell orto let . = unregulated

 

 

 

 

I will explain in detail tonight as I have to go out now but the above is wrong, as a mortgage is either regulated or unregulated on the facts at the time you signed the agreement. What you plan for the future can always change, so the law is when you signed the agreement what are the facts.

 

Remember this, the day the agreement went live is when it became regulated or unregulated. Future plans mean nothing as these can change.

 

wp3

 

 

PERG 4.4.1 06/04/2007

Article 61(3)(a) of the Regulated Activities Order defines a regulated mortgage contract as a contract which, at the time it is entered into, satisfies the following conditions:

(1) the contract is one where a lender provides credit to an individual or trustees (the 'borrower');

(2) the contract provides for the obligation of the borrower to repay to be secured by a first legal mortgage on land (other than timeshare accommodation) in the United Kingdom; and

(3) at least 40% of that land is used, or is intended to be used, as or in connection with a dwelling by the borrower (or, where trustees are the borrower, by an individual who is a beneficiary of the trust) or by a related person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness Sub-prime mortgages being recognised in the news http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/money/4773166/Ratbanks-Banks-face-10billion-bill-for-ripping-off-firms-in-loans-con.html if you haven't seen today.

 

yeah, saw that in the news. the banks are one big missell, incredible. some of them have also recently paid out billions in fines re accusations of money laundering etc eg http://www.which.co.uk/news/2012/12/libor-fixing-money-laundering-and-more-2012s-biggest-bank-fines-306865/ , http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20673466. but, they still seem get away with things at the expense of the individual consumers. as seen in some recent unfair relationship cases eg http://www.oft.gov.uk/about-the-oft/legal-powers/legal/cca/CCA2006/unfair/unfair-rel-full/

Edited by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi this was the response from the fos adjudicator . Quote:

Having reviewed your comments, I do appreciate why you feel that at the time you were occupying over 40% of the properties. However, one of the reasons that your agreement is unregulated is due to the purpose of the loan.

 

As 2 of the 3 properties were due to be sold and were not meant for your own occupation, I do feel that the loan was predominately for business purposes.

 

I have noted that you feel that the loan was ‘deliberately disguised’ by Lancashire, however I can see that this exemption was detailed in the loan agreement that you signed on xx xxxxx 2010 – I have attached a copy of the agreement for your records.

 

Because of this, I do not believe we can consider your complaint further. I appreciate that this is likely to come as a disappointment to you. I know that this is not the outcome you were hoping for. But I hope that my explanation has been helpful in setting out clearly why I have taken this view.

 

my reply was; Quote;

 

Dear xxxxxx further to my response on 25th Jan

we occupied two houses at the time the loan was taken out no.1 & no.3

The loan was predominantly to finish our own home

 

A 'Regulated Mortgage Contract' is a loan on the security of a first legal mortgage on land in the United Kingdom of which at least 40% is used as or in connection with a dwelling by the borrower. This loan can be to an individual or a trustee.

 

The response back from fos was;

Thank you for your e-mail.

I do not feel that there is anything further I can add to my opinion detailed in my letter dated 17 January 2013.

Whilst I can appreciate that you may have been occupying 2 of the 3 properties, this does not change the original purpose of the loan which gave rise to the agreement.

 

wp3 just for the record we have only sold one property, one that we was living in at the time the loan was taken out

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent this yesterday to the fos i will let you know the response

Dear xxxxx I feel you have missed the point completely. At the precise point in time the loan was entered into we was occupying well over 40% what happened after that point in time is irrelevant my options were completely wide open and one of those options was to sell a property to my brother had he been in a position to proceed your argument would be completely flawed but in truth it is irrelevant because at the time we entered into the contract this loan fully fitted into the FSA guidelines and this is why LMC has been lying / denying we were in fact living at the address clearly stated on the contract / agreement and the loan was undoubtedly predominantly for the house we now live in. Further more LMC have now escalated their position and issued possession proceedings happy in the fact you have fallen for there lies. You and i now know that this group of companies have been heavily fined for its malpractice's recently by the FSA and unscrupulous behaviour has lost in courts for malpractice's and is under further investigation. If you cannot handle this case any further could you please explain the procedure for a second opinion, or to appeal

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Suffering

I got a bit mixed up with this and I have read back thro and I think I know were I am now.

You say you occupied 2 properties, but your intention was to sell 2 of the 3.

 

So what the question is now is the size of the total plot of land that the three houses were built on and how it was divvied up,

Quite easy to prove you have or had 40% for personal use

 

If the land was divided evenly between the three houses then this loan is unregulated.

If you had the more land on the house you intended to keep 40% them loan is regulated

LAND AREA

33% / 33% /33% = UNREGULATED

40% /30% / 30% = REGULATED (you intended to keep the biggest)

You may have to prove you had 40% of the land 39% is no good so make sure

As for what the FOS say, then I would point them to the rules and regulations and then ask them to reconsider.

FOS Quote

“”However, one of the reasons that your agreement is unregulated is due to the purpose of the loan.

 

As 2 of the 3 properties were due to be sold and were not meant for your own

occupation, I do feel that the loan was predominately for business purposes“.

 

They are wrong on the above quote for the reasons posted below.

 

 

PERG 4.4.10 Purpose of the loan is irrelevant

 

The definition of regulated mortgage contract contains no reference to the purpose for which the loan is being made. So, in addition to loans made to individuals to purchase residential property, the definition is wide enough to cover other loans secured on land, such as loans to consolidate debts, or to enable the borrower to purchase other goods and services

 

 

Statutory Instruments

2001 No. 544

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND MARKETS

The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001Regulated mortgage contracts

61.—(1) Entering into a regulated mortgage contract as lender is a specified kind of activity.

(2) Administering a regulated mortgage contract is also a specified kind of activity, where the contract was entered into after the coming into force of this article.

(3) In this Chapter—

(a)a “regulated mortgage contract” means a contract under which—

(i)a person (“the lender”) provides credit to an individual or to trustees (“the borrower”); and

(ii)the obligation of the borrower to repay is secured by a first legal mortgage on land (other than timeshare accommodation) in the United Kingdom, at least 40% of which is used, or is intended to be used, as or in connection with a dwelling by the borrower or (in the case of credit provided to trustees) by an individual who is a beneficiary of the trust, or by a related person;

(b)“administering” a regulated mortgage contract means either or both of—

(i)notifying the borrower of changes in interest rates or payments due under the contract, or of other matters of which the contract requires him to be notified; and

(ii)taking any necessary steps for the purposes of collecting or recovering payments due under the contract from the borrower;

but a person is not to be treated as administering a regulated mortgage contract merely because he has, or exercises, a right to take action for the purposes of enforcing the contract (or to require that such action is or is not taken);

©“credit” includes a cash loan, and any other form of financial accommodation.

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (3)(a)(ii)—

(a)a “first legal mortgage” means a legal mortgage ranking in priority ahead of all other mortgages (if any) affecting the land in question, where “mortgage” includes charge and (in Scotland) a heritable security;

(b)the area of any land which comprises a building or other structure containing two or more storeys is to be taken to be the aggregate of the floor areas of each of those storeys;

©“related person”, in relation to the borrower or (in the case of credit provided to trustees) a beneficiary of the trust, means—

(i)that person’s spouse;

(ii)a person (whether or not of the opposite sex) whose relationship with that person has the characteristics of the relationship between husband and wife; or

(iii)that person’s parent, brother, sister, child, grandparent or grandchild; and

(d)“timeshare accommodation” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Timeshare Act 1992 (1).

 

HOPE THIS HELPS

 

WP3

 

 

PERG 4.4.8

 

The requirement that at least 40% of the land area be used as or in connection with a dwelling means that 'buy to let' loans secured on the property to be let will usually be excluded. However, such loans will not be excluded if:

(1) the lessee is a 'related person' to the borrower. This will be the case even if the borrower subsequently takes possession of the property, as the conditions set out in PERG 4.4.1 G (1) to PERG 4.4.1 G (3) were not satisfied at the outset of the contract (see PERG 4.4.3 G); or

(2) at the time the contract is entered into, the borrower has a real intention to use the land as, or in connection with, a dwelling (for example a member of the British Forces Posted Overseas who buys a property in the United Kingdom intending to live there on his return but which he lets out in the meantime).

 

WP3

 

 

Suffering you say above that LMC have issued court proceedings, have you received a date from the court yet?

You can get the judge to make a declaration on your agreement, whether it is regulated or not .

 

wp3

 

I just noticed this from one of the posts above

(b)the area of any land which comprises a building or other structure containing two or more storeys is to be taken to be the aggregate of the floor areas of each of those storeys;

 

It may not be the amount of land each house has that is important, but the actual size of the house is what the 40% relates to.

This will need checking

 

What exactly is 40% relating to house size or land area ?

 

wp3

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think i will now await the response to my email my argument being there was nothing written into the loan agreement saying i must sell the houses and i must not sell to a relative

its interesting to hear a judge can make a declaration i will look into this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, not read the whole thread so this may already be covered.

 

The court have a positive obligation to consider the terms of an agreement are fair before enforcing an agreement. See ECJ Pannon

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ecj%20pannon&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEUQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcuria.europa.eu%2Fjcms%2Fjcms%2FP_49616%2F&ei=nbEOUfWKGILJ0AXY3IDgCA&usg=AFQjCNEqoQflEi3SDXzm_1xRKnhyFvllDA&sig2=perMp9b2CpEQnlJq9_dKBg&bvm=bv.41867550,d.d2k

 

Make sure the judge does this before taking your home. And obviously go armed with a list as long as your arm as to how it is not fair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets - as a picture[jpg] file

don't forget you can use a mobile phone or a digital camera too!!

'

BUT......

ENSURE: remove all pers info inc. barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all monetary figures and dates.

*********************************************************

{DO NOT USE A BIRO OR PEN OR USE SEE THRU TAPE OR LABELS]

DO NOT USE ANY PDF EDITOR TO BLANK STUFF, THAT CAN BE REMOVED

*************************************************************

DO IT IN MSPAINT.EXE or any photo editing program

if you have multiple scans/pics

put them in a word doc FIRST and convert that to PDF

convert existing PC files to PDF [office has an installable print to PDF option]

..

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites [http://docupub.com/pdfconvert/]

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf if

you have many images too rather than many single pdfs

.

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

try and logically name your file so people know what it is.

i'e Default notice dd-mm-yyyy

.

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...