Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


welshperson3

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

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 376 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

my sentiments also ,its nice to see blen lose some cash through their own self greed and this case highlights it greedy bankers caught with their pants down hehe , an they seem to think by just turning up in court they have a right to be listened to with a we wouldnt do that attitude , well at least the judge dressed them down

patrickq1


http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What happened to these?

 

MONARCH RECOVERIES LIMITED

 

FSA maybe?

 

wp3

 

 

Licence Number:0190361

Licence Status:Lapsed on 07/06/2011

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberMonarch Recoveries Limited1959967

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Consumer hire Credit brokerage Credit reference agency Debt adjusting/counselling Debt collecting

 

strange that acompany making £ 6 million

pre tax profit just fades away

 

WP3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Licence Details:

 

 

Licence/Application Number Licence Status Applicant/Holder Name 0032328 Current Blemain Finance Limited

Event Details:

 

 

Event TypeDate of ReceiptClosed DateStatus

Renewal04-May-2011 Open ??????????

Variation07-Apr-2011 27-Apr-2011 Completed

Notification02-Feb-2011 07-Mar-2011 Completed

Variation02-Feb-2011 07-Mar-2011 Completed

Renewal31-Mar-2006 08-May-2006 Completed

Notification07-Feb-2002 08-Feb-2002 Completed

Renewal14-Sep-2000 26-Apr-2001 Completed

Variation11-Jun-1999 02-Jul-1999 Completed

Edited by welshperson3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

 

I just wish I had been a Director of that vanished Company (Monarch Recoveries)........must be like winning the Lottery!!! :smile:

 

Best wishes everyone,

 

Dougal


Update: 2013 Following our recent (9/7/13) hearing about Bank Charges at the Court of Appeal, and refusal to grant permission to Appeal; an Application has just (23/10/2013) been made for a fresh hearing and the Court Location is yet to be confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dougal

 

If you would like to be a director at monarch then you would love this one.

 

Question? how is it possible to make a profit of over 50% of your turnover, if your lend money at between 10% and 20% add then take out wages and overheads, then it is impossible.

 

The law states that they cant make a profit out of their £35 letter and phone charges or the buildings insurance that they add whether you want it, or need it.

 

BLEMAIN FINANCE LIMITED

 

 

Last registered accounts: 30/06/2010

 

Annual turnover: £79,034,000.00

 

Annual profit: £40,440,000.00

 

Turnover per employee: £272,531.03

 

Profit per employee: £139,448.28

 

Number of staff: 290

 

Directors' remuneration: £2,488,000.00

 

Increase over last 7 years: 113.75%

 

Highest paid director's salary: £709,000.00 he must put some overtime in to be earning over 50 thousand a month

 

 

Now add the £6 million profit that monarch made collecting on theas loans and it adds up to a big WOW

Edited by welshperson3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow - but I think I can see how my lender will continue to make plenty off me - paying off arrears on top of payment as pre Norgan, however, the unfair charges, variously called, 'late payment fee' 'admin fee' 'arrears fee' all the same thing at £40 per month compounded, continues to accrue interest and will be asked for at the end of the term, as this will not have been touched and their dodgy contract states they can allocate payments ANY WAY THEY LIKE.


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In stating that they have CLEARLY set up a contract that goes against current LAW. Welcome Finance have come a cropper with their 'allocating' payments the 'wrong' way. This is a clear and blatant unfair relationship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi dougal

 

If you would like to be a director at monarch then you would love this one.

 

Question? how is it possible to make a profit of over 50% of your turnover, if your lend money at between 10% and 20% add then take out wages and overheads, then it is impossible.

 

The law states that they cant make a profit out of their £35 letter and phone charges or the buildings insurance that they add whether you want it, or need it.

 

BLEMAIN FINANCE LIMITED

 

 

Last registered accounts: 30/06/2010

 

Annual turnover: £79,034,000.00

 

Annual profit: £40,440,000.00

 

Turnover per employee: £272,531.03

 

Profit per employee: £139,448.28

 

Number of staff: 290

 

Directors' remuneration: £2,488,000.00

 

Increase over last 7 years: 113.75%

 

Highest paid director's salary: £709,000.00 he must put some overtime in to be earning over 50 thousand a month

 

 

Now add the £6 million profit that monarch made collecting on theas loans and it adds up to a big WOW

 

 

Hi WPS do you have any info where it states that they cannot charge £35 a letter please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In stating that they have CLEARLY set up a contract that goes against current LAW. Welcome Finance have come a cropper with their 'allocating' payments the 'wrong' way. This is a clear and blatant unfair relationship.

 

you are right but try getting a DJ to hear it!!- my claim was kicked out, it doesnt matter how terrible the terms of contract are, if the county court wont hear it then the lender has it all their own way. If you are using s140 a-c then they will argue it only applies to certain agreements, and it will be necessary to argue it applies to the one in front of the dj.


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi fretfull

 

Hi WPS do you have any info where it states that they cannot charge £35 a letter please?”

Not an easy answer for this sorry, but here is the basic version.

Did you believe that bank charges were unfair?

Did you understand the argument as to why bank charges were unfair?

If the answer to the above is yes, then that is exactly why £35 a letter is unfair.

There is way to much information and arguments about bank charges, and why they are unfair for me to even try and explain in one post.

But I can explain why you can use the numerous (reclaim bank charges template letters)

1 In the bank charges fiasco the Supreme Court never ruled on the fairness of bank charges.

2 The rulling was that the charges couldnt be assesd for fairness as they were a core term of the agrement.

3 A core term is basically one of the following. The item you are buying / the service they are providing / the price you pay.

4 The bank won by saying that the charges you pay are in fact the price you pay for your bank account, so now your bank account is the service they provide and the charges added to your account is the price of the account which makes it a core term of the agreement and not assessable for fairness.

 

Now we are going to look at what is a core term in a loan agreement

 

 

1 the monies they lend is a core term

2 the interest we pay is a core term

 

Now with a loan agreement we have our core terms set out nice and plain for all to see, we know exactly what we are getting and how we are going to pay for it which are the core terms.

Now as charges on loans are not core term then all the arguments about unfair bank charges stil apply to loan agreements.

Take my word for it fretfull that blemain will use the supreme court judgment to try and baffle the judge (I know from experience) just make sure you understand what this judgment was all about.

 

Wp3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem's finding a fairness law, so something can be done about it

The OFT tried by taking on the banks in a test case, and indeed it beat them in the High Court, then again in the Court of Appeal.

Yet in November 2009, the Supreme Court ruled in a shock judgment, that followed strong arguments from the banks expensive barristers, that due to a narrow technical decision bank charges didn’t NEED to be fair – well at least on the main piece of law that was tried.

What was the law examined in the test case?

 

The test case focused on the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations, yet in the end it all boiled down to one simple nerdy technical point – were bank charges a core part of a bank account?

Unlike the lower courts, the Supreme Court ruled that they were, and that meant under those specific regulations the price of bank charges could not be used to examine whether they were fair.

Had this not been the case then the level of charges would’ve needed to be proportionate to banks’ costs, and a £35 charge to send a simple letter isn’t proportionate. Yet the Supreme Court ruling blew this out of the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

 

I agree, but as yet the European Court have not ruled on this - if they did (....I think they will, in the not too distant future), well we can only hope for some sense to be made of this wholesale 'theft' by the banks!

 

Have a good day everyone,

 

Dougal


Update: 2013 Following our recent (9/7/13) hearing about Bank Charges at the Court of Appeal, and refusal to grant permission to Appeal; an Application has just (23/10/2013) been made for a fresh hearing and the Court Location is yet to be confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Morning all,

 

I agree, but as yet the European Court have not ruled on this - if they did (....I think they will, in the not too distant future), well we can only hope for some sense to be made of this wholesale 'theft' by the banks!

 

Have a good day everyone,

 

Dougal

 

Hi Dougall - in what way will this affect the unfair charges debate (for the layperson) :)


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

 

That is a very good question, and personally for my part, I believe that the EC will rule that Bank Charges are historically unfair and that the position should be rectified.

 

You will know that the Supreme Court left the 'door open' for this aspect to be challenged, and I believe it will be - it might not be this week, or even next year, but I do not think we are far away from this happening, possibly within the next 2-3 years.

 

I do so hope I am not being misled from what I have heard.....

 

Best wishes everyone,

 

Dougal


Update: 2013 Following our recent (9/7/13) hearing about Bank Charges at the Court of Appeal, and refusal to grant permission to Appeal; an Application has just (23/10/2013) been made for a fresh hearing and the Court Location is yet to be confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Dougall - uk and europe not happy bedfellows eh


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is anybody from London or the South East who can recommend a good consumer lawyer please send me a note. I am another Blemain customer who is looking to challenge his mortgage agreement in court.

 

Good luck with your court case and I hope you get a satisfactory ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Eolaoy, Can i ask on what basis you are thinking of challenging would it be hidden commission or unfair relationship?

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there is anybody from London or the South East who can recommend a good consumer lawyer please send me a note. I am another Blemain customer who is looking to challenge his mortgage agreement in court.

 

Good luck with your court case and I hope you get a satisfactory ruling.

 

This is a self help site as most caggers can't afford lawyers and we don't make recommendations. If anyone contacts you we have no way of knowing how good they are and are careful to make sure we don't have unscrupulous touts looking for business.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

I definitely agree with that.

I have had some very dodgy people contact me over the past couple of years offering all sorts of help.......for a 'small fee'. The short answer is if anything seems 'too good to be true' it almost always is, (although I personally think it always is too good to be true!)

 

In the meantime, have a good weekend everyone,

 

Best wishes

 

Dougal


Update: 2013 Following our recent (9/7/13) hearing about Bank Charges at the Court of Appeal, and refusal to grant permission to Appeal; an Application has just (23/10/2013) been made for a fresh hearing and the Court Location is yet to be confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a self help site as most caggers can't afford lawyers and we don't make recommendations. If anyone contacts you we have no way of knowing how good they are and are careful to make sure we don't have unscrupulous touts looking for business.

 

signed

I would like a petition not only about the high charges but the misselling of mortgage products pre fsa by disreptuble lenders and brokers and are astonishingly Unregualated in any way. No objection to starting one but dont want to conflict with this current excellent petition:) oops didnt need to press include quote, is about petition!!


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had my S140 counterclaim struck out, (a Barrister sent by them) as unregulated, despite my arguing S140 should apply. so apparently, if over 25K and pre FSA, and never mind MCOB or UTCCR 1999 if pre that date - those agreements first charges pushed onto right to buy council estate customers en masse, are untouchable according to my county court also, so possession order garnted which includes very high sum of unfair charges plus interest:sad:


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had my S140 counterclaim struck out, (a Barrister sent by them) as unregulated, despite my arguing S140 should apply. so apparently, if over 25K and pre FSA, and never mind MCOB or UTCCR 1999 if pre that date - those agreements first charges pushed onto right to buy council estate customers en masse, are untouchable according to my county court also, so possession order garnted which includes very high sum of unfair charges plus interest:sad:

 

Judge completely and utterly out of touch and out of order he has acted "ultra viries".....beyond his powers.......................... section 140 applies to all contracts and agreements regulated by the CCA or unregulated.

 

Section 140 is only barred by FSA regulated Contracts e.g.

First Charge Mortgages.

 

An appeal should be made ASAP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Judge completely and utterly out of touch and out of order he has acted "ultra viries".....beyond his powers.......................... section 140 applies to all contracts and agreements regulated by the CCA or unregulated.

 

Section 140 is only barred by FSA regulated Contracts e.g.

First Charge Mortgages.

 

An appeal should be made ASAP

 

FSA do not apparently regulate first charge mortgages that were signed prior to FSA regulation existed??? so a First Charge Mortgage that is NOT regulated by FSA should be covered shouldnt it, why do the courts think no such thing as exists?

Edited by maybelline

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

legal costs now passed to me also, already got no legal help whatsoever, went into this LIP as equity prevents legal aid, only part time employed and a carer seems crazy to me, I have to thump someone to get any legal help i reckon.


'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...