Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OC 's don't do court   dx  
    • you will also need a copy of the CCJ and the particulars of claim on the claimform as... you'll need the particulars of claim as we don't know the judgement sum nor if post judgemental interest was allowed. did you defend it? did you ignore it? did you not get it?  did you know nothing about it?   its very rare on welcome debt either taken to court by welcome (doubtful in 2013) or a DCA (more likely)  i will suggest the debt was already at £18k before the CCJ so nothing bar court charges were added   please advise  i love bashing welcome and DCA but we can't help until we know our actual target and who did what and when.                
    • Janet Yellen confirmed as first female US Treasury secretary in Senate vote View the full article
    • I am sorry not to have responded in time to your thread. I have an awful lot going on.   I am hoping that you still haven't sent off your WS  as I have just seen a copy of Southend Airport  ByeLaws 2020. which will help you no end.     https://d1z15fh6odiy9s.cloudfront.net/files/board-approved-london-southend-airport-byelaws-100220-d14ca659.pdf   If you go to Section 5  the headline reads 5. Prohibited acts on parts of the Airport to which the Road Traffic Enactments do not apply:   In other words the roads on the airport are either governed by the Road Traffic Act or the airport Byelaws- neither of which are classed as relevant land. Therefore PoFA DOES NOT APPLY throughout the airport.   Take a copy for the Court and point out that the VCS WS is somewhat lacking in accuracy. It is inconceivable that VCS have not read the Byelaws since they are operating there.    So looking at their WS it reminds me that a good few years ago it was said about the WSs of  parking companies that they and their lawyers simply do not care about the truth and are content with regularly supplying false information to the courts, happy that they will not produce a witness to defend their porkie pies, and that nothing bad will therefore happen to them.   This practice should stop since were the authors to have to appear in Court and challenged, their perjury would not only be clear to see but it would put a stop to the practice. If they don't turn up in Court they get away with their lies and are able to repeat them ad nauseam. And this WS is full of lies and misdirections -not that you can say in Court they are lies but you can point out where there is contradictions shall we say and let the Judge decide.    The WS says in point 31 that they robustly deny that their sign is prohibitive.    You could point out that  District Justice Glenn  in Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd v Bull & 2 Others (B4GF26K6, 21 April 2016), at the High Wycombe Court said    “If the notice had said no more than if you park on this roadway you agree to pay a charge then it would have been implicit that PCM was saying we will allow you to park on this roadway if you pay £100 and I would agree with Mr Samuels’ first analysis that essentially the £100 was a part of the core consideration for the licence and was not a penalty for breach.   The difficulty is that this notice does not say that at all. This notice is an absolute prohibition against parking at any time, for any period, on the roadway.   It is impossible to construct out of this in any way, either actually or contingently or conditionally, any permission for anyone to park on the roadway.   All this is essentially saying is you must not trespass on the roadway. If you do we are giving ourselves, and we are dressing it up in the form of a contract, the right to charge you a sum of money which really would be damages for trespass, assuming of course that the claimant had any interest in the land in order to proceed in trespass.”   And of course VCS cannot sue for trespass as they are not the landowners.  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

Acenden capstone spml pml lmc sppl

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3058 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

Just received this by email:

Something most knew but nice to hear confirmation from the horses mouth as it were.

Author: Blowingthewhistle


Sadly you all look like you only know half the story.

I used to work for Capstone in the shall we say customer service department. That was the official title anyway.

Ok a quick run down

There are very strict managerial instructions stating that payment date changes are not allowed. We were also not allowed to change accounts to interest only.

We were actively encouraged to do everything to ensure that an account falls into arrears and than to keep it in arrears.

We would ask for large payments but never enough to clear the arrears. We had one main goal and that was to keep the charges being put on as many accounts as possible.

The charges go towards the annual profits upon which a bonus based on performance is paid, so it was in our own interest not to help borrowers

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 469
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Acenden Capstone mortgage services An important announcement for all ex employees.


Be a hero to 100000 abused borrowers many of whom will lose their home .

Let the powers that be know of their business model.we have a national newspaper on our side.


Edited by peterjm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty clear what their business model is. Btw it is possible to change the payment date with capstone or should I say acenden as it clearly states it in their t&c's well it does in their 2006 version.

section C 6 "The borrower may request a change in the payment date by sending the company a signed request in writing which the company receives at least 21 days before the date of the next payment day. The request must be between the 1st and the 28th of the month and the change must not result in an instalment been missed. The company will make the requested change with effect from the month following the month in which the request is received"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of their sharks know about that or rather pretend not to know! I am quite bemused by them and find any telephone call (since my victory over their last eviction attempt 12 months ago) to them rather entertaining. The most recent was when they told me I had to discuss my payment arrangement as they wanted to increase the amount I pay..............ummmm I think not, as long as I stick to what Mr Judge said they can go whistle and informed them of that in not so many words!

My charges claim with FOS has gone quiet since they ignored the adjudicators decision that it should be partially upheld, now waiting on an ombudsman, but when I get some more time will put in a county court claim. TBH as long as they ignore it and I continue to keep to my arrangement, when they are eventually forced to pay out, my arrears will be cleared and it will mean money in my pocket!!!!

Also does anyone know which CRA they use as there is no trace of my account on callcredit or equifax, just waiting on my experian one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which lenders t and c's are these? as those who've been refused a date change and there are many would be able to quote this but beware the words "may request" ie as to be expected its discretionary.

Its pretty clear what their business model is. Btw it is possible to change the payment date with capstone or should I say acenden as it clearly states it in their t&c's well it does in their 2006 version.

section C 6 "The borrower may request a change in the payment date by sending the company a signed request in writing which the company receives at least 21 days before the date of the next payment day. The request must be between the 1st and the 28th of the month and the change must not result in an instalment been missed. The company will make the requested change with effect from the month following the month in which the request is received"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a quote from dated spml april 2006 which they were using in 2007 (presumably up to april? dont know on that).

The "maybe" in this context is referring to the borrower as clearly you might not want to change the date. In relation to the lender the word "will" is used i.e "will make the requested change" - no ifs,buts or maybe's there seems pretty clear cut to me

Section C even has a heading entitled "changing the payment date" clause 5 references how they can change the date and clause 6 how you can - which is where the quote is taken from. So I think the 1st question, to one of these what I presume acenden would call "dedicated specialist advisors" or some other nonsense, would be if the date cant be changed why is there an entire section devoted to it?


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info and download mercyblue it may help people who have faced difficulty if they can quote this.

This was posted on post 52 and follows on on this thread from there.


"Hi all


I spoke with these morons again today to make a payment and as I am in arrears still they tried to make me discuss my re[payments with them the moron who I was speaking to tried to tell me that my next payment was as directed by the court and that it had to be £74 over the mortgage payment. He was not helpful when I explained that there are payments being made by the DWP of £55.00 and the along with my payment took the mortgae payment to over the agreed payment.


He then told me that the next payment HAS to be paid by the first of the month (oh he also asked why the payment today was late!!). I explained that the payment will not be paid until the end of next month and that I have to change my payment date to which e then tried to tell me that they cannot change the dates to which I then had to explain that they can do that but he insisted that they cannot do it, I then told him that they will have to do it and that he was lying and that they can do. (this went on for a few minutes after which I demanded the authorisation code for the payment. he then tried to make me wait until the tried to explain something to me to which I demanded that he either give me the authorisation code or i will ring off he then gave me the code and then I rang off. I am soooo angry!

Am I right about the changing of dates? etc."

Link to post
Share on other sites


You have had several years now of success saving many people from eviction from these administrators and group of companies so you can appreciate the depth of the problems.

Is there any likelihood of CAG running a campaign as they are currently doing with Swift to actually put pressure on the Regulators the FSA to actually regulate these firms.

Far lesser offenders have been fined such as gmac redstone etc.for levying excessive administration arrears charges of less than half of what Acenden charge,the FSA state they are aware of Acenden to borrowers MP's who contact them but still after all this time and all the lost homes now statistically about 25% of the total mortgage book ,actually do nothing.

Surely this calls for the might of CAG to run a campaign and you are a witness first hand of the abuses the borrower has suffered,the spml thread alone must be one of the longest on CAG at more than 300 pages.

I am sure all would be forever indebted if you could use your undoubted influence,this abuse has surely got to be stopped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any chance that all who post here and have posted on the old spml thread please contact their MP then post the name of the MP you have contacted and I will write a letter to them all copied to each one of them.



Link to post
Share on other sites

"Stef could be very wrong but it seems to be saying if you don't pay on time by the due date they can enforce the mortgage ie
you or take proceedings for such."



Yes, that's how I see it - but charges aren't secured amounts, surely the secured amount is the amount of mortgage advance ?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums



This site is run solely on donations


My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the directive was that they could not be added to the arrears amount ?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums



This site is run solely on donations


My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI .. went to court this afternoon and the judge said the arrears fees cannot be added to the arrears balance and MUST be added to the capital balance

he made them deduct the fees for the last 7 months almost 1000 and said not to do this again .. he didnt want to delve into previous years but i will be writing to Acenden

and asking them to take off the other 5,000 pounds x

thanks for all your help guys x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hurray a victory for someone at last,stef you could use this judgement for previous years as well.

Its unbelievable that Acenden try these things on and hope to get away with it.Watch their charges for costs for the court,have they any right to claim these?in fact you should get yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

peterjm with regard to the date issue yes you can change it - but the guy on the phone was also sort of right. You will need to change from a direct debit i.e a standing order it says as much on their website.

This will be because they will have a setup with their bank (it used to be barclays) to process all the dd's on one day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a major battle against a possession order currently. Any thoughts and advice appreciated as I have a hearing scheduled for next wedneday 13th july to try and overturn a possession order. Apologies for the length of this -

Possession was granted 6 weeks ago and I have an application to overturn this going before court next week. Previously had no solicitor but now do and he prepared application but worried me greatly a couple of days ago when he told me he was a litigation specialist and not a mortgage / possession specialist. Anyway on to the detail for any comment or advice (thanks in advance)

Possession was granted for the single reason that my defence had been struck out. Following a very minor stroke in December 2010 I had not filed discovery in January 2010 (I was in and out of hospital - Btw no physical effects but from MRI scans consultant told me a fairly small part of my brain is now dead and it would affect the way I think but in time I would overcome this - I'm still discovering the changes but memory and ability to prioritise are 2 problem areas).

Only at the hearing in May was I told of this and that as a result my defence could not be heard and I had no defence. I asked if I could make an application for my defence to be reinstated and was told by the Judge I should have done that before entering the courtroom - apparently the Court had made an Unless Order in February giving me 7 days to make application to file or my defence would be struck out. I did not receive that order - explained my illness and also this had not been received and was lectured by the Judge that it was my responsibility to keep in touch with the court. I asked Judge if I could make an application for an adjournment and was told I could not. Possession order granted.

(I was too shocked and actually felt as if I was about to have another stroke to tell the Judge that I had explained to different Judge at hearing in January that I was undergoing hospital treatment and he had told me that in those circumstances and as as litigant in person I would be given every leeway by the court. Judge did on that Jan occasion, as at the previous hearing before him, expressed grave concern at SPML / ACENDENDN accounting, In January when I explained the complete lack of response form SPML in answering points I will come to - he said this was a very serious matter and advised formal complaint to the FOS).

SPML maintain to 2 different sets of accounts for my mortgage (and maybe other people's ??) - they are both very different recording differing amounts and with different balances - they deny that they maintain 2 sets of accounts even though I hold copies of both as provided by their solicitors.

First history and then present position:

Have had a long-running battle for years with SPML where they have not credited some payments to my mortgage account. e.g. payment of £13,000 made 22nd february 2005 not credited to my account (as was the case with a payment of £3500 some months before), Issued possession proceedings Feb 05 - hearing due 22nd May 2005. As they refused to accept that £13k was paid I made a further payment of just over £12,5k a few days before hearing - agreed adjournment. Restored hearing in 2006 claiming arrears as not showing either payment on my account - defended and they were granted a suspended possession order - Judge had seen the paying in slips at court and copy of B Soc cheque for £13k and part of the order was for SPML to find and credit this within 28 days. They ignored this Order. (Only recently realised that £12.5 k was not credited to my account at that time either. I know I should have checked all statements thoroughly but had other very significant personal pressures at that time.)

SPML did not credit this to my account and subsequently continued to claim I was in arrears. On 3 occasions applied for eviction and used this to keep me paying substantial amounts - now it is clear these were significant overpayments at times when I was already in advance on payments if £13k - let alone £12.5k were credited against my account .

In October 2009 SPML finally credited the £13k payment to my account but instead of the actual date paid of 22nd february 2005 they used a date of 22nd may 2005 - coincidentally the same date as the £12.5k would have credited their bank account. That, without the £12.5 k being credited, put my account some £18k + in advance of payments.

Only partially discovered this in december 2009 when I called to make a monthly payment by debit card and was asked why i wanted to pay when I was so far in advance - but I had not then received statement showing this credited so assumed I had just overpaid in recent months. (They had again gone for eviction in early 2009 claiming large arrears) During early 2010 they required no payments as they held balances on my account - wrongly applied their own property insurance to my account (not for the first time) at a rate of £2750 per annum for an LV policy which LV quoted me £670 for. This was despite having copies of my own insurance provided by fax which they acknowledged receipt of over the phone and then later denied all knowledge of.

Had numerous discussions and required refund of insurance premiums for this and previous years. Agreed by phone in April, May, june, July that once insurance credited back we could properly review the situation and if there were any arrears (which my calculations showed there were not) I would settle these. Same conversations in september 2010 and in June and sept I provided further copies of my own insurance cover. End september without warning SPML commenced new possession proceedings - I did not receive any communication of this until 3 days before hearing and then only by chance.

I rang on a thursday afternoon in early November 2010 to ask what was happening with my insurance refund and in passing the person I spoke to referred to the court hearing the following week (monday). Got details of their solicitors and chased them - they emailed me part of the detail of claim and then posted me the full papers. these arrived saturday before the Monday hearing but I could not go through them until Sunday evening as I was away. Went through them late through the night and highlighted errors in their accounts and did short statement of much of the foregoing. Judge next day listened to me looked at the accounts and stated they did not comply with CPR and SPML must provided accounts which met CPR if they wanted to proceed.

Immediately after the hearing I wrote to SPML setting out a series of questions relating to insurance refund (not showing), interest adjustment not made to reflect £13k not being credited until 4.5 years after receipt on my November 2009 statement, and why did the statements produced for court show the £12.5 k payment they had always denied receiving and not the £13k which they now acknowledged through their Nov 09 statement. I faxed this to their litigation department and phoned to ensure receipt. Over next 2 weeks in late November and early december I phoned at least once and sometimes twice a day to chase answers. Litigation said Customer services will deal with this - CS said Litigation. By 21st december no answers from anyone but in discussions it had became clear that SPML had 2 entirely different sets of accounts - some people could see one and some the other as some saw £12.5k paid and others £13k paid sa 22nd May 2005. Eventually told that my letter had not been dealt with as nobody could decide whose responsibility it was to answer it - even though I had repeatedly pointed out we had an ongoing court case !

(Btw in the middle of this I had the minor stroke and was then in and out of hopsital until february)

21st December a girl at SPML decided to log my letter as a complaint - and would be dealt with in 7 days - all they did was send another copy of the mortgage statement but no answer to any query - I chased for replies but told in Janaury someone off sick, pointed out replies required before hearing in mid january - then told letter sent (not received). Had next hearing at which judge expressed grave concerns as to SPML behaviour and told me court would give me every leeway etc.

After hearing again chased letter and told 21st december gone out special delivery - not received and chased again and on 27th january 2 identical letters arrived by special delivery posted on 26th. repsonse was inadequate and did not address the points I raised. Phoned went through this and wrote back setting this out. No reply received and in further statement for May hearing SPML said I had not contacted them since they wrote that letter in January. yet another lie.

I have since chased them up again and provided a further copy to their litigation department who have since said they filed it as a further complaint but I have not received any response yet.

Got solicitor and he has made an application for:

1. To set aside or suspend possession order

2. relief from sanctions of the defence being struck out for non-compliance with the Unless Order dated 1st march 2011

3. Permission to amend the defence

4. Further directions

Hearing set for 13th July

What has worried me now was asking solicitor about technical aspects of law this week and him saying he is a litigation specialist and not a possession/mortgage specialist.

Have looked at and going through the Norgan Ruling and Law gazette article by Judge Peter Jolly posted elsewhere but any thoughts, advice, pointers would be much appreciated.


SPML solicitors filed an account of my mortgage statement at first hearing which had been printed out by solicitors from a web accessed system. This showed my payment of £12,500 dated 22nd may 2005 but Not my £13,000 payment.

For next hearing they filed a statement of my mortgage account produced by SPML and sent to them - this comp;ied with CPR but showed my February 2005 payment of £13,000 but showing as received 22nd May 2005 but did not show my £12,500 payment of 20th may 2005 credited to them on 22nd May 2005.

SPML have refused to provide me with a breakdown of the detail of how they arrived at a small interest credit following credit of the Feb 05 £13k they finally put onto my statement in Oct 09 - this fell a long way short of my own calculation using interest they had charged.

In late 2010 there are a series of unexplained credits and debits (small amounts) showing on the mortgage account statement they produced to replace the one the solicitors printed out from the remote syste. After, but only after, these adjustments do both accounts finally come into line and show the same 'arrears' position.

SPML refuse to accept that by their inadequate accounting and failing to credit sums that they believed (incorrectly as it happens) that I was in arrears and as a result on 3 occasions when I either had not arrears or was in advance of payments by as much as £12-15k they obtained eviction dates and only backed down from those when I made further very large payments - which caused me significant problems to make.

SPML refuse to accept that although they had obtained significant advance payments from me because of their own accounting failures - which they held separate to my account - they should either reduce interest charges on the account or pay interest to me at rates they charged.

At court they made a statement that the last payment to my account had been November 2009. Yes it was the last payment I made to them - but at the time they held very significant advance payments and they took monthly payments from this until mid 2010. The Judge actually agreed with them that I had not made any payment to them since Nov 09 and would not see that as the money was mine they were taking/receiving payment from me.

I am going to report them to FSA and maybe they will investigate - I don't know, I will make complaint to the FOS.

now my financial position - my calcs using all the above and bringing in interest on money of mine held show that round about March or April this year I was due to make some payment. SPML claim arrears of £38k. I have some £47k coming in between now and end August. I have 6 properties on the market and selling now at £3.7m and bank borrowing of £2.7 m to pay off from those sales. So should be between £700k - £1m left over - mortgage with SPML is around £660k.

Solicitor has been discussing with SPML lawyers that full redemption on above sales - no answers or agreement yet.

The property is also a registered agricultural holding as well as being my home for 30 years and I have some fields let for grazing. Mortgage is unregulated taken out in 2003.

So any advice or case history I can go through would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does that FSA directive apply to unregulated mortgages (pre-2004) or does it apply to all?

I'm sure this question was asked and answered on another thread(s) not too long ago.:???: Can't seem to recall which just now. Might even have been the old mega-length SPML thread?


I remember a few posts encompassing applicability of the mortgage arrears protocol as well. The bottom line was that yes, pre-M-Day (31/10/2004) residential mortgages are regulated but in a less straightforward fashion as the post M-Day mortgages. For example, if you ever took a further advance or changed to a fixed or tracker rate after M-Day with that same lender, then the whole mortgage becomes fully regulated etc. Part of it I think was that even though the mortgage was not classed as 'regulated' per se, because the lender IS regulated and has to abide by FSA directives, this affects the pre- M-Day residential mortgages too.


MODs, canst thee help?

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does that FSA directive apply to unregulated mortgages (pre-2004) or does it apply to all?


My mortgage is from 1999 and I have been attempting to get arrears charges and other excessive fees refunded, with no success at all. The FOS say they are fair because the bank has provided a breakdown.


The FOS agree it is a regulated mortgage and FSA MCOB rules apply. The bank has not disputed this.


Another angle that some members have voiced is s.140A of the CCA 1974 on Unfair Relationships which *seems* to apply to ANY credit agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FOS say they are fair because the bank has provided a breakdown.

Just because the FOS think it's "fair" does not mean it is. The OFT were unwilling to do this as they knew it would require every bank to justify it's charges in each instance. I hope the FOS did not indicate that the breakdown given to you applies to all? Those costs would need to be particular to you. And also, each charge/fee would need to reflect the cost to the creditor for that particular breach, at the time and instance it occurred, to not be deemed a penalty by a court. This is the task lender's are faced with so as not to be caught by the regs, when applied properly and is why they've been refunding charges claims until recently. Remember that the FOS ruling is binding on the lender but not on you, you can still take the lender to court.

The FOS agree it is a regulated mortgage and FSA MCOB rules apply. The bank has not disputed this.

Ah, a bit of good news for a change! Did they say why they considered it regulated as the mortgage pre-dates 31/10/2004.

Another angle that some members have voiced is s.140A of the CCA 1974 on Unfair Relationships which *seems* to apply to ANY credit agreement.

Don't mean to be a wet blanket but this s.140A argument has the makings of a classic trap where a lot of time and effort gets invested and the argument gets summarily dismissed in a Higher Court. Since when did CCA 1974 apply to any financial agreement/arrangement?


I'm aware there were updates to the CCA to include more loan types/amounts in recent years and remove the old £25000 limit but does an agreement not have to be specifically designated as under CCA for it to be so?

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...