Jump to content

Sub-prime lender Swift Group used loophole to avoid paying £74m in tax

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2790 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

A sub-prime mortgage lender that was threatened with having its licence revoked by regulators after targeting customers who couldn’t pay back its loans has saved millions using a legal tax-avoidance scheme.

Swift Group, which has £339m worth of loans to Britons, has avoided an estimated £74m in UK corporation tax since 2008 after racking up interest of £274m on loans it has taken from its private equity owners.


... Consumer Action Group, said the company was “another example of an under-regulated sub-prime lender which makes its crust by exploitative mining of the resources of a vulnerable British public and which clearly has no intention of putting anything back”.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This I might add, is as a result of a small group of Caggers and ex-Caggers (one of who was chased off the site as a result of arguing points such as this) who have fought a long hard battle as a group of people, some who have had to sell their homes or lose them whilst doing so, who have dedicated tens of thousands of hours investigating Swift and all it's connected companies, following loans through so called sister companies and subsidiaries within the group which directors have told us were set-up as SPV's but in reality and according to their published accounts were in fact trading companies with accounts made to look as though they were trading but were no such thing. These are the things the Inland Revenue were informed about and need to continually go through with a fine toothed comb as well as answering for this tax scheme being spoken of.


Our regime against the totally toothless and ineffective OFT who have been supplied with a continuous stream of information and supporting evidence makes them almost complicit we allege, in the alleged crimes Swift were committing, had a duty to shut them down or prosecute them for trading with unlicenced trading styles which is a criminal offence under the CCA and they should have halted ALL repossession and litigation against people UNTIL they had proven they were not breaking the law. The OFT gave them a slapped wrist by putting what they called a Determination on their licence for lesser offences, which to you, me and Swift accounts for feck-all!


Jump a red light and you are prosecuted, trade using a name not on your licence and commit a criminal offence? - that's okay!! Tell that to someone who has been repossessed and see what they feel about it. Nobody in the UK under the law can profit from the proceeds of crime they tell us.....Well Swift can be committing a criminal offence, but still be profiteering from taking your home?


What connections to whom do they have which allows that to happen if your loan happened to be a Regulated Agreement and you have the protection of the Consumer Credit Act?


It was we who obtained the Determination, it was we who alerted the Inland Revenue .....and there's more to come.....it will not stop until those responsible in Swift are ALL held to account, whether some of us have been repossessed or not, injustice will not supercede justice- EVER! Remember that Swift.


Maybe the UK spotlight has now begun shining upon you and you are not a Starbucks or Google using Tax loopholes, you are just a dull, boring sub-prime lender who will go to any lengths to heap misery on vulnerable people and strip them of their assets. You are now however, an easier target to strip to the bone. At least with Starbucks and Google they have a social conscience (I think) - they won't find that in Arcadia House.


Let the authorities loose on you with the spotlight on and see how far you get and those Authorities are welcome to contact us through Bankfodder to meet and show them what we have.


We try and fight our way through County Courts where Judges either have little time or little patience to deal with people owing money. What they fail to appreciate is how that money being asked for is accounted for. Variable rate loans which vary upwards only when Libor rates and B of E rates plummet, you then blame 'funding costs'...well now we all know why you argue funding costs and that's because you are paying your owners 20-25% interest on loans for a tax dodge....did I mention social conscience?


The only spv in the empire is Kestrel Acquisitions Ltd.


We found Loans 'sold' and bought back via a Channel Islands company all under the auspices of Alchemy who were charging Swift in excess of 20% interest for funding. Swift charged borrowers when lending 11-13%. doesn't take an Actuary to work out the equation as to why repossessions and extortionate charging regimes form the basis of your business model does it?


Okay on the monies borrowed from Barclays which was capped at 3%, but when 20-25% is having to be paid back on the millions from Alchemy we can now see why their business model revolves around repossessions.


Our day will come...



Edited by andrew1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...