Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I've been reading the invaluable advice on this forum and reading about the problems with Evri and lost delivery of items.  From what I gather the initial steps after having exhausted every's own lost item claim process is to draft a Letter of Claim, I think it is called and to register with the government Money Claims.  I have got a login for Money Claims and have made an initial stab at the letter but I'm not certain I have got it right. Am I right to assume that having exhausted Evri customer service's claims process and having received the denial of any compensation because the laptop I was sending is on the non-compensatory list that my next step would be to send the Letter of Claim to them? Let me provide some basic details which I hopefully have addressed in the letter. I purchased a laptop through Amazon.co.uk which a business in Belfast sold refurbished laptops through.  They had a 30 day money back guarantee for a full refund if you have any issues with the laptop.  I have the invoice from Amazon showing the purchase.  On 27 April, 2024 before the end of the 30 day period I used their ParcelShop (inside a Tesco) to send the laptop back and have the tracking reference mentioned in the letter.  As mentioned in the letter there was they advised they could not give me or sell me any insurance because laptops are on the non-compensatory list so I just paid the normal delivery cost.  It was scanned as leaving the ParcelShop on 29 April and the tracking has been like that ever since.  After a 28 working day Evri claim process they gave the expected response that they could not provide any compensation and simply could not proceed with my claim. I was hoping to get some advice on whether I go ahead now and email this to Customer Services straightaway and should I send a hard-copy to the Evri address as well?  Or are there any steps I have missed out on first?  I believe 14 days is the reasonable period of time for them to respond so if I were to send it tomorrow, for example 12 June then I should expect a reply by 26 June, is that correct and fair?  And assuming they don't reply with a full refund then I would then go down the government Money Claims site to proceed with that? Sorry for all the questions, I want to make sure I go about it properly.  I'll continue to read through other cases on here so I can get an even better handle on the process. I attached a LOC, happy for any edits or updates that will make it even better. Thanks so much for anyone's help! Regards, Matt Evri letter of claim.docx
    • The date was 3 June. Get on MCOL now. The legal principle is that, even if you defence is late, if the other party hasn't requested judgement, then your defence takes priority and is accepted. You might be in time. When I say now I mean now.  Recently we had someone who was nine days' late and this was pointed out to them at 5:30pm.  They faffed around till 11pm.  When they went on MCOl they saw that judgement had been entered at 7pm. Every minute is vital. File the below standard defence if you still can - 1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle]. 2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.    4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer.  6.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.
    • Hi friends,  I’m a bit worried I may have got confused with timings here. I thought I had 33 days from my acknowledgment to submit a defence but the date added above says 3/6/24.   have I missed the date?   if so how can I apply for an exception due to my disability and problems with deadlines and dates etc (ADHD)?   what should I submit as a defence?   I’ve had no reply from BW so far    just been back on MCOL and it says 28 days from service if I completed an acknowledgment of service so does that mean 28 days from that of acknowledgement (I.e. 16/5) which would make deadline for defence 14/6?   Thanks! Panicking here.
    • Normally we don't advise playing your cards early in a snotty letter, but as you have appealed we might as well use what you wrote in the appeal against them. There is no rush, you have until 6 July to get it to them.  See what the other regulars think too. How about something like this? -   Dear Rachael & Sean, cheers for your Letter of Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea you'd actually thought I'd take such tripe seriously and would cough up! As usual you'll have been too bone idle to do any due diligence.  Had you done so you would have seen that I appealed to your client.  Indeed the driver on the day is a textbook example of having done exactly what you should do when you do not wish to be bound by the T&Cs in a private car park. Of course none of that mattered to the spivs you represent but do you really want to put such a useless case in front of a judge? To be fair, your clients are very useful members of the human race - as comedians.  How I loved the page turner of their antics at The Citrus Building in Bournemouth.  It was chuckle after chuckle reading about them, letter after letter, month after month, insisting they were legally in the right, even through someone who had done just the first day of a GCSE law course could have told them they weren't.  Until the denouement - BOOM - an absolute hammering in court.  In fact - SLAM, BANG - managing to lose twice against the same motorist for the same car park in front of two different judges. Your client can either drop their foolishness now or get yet another tolchocking* in court where I will go for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) and spend the dosh on a nice summer holiday, while every day laughing at your clients' expense. I look forward to your deafening silence. COPIED TO COUNTRYWIDE PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD   *  This word is used under licence from Brassnecked
    • Well yes, ... and the tax dodgers ... Trump May Owe $100 Million From Double-Dip Tax Breaks, Audit Shows A previously unknown focus of an I.R.S. audit is a dubious accounting maneuver that effectively meant taking the same write-offs twice on a Chicago skyscraper. nytimes.com WWW.NYTIMES.COM  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

SPML/LMC anyone claimed for mis selling and unfair charges?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1133 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

Pender just doesn't do the job for the naysayers half as well as they seem to think it does. But the interesting thing is it is better for all us on the other side of the fence that Pender happened rather than not. THis is now such a matter of heightened public interest and importance affecting hundreds of thousands that it simply cannot go away. To be honest How many people were even alive to the issues of the Pender 2003/05 cases. I took my subprime crap out after that. Oh and by the way can we all agree that the borrowers are not sub prime?

 

SUB PRIME = ORIGINATORS

SUB PRIME = SPiVs

SUB PRIME = ADMINISTRATORS

 

If only they'd described my mortgage as **** +. I might have stayed away then!

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Truro,

 

It has come up before. What happened was that SPML had sold them a bunch of mortgages and made a "representation" in the contract that the mortgages all had Loan To Value ratios of 85% or less. The investors sussed out that that was a false representation and said hey, get stuffed, you lied, give us back our money. So they did. It's like you taking a jumper back to M&S and getting a refund. However, you can rest assured that the 86 mortgages that it refunded on that occasion would have been repackaged and sold off in its next securitsation anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Weil Gotshal Advises Lehman Brothers on Residential Mortgage-Backed Securitization - News/Publications - Weil, Gotshal & Manges

 

In the 2nd paragraph,

"under an innovative structure that allows lehman to issue future Eurosail transactions with minimum documentary changes"

 

Reading between the lines, could this mean they dont have to inform the debtor and the LR of any changes in relation to the cecuritisation of the mortgage?

 

b-o-2

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BO2,

 

Don't think so. First its a press release and secondly, you cannot contract to break the law. The law requires that the legal owner is registered at the LR and they don't get to decide that its inconvenient to abide by the law. The LRA is not an act that you can OPT out of at your "structural" whim.

 

But have to say that it is interesting to see that there is "master" documentation in place which means that the essential terms of all the Eurosail transactions will be the same. Excellent and handy to know. So it doesn't matter which Eurosail SPV your mortgage is in, the documentation is essentially the same. The only things that will change between each of the various securitisations is the figures, dates and some other economic details etc.

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BO2,

 

 

But have to say that it is interesting to see that there is "master" documentation in place which means that the essential terms of all the Eurosail transactions will be the same. Excellent and handy to know. So it doesn't matter which Eurosail SPV your mortgage is in, the documentation is essentially the same. The only things that will change between each of the various securitisations is the figures, dates and some other economic details etc.

 

Hi SS

 

These were my thoughts too!!

A couple of interesting links, and email addresses too, when i have more time, and have dealt with my other pressing matters, i will have a good old rummage around in there and see what else i can find, who knows it could lead to somebody elses dirty washing to hang out and dry;)

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes all eurosail docs are essestially the same, all use the same share trustee etc. The lehman document above refers to this

"Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. (whose registered

address is at 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington,

Delaware, 19808, USA) will be appointed as the fixed/floating

swap counterparty (the “Fixed/Floating Swap Counterparty”,

under the terms of the Fixed/Floating Swap Agreement (as

defined in “The Fixed Floating Swap Agreement” below).

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (the “Fixed/Floating Swap

Guarantor”) will, on or about the Closing Date, enter into a

guarantee in respect of the Fixed/Floating Swap Agreement (the

“Fixed/Floating Swap Guarantee”). The Fixed/Floating Swap

Guarantor will not be a party to the Fixed/Floating Swap

Agreement."

Their is a similar agreement for a BBR swap agreement. Basically they are trying to hedge their bets and cover their selves over changes in international rates etc indeed

 

"Each of the BBR Swap Guarantor and the Fixed/Floating Swap

Guarantor is a “Hedge Guarantor”.

 

This means that Lehman bro's should pay out on each interest date.

SPML may well have been a fully owned subsidiary of lehman's it does not matter a jot that they are bankrupt because err they have sold the loans. Don't forget the spv is a seperate ltd company. From a prospectus.

 

"Other than as provided in the Mortgage Sale Agreement (see “Title to the Mortgage Pool” below), the Issuer

and the Trustee will have no recourse to the Sellers in respect of the Loans".

 

Thats what happened when some of the loans had to be bought back because as ss said spml had lied.

 

This is a major point of this business the originator of the loans sells them on straight away hence why the "masters of the universe" claimed they had eliminated all risk. Except it turned into a massive game of pass the parcel. You just don't want to be left with the parcel now as you'll have no idea as to the real value of its contents.

 

 


 

 

 

 

 


  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This was not apparent to SPML until as part of SPML's investigation Land Registry records including registered purchase prices were checked for each loan originated through the particular packager

 

This is the problem with our LR,it doesn't state the price we got a mortgage for.

If you remember SS you thought they had someone's details mixed up with ours.

Edited by littledotty27
spelling error
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it and stand to be corrected, THE SPV sold the mortgages as packages bundles rated by S&P Fitch or Moodys - rubber stamped more like- then it is the trustee who makes the companies house s.395 registration?

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

SS Can you start a separate thread where we can all discuss in full the Judgments in Pender & at the same time a detailed rebuttal

that would be very very very helpful if this could be done

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it and stand to be corrected, THE SPV sold the mortgages as packages bundles rated by S&P Fitch or Moodys - rubber stamped more like- then it is the trustee who makes the companies house s.395 registration?

 

 

The FBI arrested the CEO of one of them which was Fitch or Moodys - or was it both:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it is the SPV itself that registers under s.395. For example if you took out a mortgage with SPML, the mortgage will be pooled with may others and sold to the SPV (in the case of SPML it will be a Eurosail Co.) Then Eurosail will have to register with Companies House a 395 Charge Form.

 

Dangermouse

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm - the plot thickens.

 

Check out a BBC Radio Four programme called Analysis. They had an episode about which I've posted before called 'Rating the Credit Agencies'. It states exactly what they did, what they knew they were doing and what the consequences might be. As I said rubber-stamping. Just another piece of the jigsaw - but a piece nonetheless.

 

It should still be available. If not I have it on MP3. However the BEEB might be straight down our throats so maybe not. It doesn't matter - it confirms that these guys and gals just gave the ratings a mix on the SPVs say so. Hundreds of Millions listed as AAA from the likes of SPML? Please!

 

Come on. But just to reiterate an earlier point it is rarely the borrowers who are delinquent. Rather it is the lender who has their own hidden agenda who is the delinquent one. Delinquent in performing the contract with due diligence, delinquent in exercising unfair terms, delinquent at law for failure to disclose material facts, delinquent even (not that I feel that sorry) to their investors. There's some sympathy here though - some of the investors may have been pension funds - and you can bet your butt the underlings were told to get on with it by their bosses.

 

Also check out S&P. Particularly a wealth of info on Eurosail SPPL/SPML. Anyway this is spilling out. Anybody think it's a good idea to start a consequences thread of their actions. It may be that somebody there is just doing a job because they have to, has a conscience, has also been ripped off elsewhere and wants to blow the whistle. Just a thought!

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers dangermouse. Will act on that! My most recent post refers to the post before yours!

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a reminder recently from Capstone to say that i hadnt sent them an up to date building/contents ins certificate. It informed me several things and the most interesting was that i had to make sure that i put EUROSAIL as the interested party on the insurance as they were my mortgagee. My mortgage i thought was with SPML????? Does this mean that EUROSAIL are now the title holder or what?:-|

I'll post exactly what it says tomorrow as i've left it in work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whooaaa Nello

 

THEY SAID YOU HAD TO PUT EUROSAIL ON YOUR BUILDINGS INSURANCE???

 

pretty much wraps it all up.

 

OH AND BY THE WAY CHECK Y'AL THAT THEY HAVE THEIR NAME ON YOUR OWN IF THEIR'S WAS A SECOND CHARGE AND ALSO CHECK WHETHER THEY HAVE PULLED YOU INTO A BLOCK INSURANCE POLIY WITHOUT EVER TELLING YOU!

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good on you Nello.

 

I reiterate challenge them to state one way or the other, in writing, whether you are paying towards a block buildings insurance policy despite having perfectly valid buildings policy of your own. They have no right to do this but do it anyway. If they won't answer guess what the answer is.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whooaaa Nello

 

THEY SAID YOU HAD TO PUT EUROSAIL ON YOUR BUILDINGS INSURANCE???

 

pretty much wraps it all up.

 

OH AND BY THE WAY CHECK Y'AL THAT THEY HAVE THEIR NAME ON YOUR OWN IF THEIR'S WAS A SECOND CHARGE AND ALSO CHECK WHETHER THEY HAVE PULLED YOU INTO A BLOCK INSURANCE POLIY WITHOUT EVER TELLING YOU!

 

;);) Just about to open this little can of worms, its just reached the top of my todo list! :D

B-O-2

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nello

Also noticed that SPML is not on my buildings cover, I forgot to include them when I renewed my cover. Which mean they do not have a record of cover for my property. Just goes to show that there is something wrong with their admin system. If your mortgagee was SPML after the transfer, why are they now asking you to put Eurosail, on the insurance cover?

Another point is that after reading Pender case, I noted that the outstanding arrears on the mortgage was £130K. In the case of SPML would this be interpreted to mean that as the registered proprietor of the legal charge, Eurosail has by virtue of the administration agreements, expressly authorisedSPML to exercise such rights on its behalf.

 

 

111.It follows, in my judgment, that Paragon, so long as it remains the registered proprietor of the Legal Charge, is a necessary party to any claim to possession of the Property in right of the Legal Charge.

112.The only question then is whether the SPV should have been joined in the proceedings as an additional claimant. In my judgment, the answer to that question is plainly: No. On the assumption that the consideration for the transfer of the Legal Charge has been paid in full, Paragon has since retained its legal ownership of the Legal Charge as trustee for the SPV (see Whiteley v. Delaney [1914] AC 132 at 141 per Viscount Haldane LC). But it does not follow that in that situation the SPV, as the owner of the Legal Charge in equity, is a necessary party to the claim; and on the facts of the instant case joinder of the SPV is wholly unnecessary. There is, after all, no issue between the SPV and Paragon as to the exercise of the mortgagee's rights under the Legal Charge: indeed the SPV has, by virtue of the administration agreements, expressly authorised Paragon to exercise such rights on its behalf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

eie I posted something ages ago (not on this thread)about eurosail been the name on the building ins - its the easiest way to find out which spv has bought you. And yes you would imagine that you would have to be the true owner to insure a property otherwise wouldn't you be guilty of er fraud if you made a claim?

As for the ratings yes they were a complete farce all just rubber stamped triple a. But just look at who was paying the ratings agency.

 


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nello

 

Eurosail is the generic name for a series of SPVs. Before you go ahead and amend your insurance documents ask Capstone to confirm which Eurosail company it is. That way you will know eaxactly the SPV your mortgage has been sold to and you will be able to obtain the prospectus.

 

For example..it might be something like Eurosail 2007-1

 

 

Dangermouse

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you can go to Companieshouse.co.uk and use the free webcheck service to see details of who owns your mortgage. Then, if you take my advice you will write to that company and ask them to provide you with all the details and underlying documents of the charge they have registered under s.395 of the Companies Act. Tell them that you have a right to inspect these documents under section s.423 of the Companies Act & they will have to send you the details. Make sure you ask them for all the underlying documents not just the copy of the s.395 form (although that will be interesting reading for you also!)

 

Regarsd

 

Dangermouse

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what the letter said...

 

Building insurance policies should fulfill the following requirements:

 

1. The policy schedule must note the interest of Eurosail 2006-3 First Client as Mortgagee

 

 

BTW i'm still waiting for my agreement to be sent after i requested it via a SAR. They only sent the mortgage offer and said they didnt have to send the agreement. I wonder if there is an agreement???

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...