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

[brassed-off-2]

Funny they can only manage to send, one copy of libor rate change letters addressed to us both when they want their money!!!

I think i will send another letter requesting my OH's dsar, and then hit them with a demand that we want a copy of each letter they send in duplicate!!!!

 

b-o-2

[enoughisenough]

Do it! They'll soon get bored with having to deal with this rubbish. Bring them to the table by hook or crook. Crook in the main though.

[Crapstone]

Pt2537,

 

Thanks.

 

So it there an easier way of asking for the data relating to just the account as a joint affair, each being several and liable? And do they have the descretion to just forward the copies to the first named or is it a lottery?

 

I'm a reasonable person (too reasonable) and would have accepted a return of the cheque or an explaination why both parties SAR could not be provided for the fee enclosed. But being lied to is another issue and it's a poor attempt to cover their tracks.

 

EIE,

Under their rights they only have to send one copy of everything to the address given and as long as one party is notified it doesn't make a difference if the other receives nothing or it's hidden from them. I tried that route and it had no legal standing, as told by a solicitor.

 

It's worked out to our advantage that individual copies have been sent. As pt2537 said, it's given us a chance to cross reference 2 SARs' that should be the same but aren't. Mine has been hastily done and they have missed a lot that should have fell foul to the dreaded black pen.

 

It's not complete. I've been in touch with the Head Honcho for the past 2 years but not one of their letters is in the SAR and they can't expect me to believe that they don't keep copies that are readily available or they are exempt from the DPA. They haven't provided the libor rate change statements either and the eviction notice they issued 'accidently' is missing. And that's just for starters..

[enoughisenough]

As far as I'm aware once they issued proceedings, or were even threatening to, there are no exemptions:

 

 

DPA, Pt IV, 35:

 

35 Disclosures required by law or made in connection with legal proceedings etc [/i][/b]

 

(1) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is required by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court.

 

(2) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is necessary—

 

(a) for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), or

 

(b) for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights.

 

That's my reading of the Act anyway.

[enoughisenough]

Mine has been hastily done and they have missed a lot that should have fell foul to the dreaded black pen.

 

Oh dear...They aren't going to be too happy with that.

[littledotty27]

Hi all

 

Can someone clarify that SPML are no longer in business!!

I am sure someone posted it on the forum,but I am unable to find it.

[enoughisenough]

hi Dotty

 

I can help with this one SPPL and I think preferred are now closed. This was the info I got from suetonius. However I have been unable to elicit a reply as to what this means. Will copy and paste the relevant posts later.

 

Keep the faith. EIE.

[Suetonius]

hi Dotty

 

I can help with this one SPPL and I think preferred are now closed. This was the info I got from suetonius. However I have been unable to elicit a reply as to what this means. Will copy and paste the relevant posts later.

 

Keep the faith. EIE.

 

*Disclaimer

 

Please note the following articles have not been written by Suetonious, so he is unable to explain what the original authors mean.

 

If anyone is looking to elicit a reply to the meaning of anything written by a 3rd party, Suetonious highly recommends that you ask the 3rd party what they mean, rather than Suetonious.

 

Lehman Brothers confirms another 200 UK job cuts - 20 February 2008

 

"Lehman Brothers has confirmed that it will be cutting a further 200 jobs across its UK mortgage capital business, affecting lenders SPML and Preferred.

 

A spokeswoman for the bank would not comment further on the future of the two brands but says that it is continuing to offer mortgages under its brands.

 

She says that Lehman Brother's UK mortgage capital business had 1000 UK employees before the recent downturn but the bank has already made 177 job cuts in November last year.

 

Last year also saw it close both SPPL and London Mortgage Company."

 

 

Mortgage Solutions - Lehman's drops SPPL and LMC

 

"Lehman's drops SPPL and LMC

 

Lehman Brothers has confirmed it is to drop its Southern Pacific Personal Loans (SPPL) and London Mortgage Company (LMC) brands as part of a global restructuring of its residential mortgage lending.

 

Jennifer Weller, head of communications at Lehman Brothers Capital Division Europe, said as part of the global changes, the company would be rescaling its operations in both the UK and the US, and closing its Korean operation.

 

While it will still continue to offer first charge mortgages through Southern Pacific Mortgages Limited and Preferred, both the SPPL and LMC brands are to be dropped. The company is withdrawing entirely from second charge mortgages in the UK for the time being, although it will continue to offer the services currently available from LMC through the remaining two brands."

 

 

 

 

[littledotty27]

If Lehman have dropped LMC and another company have taken over administration,shouldn't we have had prior notice or an assignment?

[truro]

LMC is now London Personal Loans because that's the company on my court eviction notice, but the solicitor at the CAB dosn't see anything wrong with that.

Had contact with him but he can't represent me in court, he thinks the DJ will accept that the details on the Land Registry is legal and that SPML is the registered owner of the mortgage. He cannot see why it would make any difference to the claim that my mortgage is with SPML/LMC and the claimant is now SPML/LPL.

He dosen't understand the info I sent him on securitisation and could not rely on the information in court because its out of his sphere of the law, I need a contract lawyer. He think that SMPL/LPL can evict me even though my mortgage is with LMC because they are all trading names of SPML.

I suggested challenging the eviction under Unfair Relationship legislation but he was more concerned with the arrears on my mortgage and how I will repay the debt.

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 - Unfair Relationships

 

See Unfair relationships - Enforcement action under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002 .

[lola and cecil]

hi SuperSleuth

 

Just wondered if you could let me know again how we go about finding out who owns our mortgage and where we can find out this information.

 

Thanks we are with Capstone but Preferred and SPML are all in there somewhere as we have letter from all of them. Hope to hear from you.

 

Lola and Cecil

[rocket1]

I too, have a mortgage with spml. They are appalling ! I am wondering if anyone is interested in brining a class action of some sort ?

[42man]

Some intersting information on Paragon (securitisation) here - securitisationReports

[lola and cecil]

hi Supersleuth

 

Your info. is invaluable but would it be possible for you to read our post Lilo and Cecil, SPML not following Land Registry rules.

 

If you can help or need any further info please let me know but we need your help on this....

 

Cheers

Lilo and Cecil

[Suetonius]

LMC is now London Personal Loans because that's the company on my court eviction notice, but the solicitor at the CAB dosn't see anything wrong with that.

Had contact with him but he can't represent me in court, he thinks the DJ will accept that the details on the Land Registry is legal and that SPML is the registered owner of the mortgage. He cannot see why it would make any difference to the claim that my mortgage is with SPML/LMC and the claimant is now SPML/LPL.

He dosen't understand the info I sent him on securitisation and could not rely on the information in court because its out of his sphere of the law, I need a contract lawyer. He think that SMPL/LPL can evict me even though my mortgage is with LMC because they are all trading names of SPML.

I suggested challenging the eviction under Unfair Relationship legislation but he was more concerned with the arrears on my mortgage and how I will repay the debt.

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 - Unfair Relationships

 

See Unfair relationships - Enforcement action under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002 .

 

 

What would help you is to find out how things went with Superslueth.

 

If she won her case, you can use the same arguments and points (if applicable). If she didn't win, we will at least get an understanding of the arguments used by the lender so that these can be debated and overcome.

 

Has anyone heard from her ?

 

I see she is still logging into CAG but has not posted anything in the last couple of weeks.

[Crapstone]

I'd be very interested Rocket 1 but unless we can find something conclusive it's going to be hard going.

 

I was mis-sold by a broker that falsified documents but trying to nail him down is proving difficult.

 

SPMLs' websites have done a vanishing act. I have a list of Sundry fees dating back to 2002 and they look nothing like the ones now displayed on Capstones website. The effort they have gone to cause maximum distress and the lies they have told are unbelievable.

 

Truro,

 

The CAB, with respect for what they do, are hopeless when it comes to anything outside making an arrangement to pay. If they can get you from death row onto a life sentence then they will see that as a positive result even if you didn't commit the crime.

 

I think I've exhausted every root to find out and get SPML to provide the information on securitisation. So I've tried the direct approach, as the 'other' company should be named on the insurance and as such I feel I'm bound to directly inform them, and not Capstone/SPML, that I've had to make a claim for water damage.

 

Plus the other complaints and a direct confrontation of a proven lie. Strangely enough it's been over 2 weeks since it was received recorded delivery and they haven't yet replied. Usually I get a reply within a few days to say it has been received and a few days later another letter arrives that's full of ........

 

Eerily quiet.

[littledotty27]

I agree suetonis..where is Supersleuth? hope everything went ok at court for her!!!

[truro]

Spoke to solicitor acting for SPML today pointing out that the letter from them the claimant is LMC but the court eviction notice is London Personal Loans. Also pointed out that after checking companies house there is no such company as LPL registered, so how can this company legally evict me from my home. Still waiting for a call back from her.

 

I will be writing to LMC and the court regarding the info I have on SPML and Eurosail. I dont want to be evicted and then find it was done illegally I want to make sure they aware that the company evicting me could be doing so illegally.

These companies cannot continue to repossess borrowers because the law is blind and there is no justice for ordinary citizens in this country.

[Crapstone]

They are absolutely hopeless Truro and nether Capstone or SMPL have a clue what they are doing.

 

I spoke too soon before and have now had a response, if you can call it that. I'm basically back where I started as they have classed it as a new complaint instead of keeping up the correspondance when they already knew I was complaining and it's a flamin' ongoing thing that they can't get anything right!

 

In their little list of things taken from my letter to investigate, guess which question has been overlooked?

 

2 letters from the same person, (not even the person that it was addressed to directly), on the same day and both signatures are completely different. The can't even get the names right for the account and have fused my OH and myself into one trans-gender name.

 

I've had enough of their rubbish and games as someone is taking the P.

 

I think I've done everything to sort this mess out and even after going to the FOS and sticking that out for 2 years, more things are coming to light the deeper I look so I don't think there is any other choice than taking them to court. The longer it's going on for the more chance we have of losing our home as they are a loose cannon when it comes to fiction and fees.

 

I'm a fairly strong person but it just grinds you down to think that THEY couldn't be trusted to walk a dog (mildly put) but are in charge of your home.....GRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Crapstone]

I'm ranting a bit but travellers seem to have more bloomin rights than any of us that have tried to better ourselves and free up authority and rental housing. But what help do we get when it all goes wrong and the company is acting unlawfully? A free ticket to the FOS that's bloomin funded by them and are as impartial as an MP's accountant.

 

I'd better stop before I throw my toys out of my pram but all of you in the same situation will know how it feels and it's not good.

 

Rant over (sorry).

[littledotty27]

Hey crapstone

 

I think we all have our off days!!! Just lets hope whoever becomes the new PM tomorrow gets these sort of companies on track or rid of them for good.

[Crapstone]

That made me smile littledotty and thanks for being so sympathetic at my rant. Together we will find something to bring their house of cards down and I'm thinking along another avenue rather than the main road.

 

Doesn't matter who we vote for, the Government always get in . Words fail me at what the bar stewards have milked when 'prudence' was preached:lol:

[littledotty27]

Well I have today received my SAR from LMC or should it be Vertex..i don't know who it should be anymore,there has been that many change of names in the last 3 years.

 

Anyhow,its just aload of dump notes with the 3rd party details marker pen crossed through the names,a copy of abbreviation glossary that does not match and a load of bull s*** with re to telephone conversations making them sound like they are fit to work for the queen!!!

 

I have been through all the missed payments and the figure is nearly £6k less than what they state we owe,but i can see what they have done...when we agreed to pay that bit extra to cover the arrears,the amount has been returned by dd and they are adding the cmi plus the extra back onto the arrears figure.

 

Can I complain to the Information Commissioner? as they havn't fully complied with the SAR!!!

[enoughisenough]

Already posted elsewhere but worth a serious look!

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/enterprise_act/oft854.pdf

[enoughisenough]

Ok a General plea.

 

Muppets and devious (deviant criminal) muppets at that. However not so devious that there is no recourse in law. It's all here. A carefully constructed legal argument awaits those who look through with meticulous consideration to the fact that repossession awaits them if they don't. Me too probably even though I do.

 

YOU HAVE TO FIGHT AND DO IT PROPERLY.