Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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 1134 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

EiE,

 

I believe I posted this earlier, Companies House info, is open to the Public.

I made an enquiry to the compliance team, because of SPML late accounts, I am awaiting their reply and will then post. They are well aware of the directors, and the file is close to be being passed for prosecution(told so).

Whats interesting is that these directors operate for other companies, so I will press for full disclosure.

 

ITBG?

Options

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 6236

 

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

 

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

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ITBG

 

I'm starting to get the gist of where you are coming from. Sometimes I get an echo in my head and think I've come up with something. Othertimes stuff goes in one ear and out the other. Probably a consequence of trying to spin 12 different plates at one and the same time.

 

All I can say is this. Bear with me. I'll be up to speed soon.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

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

Someone, I think it was Midge, asked me about how they (SPML) judged the lending .

 

This should be an insight into it..one of the few remaining docs. out there..but there are some for other years.

 

http://www.themoneysuperstore.net/New%20TMS_files/Lender%20Details/spml/spml%20product%20guide.pdf

 

A copy of the application form that should have been filled in by a broker.

 

http://www.metrofinance.co.uk/applications/spml.pdf

Edited by Crapstone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the policy document. What stuck out like a sore thumb was the loading. Not a figure there anywhere near the 7.5% over libor I am contracted to pay. Anyone paying 7% and more over libor? This is a diabolical liberty.

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

Someone, I think it was Midge, asked me about how they (SPML) judged the lending .

 

This should be an insight into it..one of the few remaining docs. out there..but there are some for other years.

 

http://www.themoneysuperstore.net/New%20TMS_files/Lender%20Details/spml/spml%20product%20guide.pdf

 

A copy of the application form that should have been filled in by a broker.

 

http://www.metrofinance.co.uk/applications/spml.pdf

 

 

 

lnteresting reading this. l cannot figure out how they calculated my mortgage at all. Considering that l have a near prime with (at the time) less than 75% LTV, my mortgage should have been not more than 1,5% + 0,5% self cert equals 2% plus libor. l have 2.2% with a, then, perfect or almost perfect credit file, why, that extra 0,2% points intrigues me. l did have a fast track mortgage arrangement, which was the only reason l accepted Preferred/SPML at all, but, as l've stated earlier, l never thought l would end up being mortgaged with the same company after the initial 2 years. l must say one thing in all honesty here, they have not been to bad with me, except so damned inept and unprofessional. When the crash hit, l was one of those who lost out rather immediately, resulting in mortgage arrears and eventually a reposession hearing. l was lucky as l could raise enough money to pay off the arrears, but, have since then struggled to maintain my payments. Am currently a few hundred pounds behind, but, should be fully up to date by the beginning of October. So, my engagement here is not personal in that sence, nor do l have a massive axe to grind, but, l am seriously concerned about the future of our mortgages and l do want to know who the heck l am paying to. l explained in one of my earlier posts that my payments to Preferred ended up in the account of SPML. When l queried this with Capstone, the answere was...''not to worry, the payment will be correctly registred against your mortgage account''.. But, l do have a reason to worry, particularily if SPML is in worse condition than Preferred and my cash payments end up in SPML's account to stave off a catasrophe or even if it is only to boost their cash flow. l do not buy the argument from Capstone that it does'nt matter where the money goes as long as it's registred against my mortgage payments. The fact is that l have a mortgage with Preferred and not SPML and l cannot see that it is legal to re-direct my payments to SPML as my bankstatement confirms. The money should have been made to Preferred's account and then, what they do internally with the money is their business. The people at Capstone are not professionals and seems to be completely out of touch with legal requirements as well as legal and established accounting methods. So am l worried, you can be damn sure l am and l need to have this sorry mess sorted soonest. As what regards repossesions and their general behaviour against their customers, they are unfortunately not alone. All of these sub-prime lenders are in the same boat right now and are desperate to disengage themselves from their mortgage holdings. Their investors, i.e. all these banks, investment and hedge funds who bought in to the dream of a never ending high yield cashflow for limited investments, well, they are either being bailed out by our most beloved government or desperate to liquidate what holdings they have. This then brings me back to the original queries l made about contractual performance and fairness, i.e. no-one intended to engage or take the risk of any long term mortgage lending, but, they were all in the business of relatively short term hiked up lending as originators, where everyone made indecent profit's on the back of desperate people needing housing. We the mortgagors have been misled and are now left out in the cold without any support or even remote engagement from the very authorities that supported and encouraged this type of gambling with our assets.

lt is disgusting and immoral and unfair, particularily as we in the end will, not only have paid extortionate interest rates to ruthless money lenders, but, actually have to pay back the loans the government has obtained to bail them out. Guy's we are no longer paying only for our mortgages, but, we are actually paying the investors back for bad investment strategies too!!!!! Hell freeze over before l will voluntarily agree to this.

Gustavius Rex

Link to post
Share on other sites

GREX This is interesting why on earth would they pay your funds into SPML rather than preferred as both seem to be twin companies with both accounts overdue at companies house etc.could be that spml are actually more alive than preferred and all the preferred funds are being chanelled there.what gives capstone the right anyway to decide where your payment goes?sure evidence they are pulling the strings behind both companies.your contract is with preferred not capstone and spml,what if capstone are moving or selling all the preferred mortgage accounts into spml because preferred is going to be ditched,how would we ever find out ?.Imagine the same thing happening to high street banks and the uproar that would raise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawsuits

 

In 1996, the company agreed to pay $3 million into an "educational fund" to settle a Justice Department lawsuit accusing it of gouging and predatory lending practices against older, female, and minority borrowers. Prosecutors accused it of allowing mortgage brokers and its employees to charge these customers an additional fee of as much as 12% of the loan amount. As part of the settlement, Ameriquest (then still known as Long Beach Mortgage) agreed to use the educational fund to train its employees in proper mortgage techniques (training which most observers agree never actually occurred to any substantial degree), and to refrain from utilizing predatory lending techniques (such as "bicycling"), but only within the State of California. Shortly after entering into this settlement agreement, the company "switched" names with its subsidiary, and began aggressively seeking refinance mortgage business throughout the United States.

 

In 2001, after being investigated by the Federal Trade Commission, the company settled a dispute with ACORN, a national organization of community groups, promising to offer $360 million in low-cost loans.

 

On 1 August 2005, Ameriquest announced that it would set aside $325 million to settle attorney-general investigations in 30 states to settle allegations that it had preyed on borrowers with hidden fees and ballooning payments.[1] In at least five of those states—California, Connecticut, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Florida—Ameriquest had already settled multimillion-dollar suits. Brian Montgomery, the Federal Housing Administration commissioner said that the Ameriquest settlement reinforced his concern that the industry was exploiting borrowers, and that he "was shocked to find those customers had been lured away by the “fool’s gold” of subprime loans".[1]

 

In May 2006, Ameriquest Mortgage announced it was closing all of its retail offices, and in the future would make its loans through mortgage brokers, a channel that is not covered by the predatory-lending settlement with the Attorneys General.

 

On June 13, 2007, lawyers for borrowers, who are seeking to combine 20 suits into one class action suit, asserted in a filing [2] in Illinois Northern District Court that "Assets of the Ameriquest entities were transferred to (the owner of Ameriquest) Arnall with the actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud the plaintiffs in this action."

 

The issues confronted by companies like Ameriquest could be a major contributing factor to the rapid rise of Certified Mortgage Planners, certified industry experts that work in concert with Certified Financial Planners in harmonizing the home-finance products utilized by consumers with their larger financial portfolios.

 

Former employees from Ameriquest, which was United States's leading wholesale lender,[3] described a system in which they were pushed to falsify documents on bad mortgages and then sell them to Wall Street banks eager to make fast profits.[3] There is growing evidence that such mortgage fraud may be at the heart of the Financial crisis of 2007–2009.[3]

 

[edit]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks,

 

I thought you would be interested to have a look at this Wikipedia link which explains how one predatory lender was successfully sued for hundreds of millions.

 

It's obvioulyy do-able !!!!

 

So, Let us get on with it and get a class action going !!!!

 

I did paste a copy of the info from wiki here but it instantly vanished before I could complete the post. Does anyone know why ?

 

Ameriquest Mortgage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaAmeriquest Mortgage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks,

 

I thought you would be interested to have a look at this Wikipedia link which explains how one predatory lender was successfully sued for hundreds of millions.

 

It's obvioulyy do-able !!!!

 

So, Let us get on with it and get a class action going !!!!

 

I did paste a copy of the info from wiki here but it instantly vanished before I could complete the post. Does anyone know why ?

 

Ameriquest Mortgage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaAmeriquest Mortgage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

 

Hi Rocket,

 

Excellent post(s) and l am most grateful as l never could find what you supplied here. It's a big difference between UK and US, unfortunately, in that, in the US they may have the (former) governement against them, but, not their congress men, as they are directly elected. Here, we have Boris Jonson running off to New York trying to stop any control or capping of bonuses!!! A big difference in attitude, l'm sure you agree. However, using the American class action(s) as an international rule of thumb and considering the fact that Lehman Brothers was a US investment bank, there may be some opportunity to do something. We all agree that we have not only been mis-sold our mortgages, but, in many cases at terribel rates and indefencible costs. l agree with you, based on what l've said above, that we should get as many people as possible together in a class action. With enough evidence it should'nt be any problem to to find a willing law firm, specialised in this type of action, to take care of our business.

GR

Link to post
Share on other sites

GREX This is interesting why on earth would they pay your funds into SPML rather than preferred as both seem to be twin companies with both accounts overdue at companies house etc.could be that spml are actually more alive than preferred and all the preferred funds are being chanelled there.what gives capstone the right anyway to decide where your payment goes?sure evidence they are pulling the strings behind both companies.your contract is with preferred not capstone and spml,what if capstone are moving or selling all the preferred mortgage accounts into spml because preferred is going to be ditched,how would we ever find out ?.Imagine the same thing happening to high street banks and the uproar that would raise.

 

 

I'm sure that l'm not the only one who has had his or hers mortgage payment either transferred or directly debited to another account. Capstone only does what they are told and the real power is someone somewhere else. Do not forget what l revealed above, that Capstone was a part of the mortgage book offering from SPML/Preferred. lt's messy and very difficult to sort out, but, eventually we shall get there.

GR

Link to post
Share on other sites

to add,

 

If you refer to your Prospectus, you see under 'Bank Agreement', all monies go to Eurosail. So whether you pay SPML, PML, Eurosail or Barclays direct it will all be processed into the Eurosail Trust Collection account, administered by Barclays.

 

ITBG?

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 6236

 

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

 

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

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said Barclays were up to their necks in this stuff.

 

It was Barclays who refused the loan in the first instance after offering me it (Unsolicited I might add). At that point my credit rating was not perfect but pretty solid

 

It was Barclays who referred me to some brokers in slough -who the hell they were I don't know- they just kept ringing me up and never sent any letters.

 

Then some nice helpful person from SPPL gets involved

 

Then... we know all the rest. And it goes if you are SPPL SPML or Preferred into a barclays account. And now Lehmans headquarters no longer have green carpets they have blue ones and the NY office now has signs headed Barclays Capital.

 

None of this will be any form of revelation to anyone on this site/thread. But I will say this. If not legally accountable for this sh*te Barclays are morally culpable. They are big boys and they knew what they were doing.

 

Do what I did if you have anything with these barstewards. Divest yourselves of everything from the bank that used to support apartheid south africa (last one standing) and now supports equity cash grab schemes.

 

How many more millions does Bob Diamond actually need?

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

Just read the policy document. What stuck out like a sore thumb was the loading. Not a figure there anywhere near the 7.5% over libor I am contracted to pay. Anyone paying 7% and more over libor? This is a diabolical liberty.

 

Remember that the doc. is for 2005. I'd love to get hold of a copy of the SPML manual that they refer to.

 

I'll see if I can find the ones for other years. I've just lost the plot and forgotten what mine is but I think it's either 3.25% but that's from 2003.

 

My OH checked his credit record and SPML are showing more months missed repayments than what it should be. It also doesn't take into account the amount that's been payed off the arrears over the past few years either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This one is from Oct. 2007.

 

Note at the bottom it says ' not to be given to the general public'!

 

http://www.quotes4all.biz/intser/SPML/Product_Guide_Oct_2007.pdf

 

Also a copy of the insurance and T & C's of applications

 

http://www.active-investments.co.uk/active/download/documents/spml/SPML%20Insurance%20Declaration%20form.pdf

Edited by Crapstone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing fast and loose with your credit score is just another way of pursuing the aggressive repo strategy. They duff it up so badly you can't switch providers. I wonder what effect these monthly credit checks are having. Leaving great big muddy footprints all over the shop I would guess. We have got to do something more to take the wind right out of their sails. Dougal's fraud act might focus the mind even if ultimately it doesn't stick. Last thing they will want is plod sticking their beaks in. Also it goes right to the top with the directors getting nice calls from the local constabulary. If it didn't stick what have we lost.? It doesn't even cost us, causes them maximum havoc and gives us some welcome breathing space to develop a coherent strategy for legal opinion. Thoughts anyone?

Edited by enoughisenough
Typo sand other assorted communication slips

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

Wonder if preferred,spml,capstone have anyone monitoring this site so that they can stay one step ahead,are they all based at the same address?if I knew where and how to do it I'd report them for tax evasion and money laundering ,any ideas,any concrete evidence ,paying preferred account money into spml?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ITBG

 

My Inbox is empty now. Please send your message.

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

Originally posted by GREXAnyone see Panorama last night? As for the rest, will be back a bit later.

GR

 

Have dowmloaded it but not watched it yet. Aren't they chewing at the edges though, rather than getting to the heart of the matter?

 

Keep the faith EiE.

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

Just found this on companies house... London Mortgage Company Ltd registration no. 05673094. Previous name - EBONYWAY ltd- date changed 02/05/06. The registration number for this is. 01281316.

 

This registration number 01281316 is LANGERSAL No.3 (Dissolved 12/05/2009). Previously known as EBONYWAY LTD and before this was CANDA Int. date changed 08/05/02

 

00603511- Matlock London,previously known as Matlock London Ltd,date changed (09/08/2007) also previously known as Matlock Bank Ltd,date changed (14/05/2007), also previously known as Trucanda Trusts Lts,date changed(01/02/1990).

 

http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/pdf/fixedincome/040303_mars.pdf

Edited by littledotty27
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everyone,

 

Have a look at this link about Americaquest being sued for predatory lending. It settled with payment of a few hundred million to be distributed to its borrowers rather than risk being found guilty of illegal activity.

 

But it shows that we could do the same thing here - take the lenders to court in a class action and see if they offer to settle or risk losing their case.

 

You will notice that there is increasing public recognition that borrowers were victims of illegal practices, but nobody has yet done anything about bringing an action against the lenders here in the UK.

 

Lord Turner said the banks engaged in undesirable , harmful practices etc today !! He basically seemed to be saying the banks were parasites.

 

Can we do something about finding a suitable lawyer for some initial advice ? Any ideas anyone ?

 

If we can make a list of what seem to be predatory practices that we have experienced, a lawyer will easily tell us if we might have a case. All we then have to do is gather evidence. It shouldn't be difficult if we all get together to work on it.

 

Ameriquest Mulit-State Settlement

 

1. What kinds of lending practices did the States investigate?

 

The States investigated complaints that Ameriquest used a variety of unlawful lending practices, such as giving borrowers inaccurate information about interest rates, Discount points and other mortgage loan terms, inflating property appraisals, and persuading borrowers to refinance, even when refinancing didn’t offer any real advantage to the borrowers. Some borrowers also complained that Ameriquest pressured them to close loans on terms that were different from those originally proposed, and failed to complete funding of loans on time.

 

You can read the complete list of lending practices that the States investigated by clicking here to see the definition of “Lending Practices” in the Settlement Agreement.

 

Scroll down to the letter 'Q' for details of lending practices.

 

It occurs to me that we might start this by simply listing on this site a list of our specific experiences of predatory lending practices (I have a few for a start ). These will also be likely to have evidence available from the individuals concerned who list them.

 

We can then bunch this group of individuals together and start the ball rolling by making a 'group complaint' to the FSA asking them to specifically investigate the list of complaints.

 

We can get newspaper publicity for each step taken, perhaps do a deal with an appropriate newspaper for ongoing publicity support.

 

Anyone game to make a start on this ?

 

I think the way forward is for people to succinctly list their particular experience of 'predatory lending'' they have experienced. this can then be collated etc for the FSA.

Edited by rocket1
clarification
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...