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

[Crapstone]

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

 

Page 15 has the basics...written on the initial application form.

 

I have the original t & c' which were provided in booklet form after the mortgage was agreed to. I suggest that the conditions on the application form were the ones that were to be relied upon as they were revealed pre-contract.

[ryde]

b............r sorry about this technical incompetency!

Edited October 5, 2009 by ryde

[Crapstone]

http://www.europeservicing.com/BARCAP-RMBSServicing2008.pdf

 

On pg 16 of the above it shows the structure for servicing...i.e. Capstone but also that there is a back-up server should they become insolvent. It shows the Eurosail parts and other companies in the sub-prime market.

[ryde]

Mortgage brokers jailed for conspiracy to defraud | MB Mortgages Sercices | Shelton | Matthew Booth | Grant Ratcliffe|

 

see this link I know I have been through it before but its bugging me and someone new looking at this might know,something.Pml in administration.verycatchy7939 believe this must be your local paper and crown court,any chance of getting a transcript of the trial!!!!!!!!!!!!???????.

 

Mortgage brokers jailed for conspiracy to defraud | MB Mortgages Sercices | Shelton | Matthew Booth | Grant Ratcliffe|

 

http://www.ise.ie/debt_documents/Eurosail_7083.pdf

 

check out page 72 onwards of the lending criteria of spml/pml etc this was the guarantee offered to the mugs who invested amongst many other things of interest there are loads of these documents on the irish stock exchange will try and post a link.

Irish Stock Exchange

 

JUST TYPE EUROSAIL IN DEBT SECURITIES AT TOP RIGHTHAND SIDE OF PAGE AND PRESS ARROW.

 

Notice to Noteholders - London Stock Exchange

 

This is an interesting one as well shows how much trouble lehmans are in,this will contain many of our mortgages,can't say I UNDERSTAND IT FULLY THOUGH

 

JUST GOOGLE ......EUROSAIL IRISH STOCK EXCHANGE and look at all the announcements to noteholders some huge claim was made against lehmans on 22/09/09 and notified to noteholders on 29/09/09 Suetonius as our potential saviour and respected resident expert or any other knowledgeable cagger any idea of the implications of this lot?

Edited October 5, 2009 by ryde

[Crapstone]

Although Sue is setting out on the right foot with the contracts I still think the best bet is starting with the hard sell from fact 1.

 

All of these mortgages went through an originator with no direct access to SPML, Preferred, LMC....etc

 

Lehmans covered their backsides pretty well by making sure none of the advice was given by them. In fact no questions were ever meant to be answered by them..that's what the server was for after the mortgages were set up and that's when the circus started. All separate legal entities to make the chain as long as possible away from the lender.

 

The brokers and originators took a fair slice of your cash..£2k+ on a £60k mortgage for filling in a form that you could have done yourself? And would have done it far better, without the pressure selling, and more accurately than the greedy brokers.

 

Someone must have steered you in the direction of them. Were there other more suitable products on the market? Has the broker/originator helped you since or have you been able to get a copy of the original application you made?

 

Securitisation isn't going anywhere unless you can show something new.

 

My observation is that most of us had debt problems so turned or were recommended to the sub-prime market to release equity or consolidate. Tempted by the ploy that in a few years you'll be back on the High Street despite the high rates.

 

The checks made for these mortgages were a farce as were the promises made that run alongside the contracts.

[Crapstone]

Ryde..perhaps that's the reason why Capstone/SPML have 'lost' my original application and other files. Dodgy broker that filed that my OH was employed instead of self-employed and fluffed up the figures. Told them as soon as we knew and the files vanished in a puff of smoke..and told to go back to the broker, who had also signed me up for insurance I didn't want or need.

 

Broker told me I was on a 'witch hunt' and that I got the mortgage I wanted so what did I expect him to do? He made a mistake ..so what..not his fault ...

 

Cue the swearing....from him and then from me.

What a charming chap he was and so professional with it.

[ryde]

Eurosail 2006-1 PLC - Repurchase of Mortgage Loans - InvestEgate

 

Crapstone totally agree with you I bet many have the same story ;all the brokers wanted was their fat fee and probably fiddled the forms to get it hence they are lost.

The two fraudsters above were caught because PML MUST HAVE LOST MONEY BUT AS LONG AS THE VALUE WAS IN YOUR PROPERTY THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BOTHERED.PML AND SPML WERE CRAFTY IF ANYTHING GOES WRONG BLAME THE BROKER.IF THEY WERE ON £2000 + COMMISSION THEY ARE HARDLY GOING TO RECOMMEND ANYBODY ELSE.THIS IS WHERE WE ALL HAVE TO START.SPML HAD TO BUY A LOAD OF MORTGAGES BACK BECAUSE OF DODGY BROKERS WILL POST THE LINK ABOVE.

Edited October 5, 2009 by ryde

[JonCris]

hi Guys,

 

l've taken a step back lately and not engaged so much in the ongoing discussion here. And, the reason for this is that l get this feeling that we begin to act like the dog who's chasing his own tail. Round and round it goes and it always end up with the same issues and same arguments. Sue has laid the complexity of the securitisation issue out as clear as it possibly can be. The law of the land is also clear, hence, l cannot for my life understand why we are dissecting something, again and again, that cannot reveal anything that we do not already know.

 

To get back to the basics again, this is how it worked:

 

Lehmans decide to enter the bandwagon and cash in on the mortgage frenzy by establishing x number of lenders (originators). Funding is obtained from Barclay Capital who will provide bridging funding. Mortgages are centred on the sub-prime market where the return on invested capital is seriously good. Mortgages are split up in to a beneficial and a title part and the beneficial part is bundled in to tranches and ''sold'' on to a spv at a premium (Lehmans profit margin or spread). The spv issues notes or instruments that guarantee a return of x% on invested capital, but, with attached risks. Funds are established as buffers for any non-performance, normally at 1% of the tranch value. Investor money are paid to the spv and to the lender who finally pays back Barclays. Everyone is happy and has made a bundle of money.

 

Now we have the problematic issues and those are related to what the originator/spv has promised the investors. Most mortgages originated through SPML/PM were fixed for a period of, say, 2 years and thereafter running for various periods at a premium over LIBOR. What the prospectus say to the mortgagor and to the investor are, however, not the same. Lehman obviously calculated that the majority of the mortgagors would be able to repair their lousy credit files over the next 5 years and thereafter re-mortgage with a prime lender at a much better rate, hence, the investor prospectus say that the investment would run for 5 to 6 years. But, the mortgagor has a standard agreement running for anything from 10 to 35 years. Enters bank crash and everything so carefully planned goes out the window and now the originator, spv and investor are facing real problems. Mortgage arrears, defaults, non-existant alternative lenders and a dramatically drop in the LIBOR makes the whole business set up risk to fail. The bridging loans dry up and the buffers get drained why the investors want to get rid of their bad investments. No can do, no-one wants to buy and now they are desperate and that's when re-possessions etc. are the preferred method. The thing is, l have mortgage for the next 25 years and at a rate of 2.1% + LIBOR so l'm not interested in losses to the investors or the spv's or the originators. l want to keep my mortgage and l do not want to pay more than 2.1 + 0.6% or 2.7% in total. However, the investor who sits on all these bonds that are running on 2.2 to 3.5% instead of 8 to 10% and an ever increasing amount of arrears/defaults, is now desperate to get rid of my mortgage and there you have the problem in a nut shell. Most of us do not have a mortgage contract that is performing as we originally agreed. Anyone who has his house threatened with re-possesion under the current financial circumstances is not provided with a proper opportunity to sort his problems out, because the investors are losing money. So, let's look at what we were promised and then at what the investors were promised and perhaps we can come up with a joint conclusion and way forward.

 

Gustavius

 

Excellent summary Gus I should also mention that the 'investors' banks didn't use their own money they didn't have any so they themselves borrowed (known as leverage) from other banks using the now useless investment as collateral

[JonCris]

PS when your mortgage is securitized does the relationship between lender & borrower change to the borrowers detriment & if it so does that not effect performance & does that not mean an unfair relationship has been created without either your consent or even knowledge ............... sigh:rolleyes:

[JonCris]

Although I can't prove it...yet. I suspect the reason why prime lenders are so quick to default todays consumer for the slightest mistake is to force that consumer into the arms of their sub prime lenders who they also own & fund & THAT would be predatory lending

[keithybat]

Hi to everyone

I have been monitoring this site for a few months now and would like to thank you all for the information that has been put up on this thread. I have found it very useful and reassuring that we are not on our own fighting these people. Our situation was that our cap came off and our mortgage went up to 3% above the LIBOR rate. I contacted Capstone and told them that we would not be able to pay these high payments and they suggested that we did a modification on our mortgage. They did a credit check which we had no adverse credit on our file at that time and informed me that there would be a meeting and would get back to me asap. They contacted me and told me that they would reduce the rate and we were quite relieved. Then Lehman Brothers went bust and I guessed that the modification would not go through. I questioned them and demanded that they send me the offer in writing. They informed me that this would be sent out that same day. In the afternoon I received a phone call saying that because of a system problem they could not put it in writing for at least a couple of weeks. I rang them back and asked them is it the fact that because of Lehman Brothers demise you cannot do any modifications to our mortgage?. They said it was just a system error. I told them that I would not pay my mortgage until I received the modification in writing. This went on for six months I received nothing from them until December then I started to get aggressive telephone calls. I then reported them to the Financial Ombudsman who took up the case but I was advised to pay the mortgage which I have done since. The letter I received back from them said a verbal agreement was not binding I am now waiting for the Ombudsman's reply. I agree with some of you that the way forward is to contact our MP's which I will do and I also agree that they are not in the mortgage business and they just want their money back as fast as possible for the investors and they do not care the consequences that they cause. We are just numbers. What I think we should do is arrive at Capstone's offices in High Wycombe with a few placards maybe that would get the press interested! I would just like to thank you all again for all of your efforts and for any of you that feel like giving in - don't!.

[slgsue]

I am sat at work reading this thread with amazement, the knowledge you guys have is outstanding:)!

I am more than happy to write to my MP, what sort of things do you suggest we say, I have no clue at all as to what could possibly have some clout but will with pleasure if someone could advise.

[ryde]

keithybat think you,ve done the best thing by contacting the fos (in whom I had little confidence to start with),I had a similar problem with bristol and west who just would not listen then tried to change a verbal agreement and took repo action,my complaint to the fos stopped the repo and after over 12 months they brokered a deal which I could never have done so they do have clout,seems the general rule is litigation won't proceed whilst there is an active complaint.(capstone will have to pay them £500 if theres a genuine complaint I've been told)it seems anyone in trouble they try and escalate the problem by acting incompetently engineering a repo situation,I WONDER WHO HAS GIVEN THE STAFF THIS DIRECTIVE,WE NEED A WHISLTEBLOWER.!!!

Edited October 5, 2009 by ryde

[JonCris]

keithy so they admit, in writing:D, there WAS an agreement albeit verbal if so they are stuffed. An agreement whether verbal or in writing is still a legal contract. What they gonna do in court lie I think not as their letter gives the game away

 

SAR the bums asap

[bustthematrix]

In addition to the Pender Court of Appeal Judgements (and legal precedent):

 

Everyone should also ignore:

 

 

 

Difference Between America & UK securitisation

• House of Lords
  
• Legislative Law (Law of Property Act 1925 & The Financial Collateral Arrangements (No.2) Regulations 2003)
  
• Dr Ellis Ferran (Professor of Company and Securities Law at the University of Cambridge)
  
• Halsbury
  
• High Court of Justice (MBNA v HMRC)
  
• Her Majesty's Revenue & Customers (HMRC)
  
• Manchester Tribunal Centre (Capital One v HMRC)
  
• Court of Appeal (Paragon v Pender 2005)
  
• High Court of Justice (Paragon v Pender 2003)
  
• Trust Law
  

But what do they (can list more if required) know...

 

For goodness sakes Suetonius!!! You don't half try! You've been harping on about this sh*te for ages and we all cave in, agree with you and give up! Ok you've won! The argument yes...the debate NO!!! NEVER!

 

As I said in another post, the REASON, WE WILL NEVER EVER give up on these matters is because there are clear frauds being perpetrated on many levels and people inherently KNOW that they are being wronged, even though they cannot put their finger on it. The drive behind all this is truth telling and justice and as long as people feel they're being shafted.......

 

Have you never stopped to think, if it's wrong in the US, why should it be right in the UK? Just because we have a quirky loophole which allows our legal masters and their banker financiers to exploit this securitisation point to the max DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT!!!

 

For your information, the accounting standards in the UK and US and indeed the world have to be uniform under IFRS, GAAP and the Uniform Commercial Code. See International Financial Reporting Standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Otherwise, it would be impossible for nations to trade with each other because financially and legally they'd be speakling completely different languages. Some local variations will apply but the core principles are and must be the same everywhere.

 

I for one think the successes coming out of the US or any other modern economies must NOT be ignored. There is tremendous value to these cases and the arguments and rulings behind them.

 

There are many different ways to get unlawful debts, including mortgages eliminated. We just need to keep chipping away at it.

[gustavius rex]

l am so very happy reading this thread today. Why? A lot more people involved, more responses and more arguments. lf we now can sift through all of what has been said, both in anger and in afterthought, we may just be able to find a few jewels among all the sand.

 

My first point would be the rather un-necessary and heated response to Sue's contributions by But..mish. l can understand your frustation and anger, but, to attack Sue and her well researched arguments, will not help you or anyone else. lf Sue is able to shoot your and everyone's arguments down, then there's some flaw in the reasoning and rather to vent your anger and frustration on Sue you should go back and look at where you went wrong and how to turn that in to something better and more viable. What is the point in contineuing on a path that will at best lead no-where and at worse to your own destruction. There is always the risk that we all get stuck in one single way of reasoning and forget or lose sight of all the other options and issues, despite it being very clear if you just look that way.

 

The laws and regulations pertaining to securitisation are all very very loaded in the favour of the originator/investor. You go to court and try to reason with a judge on a case you can prove is morally wrong against a bank or other financial entity who has the letter of the law on it's side and you will lose. The government, it's agencies, courts and the entire system are all hand in glove with the financial industry, hence, you and l are only fodder for more riches and that is, dead or alive. Consequently, in order to achieve some form of justice we must act with loaded guns and knowledge of the opponents tactics. Only then can we win anything at all. Our goal must be to win and to do that we must act in concert and not against eachother.

 

The battle lines are drawn up. We know the enemies strategy, We know his armament and we know his support. Why on earth can we not get this package together and form our own strategy that will lead to defeat of the enemy and ultimate victory over the evil. You tell me.

Gustavius

[keithybat]

Hi Guys

Take a look at this investment company www.queenswalkinv.com look at there accounts and directors they seem to hold a lot of uk mortgages

[gustavius rex]

Excellent summary Gus I should also mention that the 'investors' banks didn't use their own money they didn't have any so they themselves borrowed (known as leverage) from other banks using the now useless investment as collateral

 

 

And the money they borrowed, was our money and the money they lost, were our money and in the end, the money we bailed them out with, are our money.

GR

[keithybat]

Hi Guys

Look at page 7 www.queenswalkinv.com/docs/results23092008.pdf

[verycatchy7939]

Let pool our various talents into beating spml/capstone

Suetonius bustthematrix gustavius rex pool your talents and look for a possible legal challenge ,The rest of need to write ring email anyone who will listen to us.Get this in to th epublic domain no matter what.If we stick together we got a slim chance , but we need to stop sitting arond postualting on how bad capstone /spml are we know this already.

Lets focus on the postives and that is othe people have beaten big bussiness

So we going to give it a go or what?

[verycatchy7939]

Hi Guys

Look at page 7 www.queenswalkinv.com/docs/results23092008.pdf

Exposure to Lehman Brothers

The Company has both direct and indirect exposure to Lehman Brothers and its subsidiaries. On 15 September

2008, Lehman Brothers International (Europe) Limited entered into administration. There is still uncertainty about

what this event will mean for its obligations and contracts with counterparties. The Company has direct exposure

to Lehman Brothers International (Europe) Limited via €14 million notional of the HPI option (exposure valued at

30 June 2008 at €1,565,034), and an Interest Rate Swap (valued at 30 June 2008 at €92,288). Lehman Brothers

Special Financing Inc provides the fixed to floating swap in the Eurosail 2006-1 securitisation. At the date of these

accounts it remains unclear if this entity has specifically entered into administration. If swap payments are not

made to the SPV, we expect cash flows for Eurosail 2006-1 to be materially affected until March 2009. Capstone

Mortgages Services Ltd. ("Capstone"), a subsidiary of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (the bank’s holding

company), is the servicer of the loans in the Eurosail 2006-1 mortgage pool. Capstone has not entered

administration, and the Company is evaluating Capstone's ability to continue to service its mortgage loans without

the backing of Lehman Brothers.

 

Lehman info from that hedge fund

[bustthematrix]

l am so very happy reading this thread today. Why? A lot more people involved, more responses and more arguments. lf we now can sift through all of what has been said, both in anger and in afterthought, we may just be able to find a few jewels among all the sand.

 

My first point would be the rather un-necessary and heated response to Sue's contributions by But..mish. l can understand your frustation and anger, but, to attack Sue and her well researched arguments............

Gustavius

Hi GR

I am not attacking 'Suetonius' and his/her 'well researched arguments'. If I was doing that, I would counter each and every point s/he's written about. What displeases me about Sue's securitisation posts in particular is how quick and heavy handed she seems to be in rebuttal whenever anything contrary appears to her viewpoint. Maybe not in this thread, but trust me, in a number of others. S/he has meticulously repeated these same arguments and quotes in a number of places and I think now that the point has been well and truly made and anyone thinking of using the Securitisation argument in the UK legal system, to stop a repossession etc may be barking up the wrong tree. S/he seems to want to have this great debate no one really cares about.

However, there are other avenues which actually achieve the same result and we should be exploring and investing collective resources in digging these out. It concerns me, that Suetonius, with his/er considerable access to legal research material has chosen to use it to further butress and entrench the argument for the lenders. This is entirely his/er prerogative of course.

Whilst it has been helpful to warn people against using that line of reasoning in their cases, it does not need to be continually rehashed as it has been. We now need to focus on the loopholes and injustices that we all know exist.

[keithybat]

I agree with catchy we need a plan why don't we pick a consumer ie watchdog bbc news panorama or Robert Peston blog or FSA and email or phone if we all focus on one of them in the same week we might get them to listen if not the next week do the same to another

[bustthematrix]

Fraudulent mortgages CAN be cancelled or significantly negotiated down.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/realestate/2004120878_realhowto13.html

The evidence is out there. We just need to work through it.

All I'm trying to do here regardless of what anyone says or posts, IS THAT IT CAN BE DONE, HAS BEEN DONE AND WILL BE DONE!!!

[JonCris]

For goodness sakes Suetonius!!! You don't half try! You've been harping on about this sh*te for ages and we all cave in, agree with you and give up! Ok you've won! The argument yes...the debate NO!!! NEVER!

 

As I said in another post, the REASON, WE WILL NEVER EVER give up on these matters is because there are clear frauds being perpetrated on many levels and people inherently KNOW that they are being wronged, even though they cannot put their finger on it. The drive behind all this is truth telling and justice and as long as people feel they're being shafted.......

 

Have you never stopped to think, if it's wrong in the US, why should it be right in the UK? Just because we have a quirky loophole which allows our legal masters and their banker financiers to exploit this securitisation point to the max DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT!!!

 

For your information, the accounting standards in the UK and US and indeed the world have to be uniform under IFRS, GAAP and the Uniform Commercial Code. See International Financial Reporting Standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Otherwise, it would be impossible for nations to trade with each other because financially and legally they'd be speakling completely different languages. Some local variations will apply but the core principles are and must be the same everywhere.

 

I for one think the successes coming out of the US or any other modern economies must NOT be ignored. There is tremendous value to these cases and the arguments and rulings behind them.

 

There are many different ways to get unlawful debts, including mortgages eliminated. We just need to keep chipping away at it.

 

 

I agree & although early days have previously referred to the American situation as eventually being relevant to the UK What's needed is for there to be a link made between American consumers & British ones where there is the same detriment to both nationalities