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

[Suetonius]

Eh? We all love Crapstone (NOT Capstone, goes without saying). But come on guys this is no time for a love in!

 

Now now EIE, no need to get jealous...

 

I am sure they all love you too..

[JonCris]

AT LAST! Contract Performance .............. or rather lack of it ............ Gawd sorry but it's bin hard work to get you guys (& gals) to argue performance .............. what you bought wasn't what you thought or were led to believe it was

[JonCris]

It's like buying a new car only to find that you've bought a wreck & the dealer won't honour the warranty

[enoughisenough]

Originally Posted by JonCris

 

It's like buying a new car only to find that you've bought a wreck & the dealer won't honour the warranty

 

Or...

 

It's like taking out a mortgage for 25 years only to be told after about 30 months "...sorry...no can do - pay up the rest of the contract or we will take your house." Unfair relationship anyone?

 

JC are you still like me of the belief that the EU angle we discussed some time ago has legs? I know it would be an absolute mountain. But that's not what I'm asking. Thoughts?

[Crapstone]

I agree it's no time for a love in..but flattered ..I'm a 'darling'..

 

I don't know if anyone else has done the calculations and I don't blame you if you haven't. The variables and payments would equal a deficit at some time sooner or later, usually sooner and the long term then speaks for itself.

 

Some of the companies didn't give their stats so it's only what the FSA has gathered so far. Capstone won't release anything even though their fees are common knowledge. Like getting blood from a stone...

[JonCris]

Didn't the FSA state that had they known what these securitized mortgages consisted of & how little they protected the borrower they would never have agreed to them & shall not in the future .............. talk about closing the stable door

 

Clearly like most regulators they didn't understand securitization they just believed what the banks told them

[bach]

May be helpfull to you.

 

Regards Bach

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=492122&in_page_id=2

[h8them]

Subbing

[littledotty27]

Had letter from LMC stating that the buildings ins previously arranged by them has come to an end & there is an overpayment of £90 which they will reduce from the arrears.

Even though the policy schedule had to be shown in court,they wouldn't accept it & refund what was owed.

 

But the main thing noted is that the policy schedule MUST note the interest of SPML on behalf of LMC as mortgagee.

 

Does this mean we are NOT in a securitisation then?

[Crapstone]

Little Dotty have you written to them and asked about securitisation? I did..got an initial fob off but then they admitted it and gave the company name and dates. Did you have your own insurance already? It seems common that even if you are not in arrears they WILL NOT refund anything, they only take it from the sum owing leaving the consumer X amount of £'s short for managing their income. A way of grabbing as much overpayment as they can.

 

JonCris, the FSA have known what the risks were for years and how it could all belly up. Any person that is educated in basic economics could have predicted the cycle and what was coming. We have natural cycles of boom and bust..the government are there to smooth them out and act accordingly to prevent them.

 

Too busy taking the cream and the fiscal policies flew out of the window . So much for Prudence Brown and the fiasco Labour have created. A red tape society for all those acting in good faith but no teeth to bite it with. Blame everyone but keep quiet all the papers that show it was inevitable if we adopted the same securitisation ways of the US.

 

They knew that's why they have filtered in various aspects on brokers. A strange comparison but it's like buying a sausage roll from Greggs and being allowed to just sniff it and take a nibble. It has a sell by date and once that has passed it's consigned to the bin.

[Crapstone]

May be helpfull to you.

 

Regards Bach

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=492122&in_page_id=2

 

Thanks for that Bach.

 

I think the key to our cause lies in the failure to protect consumers from 'non-banks' and what lies ahead.

[ohitsonlyme]

Had letter from LMC stating that the buildings ins previously arranged by them has come to an end & there is an overpayment of £90 which they will reduce from the arrears.

Even though the policy schedule had to be shown in court,they wouldn't accept it & refund what was owed.

 

But the main thing noted is that the policy schedule MUST note the interest of SPML on behalf of LMC as mortgagee.

 

Does this mean we are NOT in a securitisation then?

 

 

I dont know how to respond to these thieves but,I have had the same experience with oakwood/mars, and they are taking me to court for a repo hearing!!! so My Judge will hear about it

I sent a Subject Access Request and surprise surprise I got back a copy of their insurance invoice which was £370 less than they are charging me.

 

Also within the SAR no reference to securitisation or who has the legal rights to do what!!

 

Check your policies and dont let em get away with it

 

ohitsonlyme

Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act.

There is no time limit. The

[littledotty27]

I sent a Subject Access Request and surprise surprise I got back a copy of their insurance invoice which was £370 less than they are charging me.

 

Also within the Subject Access Request no reference to securitisation or who has the legal rights to do what!!

 

I have SAR them & got nothing mentioning securitisation or even a copy of the insurance paperwork.

When we initally took out the mortgage with them,we took out the insurance. It was only when we had a fire & came to claim on it that we was told the insurance was for there protection only,that was after 3 months of being sent from pillar to post,because no-one could find any details of us or paperwork.

 

We got our own insurance eventually,but even after requesting them to cancel there insurance they wouldn't until we proved that we had buildings insurance,even when we did they wouldn't cancel it & that was 25 months ago.

So £90 odd pound is way less than what we have been paying...more like £400 should be reimbursed.

 

One question I would like to ask...Originally the mortgage was taken out with Matlock Bank t/a LMC,which we have the mortgage deed as.

As the account was transferred/sold to SPML shouldn't a new mortgage deed have been signed between us & SPML?

if this is the case,could we argue this in court,as technically we have no privity of contract with SPML.

 

ANY ADVICE WOULD BE GREATFULL.

[I'm the bad guy?]

Lil'dotty, all

 

If you are going to court, and have filed your witness statement, stating your mortgage has been sold to the SPV in a true-sale securitisation(eg Eurosail), then you have a chance to set aside the possession. I did and the lender is to appeal. They tried the Pender ploy, but the evidence my solicitor and I had was enough.

 

ITBG?

on air

[littledotty27]

If you are going to court, and have filed your witness statement, stating your mortgage has been sold to the SPV in a true-sale securitisation(eg Eurosail), then you have a chance to set aside the possession. I did and the lender is to appeal. They tried the Pender ploy, but the evidence my solicitor and I had was enough.

 

ITBG

I dont know if it has been securitised as it states in there letter to put the insurance in the interest of SPML.

Not been to court for awhile but im sure it won't be long before they do,for the sake of £12.68.

Other than that we feel the only thing we can get them on is not being in privity of contract with them as we didn't sign the deeds with them.

[I'm the bad guy?]

LD,

 

What did your insurance documents say before they asked you to put it to SPML? Note, as SPML is defunct, it does not matter if they ask this of you now, as they have nothing to lose. They are trading insolvently, but PWC won't inform CH, that's why CH are pursuing legal action against the directors/SPML for them. If SPML reveal its accounts it will directly have to go into administration.

 

In my SAR, it disclosed 24hrs after SPML sold the mortgages to Eurosail, Capstone, wrote to my insurance company to inform them to change the mortgagee to Eurosail(on their letterhead). The Judge thought this was important evidence.

 

ITBG?

[littledotty27]

The insurance stated London Mortgage Company,but the address stated " Dummy Dummy Dummy" (you can't help but laugh at that,because it's about right) Thats why they carried on using there insurance company & wouldn't accept ours...because of the address & stating they never received a copy.

[I'm the bad guy?]

LD,

 

Looks like a right mess, was'nt LMC a trading name of SPML?

 

In any event, you will have to go right back to when you went to court, and SuperSleuth was helping you with the Matlock bank sale to LMC?

 

ITBG?

[gustavius rex]

I have SAR them & got nothing mentioning securitisation or even a copy of the insurance paperwork.

When we initally took out the mortgage with them,we took out the insurance. It was only when we had a fire & came to claim on it that we was told the insurance was for there protection only,that was after 3 months of being sent from pillar to post,because no-one could find any details of us or paperwork.

 

We got our own insurance eventually,but even after requesting them to cancel there insurance they wouldn't until we proved that we had buildings insurance,even when we did they wouldn't cancel it & that was 25 months ago.

So £90 odd pound is way less than what we have been paying...more like £400 should be reimbursed...................

 

 

Hi LittleDotty,

 

two questions you need to answere:

1. Was London Mortgage Company bought up and the mortgage books absorbed by SPML or is LMC still a working legal private limited company?

 

2. lf the mortgage books were sold or transferred to SPML from LMC, did they inform you about the sale/transfer of the legal title of your mortgage and if so did you object?

 

As for insurances, why are you forced to insure through your mortgagee? l've never understood this issue as they cannot force you to do so except if your mortgage contract agreement expressively states so. lf you want cheap and excellent insurance for your homes at less than £300.00 a year, PM me.

Gustavius

[littledotty27]

Was London Mortgage Company bought up and the mortgage books absorbed by SPML or is LMC still a working legal private limited company?

I don't know if it was bought up or transferred over. As far as I am aware LMC is still working.

 

lf the mortgage books were sold or transferred to SPML from LMC, did they inform you about the sale/transfer of the legal title of your mortgage and if so did you object?

 

We didn't get any information that LMC had sold/transferred to SPML,they state a letter was sent,but nothing was received. The court even asked for the transfer of assignment,which they failed to produce.

 

As for insurances, why are you forced to insure through your mortgagee? l've never understood this issue as they cannot force you to do so except if your mortgage contract agreement expressively states so.

It stated on the key facts we would be charged an amount if we didn't take out insurance with them. Premiums are included within the cmi.

There insurance has now come to an end & they want proof that we are insured,which we have presented in court,but they are still not happy with what we have provided.

[h8them]

Does lmc now matter

 

Im the bad guy ? and his solicitor has the evidence to stop spml repossessions. spml and the others can now all jog on.

 

you the man Im the bad guy ?

[I'm the bad guy?]

it ain't over yet, they appealed with a circuit Judge hearing, next month.

 

their maggotfarmer in court said, they did not need to disclose documents under CPR31.6, for a possession hearing?

 

don't know where that came from, my solicitor said it was nonsense. So still waiting for the disclosure of the mortgage sale document.

 

 

ITBG?

holding breath

Edited October 23, 2009 by I'm the bad guy?

[littledotty27]

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/consumer_credit/oft192v2.pdf

 

Come across this..so much for not coming under the CCA Act.

[Crapstone]

As far as I remember LMC was one of the first to close it's doors as a spin-off from SPML. Business was passed to SPML but all still goes through Capstone or the other admin. company (Oakwood?) as they are now just names.

 

As for the insurance....they charge you for not taking out their own insurance (which only cover them) and for checking yours is suitable(?), has the insured sum on and their marked interest ( either SPML or someone you haven't heard of). The 'fee' is around £100 and you have to pay a similar arrangement fee even if they put in place block insurance to protect only their interest.

 

They are never happy with any insurance you provide and will delay and delay until they have taken enough premiums and arrangements fees. They will then only refund these back to the mortgage account and not to the account they were taken from. Easy money and a way of clawing back arrears or adding charges.

 

In all 6 years of being with them they have never made it easy to submit insurance and we go through the same comical routine of sending it at least 3 times and they lose it, deny it's validity...This year they have excelled themselves and asked for it 2 months early ..or else..

[enoughisenough]

Originally posted by Crapstone

 

They are never happy with any insurance you provide and will delay and delay until they have taken enough premiums and arrangements fees. They will then only refund these back to the mortgage account and not to the account they were taken from. Easy money and a way of clawing back arrears or adding charges.

.

 

Hi Crapstone and others. This is yet another example of why we would never have got involved with these feckers. I thought there were laws and regulators to stop this kind of abuse going on? My mistake then.

 

They claim, point blank, there is no insurance on my account. They've never mentioned it, never made a seperate charge for it and they have never ever taken a single penny from me to chip in towards some clandestine block policy I know nothing about.

 

Still doesn't account for where the money is going though does it? Because the principal loan amount is never amortized despite the loan being a repayment loan.

 

Oh and don't fall for the haven't they gone quiet BS. They may have done for some of us but they are still very active in the repo business.