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

[not another b----- letter]

NABL

think things have passed you by,big talking point a few weeks ago was the imminent insolvency of sppl because of no directors and this was from info posted by the spv on the net.Would ring oft though as this is still unconfirmed officially.

 

RYDE

I know about imminent insolvency of SPPL, our loan is with SPPL and is a second charge and a regulated loan under the CCA, Capstone as far as I know are not licenced by the OFT, the running of our accounts is probably being carried out using the existing SPPL licence, but if SPPL are insolvent then there is no licence, if this is correct I will challenge there right to carry out the administration.

[ZillaK]

NABL

 

..interesting point regarding consumer credit licences etc.. I've just looked up the date that LPLL filed notice to surrender their licence 04/05/06 & completed 05/06/06.

 

..my question to anyone who can answer please - does LPLL have the legal right to enter into a CCA1974 agreement with a consumer during those dates above?.. also, given that LPLL changed registered name at companies house on 02/05/06, if this new name doesn't appear on the consumer credit licence then doesn't that mean they don't have the legal right to sell loans?

 

ZillaK

Edited January 10, 2010 by ZillaK
adding more detail to 2nd para.

[ryde]

see where youre going nabl good idea,thought you may have missed a few earlier posts and this lot have never been worried about any sort of regulation or proper procedure their ethic is just do it until told to stop which hasn't exactly happened yet.

[not another b----- letter]

see where youre going nabl good idea,thought you may have missed a few earlier posts and this lot have never been worried about any sort of regulation or proper procedure their ethic is just do it until told to stop which hasn't exactly happened yet.

 

 

Only one problem have seen somewhere that all loans issued by SPPL were transfered to SPML, but all correspondance we have received is from SPPL so will use that if theres an argument.

Will let you know tomorrow of any progress.

[not another b----- letter]

NABL

 

..interesting point regarding consumer credit licences etc.. I've just looked up the date that LPLL filed notice to surrender their licence 04/05/06 & completed 05/06/06.

 

..my question to anyone who can answer please - does LPLL have the legal right to enter into a CCA1974 agreement with a consumer during those dates above?.. also, given that LPLL changed registered name at companies house on 02/05/06, if this new name doesn't appear on the consumer credit licence then doesn't that mean they don't have the legal right to sell loans?

 

ZillaK

 

Is your loan above or below £25,000?, if its below it should come under the CCA and the OFT, check your agreement, not sure about the legal rights question will leave that one for the legal experts.

[ZillaK]

Only one problem have seen somewhere that all loans issued by SPPL were transfered to SPML.

 

hi nabl..

 

on what date? 11/03/09? only loans issued by or also including those legally assigned to SPPL?

 

also, what's happening tomorrow? court?

 

ZillaK

 

ps - our loan is regulated under CCA1974 but with LPPL then assigned to SPPL.

Edited January 10, 2010 by ZillaK
adding a ps

[wot2do?]

Dont wish to be the bearer of real bad news everyone spml/pml 6/01/2010 full accounts made up to AA 06/01/2010 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 30/11/07

 

Mind you 2009 september accounts still overdue if any consolation ,check CH.

 

is it bad news ?

 

must not forget

 

"I have absolute proof, from written evidence, that SPML is both balance sheet and trading insolvent.

[not another b----- letter]

hi nabl..

 

on what date? 11/03/09? only loans issued by or also including those legally assigned to SPPL?

 

also, what's happening tomorrow? court?

 

ZillaK

 

ps - our loan is regulated under CCA1974 but with LPPL then assigned to SPPL.

 

Hello Zillak

No not court, going to spend the day trying to stick a spanner in works, one questions when you receive any letters about your loan whose name appears on the letterhead?.

NABL

[not another b----- letter]

FSA Register

FSA REGISTER SHOWS AMANY ATTIA STILL ACTIVE AT SPPL,SEE WHAT WERE UP AGAINST EVEN THE INFO GIVEN BY THE REGULATORS IS UNRELIABLE

 

Ryde

FSA may still show her as active at SPPL, but Companies House tell a different story, went in April last year, jumped or pushed not sure, I said her is Amany masculine or feminine?, not much communication between FSA, OFT, and Companies House.

[ZillaK]

@ NABL

 

letterheads:

 

..in the application pack/agreement/mortgage deed etc - LPLL who are an authorised representative of Matlock Bank Limited.

 

..the letters that accompany the cheque/confirm legal assignment to SPPL are on SPPLL t/a LPL..

 

..the letters that enclosed copies of agreement/mortgage deed/personal docs used in support of application are on SPPLL t/a LPL..

 

..later letters such as statements/defaults etc are on SPML t/a LMC..

 

.. I also have letters from SPML t/a LMC that also state my loan was assigned to SPPLL from LPLL..*

 

..and just a few months after the * letters - documents from SPML t/a LMC stating that the loan was assigned to SPML from LPLL..

 

ZillaK

 

ps - on the consumer credit licence issue I mentioned earlier - I may be wrong but when a company submits CCVS form to surrender their licence they must also enclose the actual licence.. I am under the impression that if you are no longer physically in receipt of the licence then you must also cease trading in activities bound by the licence and to do so is a criminal offence.

[osprey29]

EIE - You asked for the email of the Mail Reporter who did article last Sunday 3rd Jan. Main article featured a repo from Rooftop but ..... there was still a substanitial boxed article headed " Unregulated The Tough Sub Prime Mortgage Lenders - article referred to SPML!! Article actually stated " The current ownership of many such lenders is unclear" and Goes on to say that Citizens Advice etc. suggests these lenders are especially harsh over arrears! Quote from FSA in article says "Regulation doesnt cover the owner only the administrator and the Administrator has no responsibility for setting rates and charges. We support proposals to extend our remit. The report ends by saying Capstone, responsible for SPML failed to answer our questions!! What a surprise. So what does anyone make of this? And importantly, article ended by saying "Do you have a mortgage with SPML, Preferred, Rooftop or Oakwood? Email [email protected]

 

So guess we should all email him and tell him to look carefully through all these pages and Read!!! Perhaps those more "technically legal" can raise some more specific questions with him? An opportunity???

[scedminc]

Dont wish to be the bearer of real bad news everyone spml/pml 6/01/2010 full accounts made up to AA 06/01/2010 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 30/11/07

 

Mind you 2009 september accounts still overdue if any consolation ,check CH.

 

I dont think this is bad news at all because they are not exactly fully up to date. I got my mortgage in 2007 with PML when they were still trading properly, so wouldnt expect there to be an issue with supplying account for this time. I do think it will be much harder for them to supply full accounts for 2008/2009.

[not another b----- letter]

I dont think this is bad news at all because they are not exactly fully up to date. I got my mortgage in 2007 with PML when they were still trading properly, so wouldnt expect there to be an issue with supplying account for this time. I do think it will be much harder for them to supply full accounts for 2008/2009.

 

Southern Pacific Mortgage Limited

Last Annual Return 21/9/09

 

Shares 7750572 all held by Retsetfan

 

Two Directors

 

Amany Attia MD

 

Paul Stuart Chambers (appointment terminated 15/10/09 jumped ship at SPPL same day)

 

The latest entry 6/1/2010 was for full accounts up to 30/11/2007

Full accounts for 30/11/06 submitted 29/7/08 so there seems to be a two year delay.

 

So only one director, (already in a bit of trouble) does not look very good to me, if this lots not dead in the water they should be.

[littledotty27]

1. LMC ltd on CH - proposal to strike off notification(see CH website). Same for SPPL, but not up on CH site as yet, but strike off imminent also.

 

2. Recent accounts of SPML/PML to CH from PWC, are ONLY for their year ending 30/11/07; so 30/11/08 & 30/11/09 still overdue. Prosecution of Attia continues.

 

3. Limited companies can have several trading names, so this is adding to the confusion:

SPML t/as as SPML or 'London Mortgage Company'

Matlock Bank Ltd t/as as 'London Mortgage Company'

SPPL t/as Southern Pacific Personal Loans Ltd or 'London Personal Loans', etc.

 

Check out the actual company registration of each lender and the trading name they each use.

[ryde]

I dont think this is bad news at all because they are not exactly fully up to date. I got my mortgage in 2007 with PML when they were still trading properly, so wouldnt expect there to be an issue with supplying account for this time. I do think it will be much harder for them to supply full accounts for 2008/2009.quote sced.

So they still have 2 lots to submit and are under penalty fine to submit these.What disturbs me is that they're actually making the effort to submit anything. Keeping my fingers crossed that you're right sced.

nabl

amany attia is a woman.

[ryde]

sced

if you got your mortgage in 2007 it should be directly traceable to the eurosail spv if that is any help,you could then monitor the notices the spv posts to noteholders to see exactly what is happening with that particular fund.

On another note why do we have to have guests on this site can't admin insist everyone register,people are posting highly sensitive info here and we all know the scummers are watching and are therefore prearmed or warned and always one step ahead.How can something be done about this,half the time I can't post what I want to.

I bet our lot have got someone full time on this going through all the info posted everyday,you'd have to be a complete cretin not to put 2 and 2 together and tie in the posts to a particular litigant,its like knowing someones case before they've presented it.

Edited January 10, 2010 by ryde

[scedminc]

sced

if you got your mortgage in 2007 it should be directly traceable to the eurosail spv if that is any help,you could then monitor the notices the spv posts to noteholders to see exactly what is happening with that particular fund.

 

Mine was bundled with Mortgage Funding 2008. I originally thought it was Eurosail but our good friends wrote to me with the insurance bull**** and let the cat out the bag themselves lol.

[mollie5549]

EAGLEFORMS

I read somewhere that if you have a repayment plan you shouldn't be paying any arrears fees if this is maintained,is this correct?

will investigate further.

 

Ryde,

 

This is stated at the bottom of the tarriff and charges letter. I have an arrangement in place and have not had any arrears fees added to my account since I have managed to maintain the payments - just.

 

 

 

Mollie.

[ZillaK]

.. quick question for those that have been to court over repo claims with this bunch - is it stated anywhere in the particulars of claim that your loan/mortgage has been assigned from one company to another and notice given?

 

ZillaK

[ryde]

Ryde,

 

This is stated at the bottom of the tarriff and charges letter. I have an arrangement in place and have not had any arrears fees added to my account since I have managed to maintain the payments - just.

 

 

 

Mollie.

THANKS MOLLIE,

Not being in this position didn't know how it worked,so they pile on fees as soon as you get into arrears until they get a suspended repo and or an arrangement.Meaning if you miss a payment you get stuck with an arrears fee every month (which is? ) making it virtually impossible to get back on track and make up the original missed payment,escalating eventually to repo.basically the admin for this costs £50+ per month.?

[ZillaK]

.. so are the fees/charges also secured on the property?

[ryde]

from the previous PWC report on Mable Commercial Funding Ltd, and its confirmation of setting up a new holding company for the mortgage assets;

 

i believe this is it: Lehman Brothers Assets Management Ltd

WebCHeck - Select and Access Company Information

 

it could be PWC will dump everyones mortgages into this company, by creating the illusion, that your existing lenders(bankrupt) have 'sold' your mortgages into this new Lehmans company(incorp.10/11/09), only in name.

 

the majority shareholding is Safaro Corporation Ltd(80% share), 10% by Lehmans Bros Bankcorp of Investments & Securities Ltd(31/10/09).,PWC are restructuring the whole criminal cabal, in order to continue the dispossession of the British people....guess what? all at the same registered address-

.:SAFARO CORPORATION:.

lovely Safaro £billion office block, (google map- 94,Lansbury Drive,Hayes)....

 

 

 

ITBG?

following

the money

 

Think by the look of it the dumping ground/holding company may be spml so pretty close! and good memories of the dead herring.( still under construction ):grin::grin:

Edited January 11, 2010 by ryde

[ryde]

zillak

far as I know its all bundled together and interest added on as well!

 

Does anyone know whats happened to lord caggers (itbg) posts, appears a lot have been pulled.Apart from the crazed ones there was one really good one which gave an indication of exactly what appears to be happening now.

It said something about CH cutting PWC some slack with the current mob so all the mortgages could be dumped into one vehicle instead of being scattered through the group and it looks to me based on what has been occuring as though he was dead right.

Can lord cagger be resurrected ala Lazarus??

If someone gave him a boot the needle might move.

In lord cagger

I trust

wars here

etc

etc

Edited January 11, 2010 by ryde

[ZillaK]

zillak

far as I know its all bundled together and interest added on as well!

 

hmm.. ok.. after looking through my agreement (albeit regulated under cca1974) I find no specific clause that says default charges are also secured..

 

.. it does say that they will apply payments made firstly to default charges, then to interest, then capital etc..

 

..I was told in the past by a debt counsellor that, when experiencing financial difficulties, it is unlawful to make payments towards unsecured or non-priority debts so therefore you can't favour them when priority debts are in arrears or outstanding..

 

..can't find any law to back this up.. but am wondering if they can be forced to apply payments to the secured element first.. and that the term in the contract is unfair because it forces you to break the law..

 

ZillaK

[ryde]

zillak

should think caggers who have been in similar situation can answer this.

Edited January 11, 2010 by ryde