Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ReuTheo
      EVRi lost my high value parcel - looking for mediation advice and any guidance

      By ReuTheo · Posted

      Hi. I am reading through the full thread and will continue to research. I have come across a reference to a form called N180 DQ in the thread, but I cannot see any reference to this form in my case nor can I see it on the MoneyClaim website. Should I have been sent this form? Thanks 
    • Man in the middle
      Multiple speeding tickets

      By Man in the middle · Posted

      12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • dx100uk
      Erudio/SLC

      By dx100uk · Posted

      and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • HanaK
      Multiple speeding tickets

      By HanaK · Posted

      @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • BankFodder
      Big motoring world/motonovo HP - faulty vehicle purchase on 31/5/24

      By BankFodder · Posted

      Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.
Latest activity

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

littledotty27

By littledotty27
in Mortgages and Secured Loans

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1138 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

  • Replies 7.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

AndyOrch
AndyOrch

Not quite....a shortfall after repossession is mortgage capital the money you originally borrowed. For this part of a mortgage shortfall debt, the lender has 12 years to use court action to make you p

AndyOrch
AndyOrch

Topic reopened

Posted Images

alisono

alisono

Posted
Posted

Little Dotty, Strange, this, I had a run in with the Solictors about repo last year and they actually sent the wrong Terms and Conditions to me, from my solicitor and in letters they terms were dated October Edition 2006, they tried to fob me off with April 2007, I challenged this and also repaid them some arrears so I was only a month and a half behind. All my documents are LMC but on the Land register it clearly states Southern pacific t/as LMC and on direct debits Matlock Bank, although I'm going to check this again as I changed banks from Abbey to Natwest over Christmas so I'll see what this new DD states. When Abbey first took my payments I checked with LMC and they said Matlock Bank was their holding bank for payments, I actually have a paying in slip with Matlock Bank on it somwhere so I'll try and look for this. Where are we with this do I need to challenge the Land registry Office to check this SPML arent trading anymore is that correct?

Thanks for your help, I've read up and it's seems you've had a really rough ride with these cowboys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
alisono

alisono

Posted
Posted

Litttle Dotty,

I checked the link you sent and pasted in the registered company number on my Land registry deeds this is what cam up :

Name & Registered Office:

SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED

ST. JOHNS PLACE

EASTON STREET

HIGH WYCOMBE

HP11 1NL

Company No. 03266119

 

 

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 15/10/1996

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

6523 - Other financial intermediation

Accounting Reference Date: 30/11

Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/11/2007 (FULL)

Next Accounts Due: 30/09/2009 OVERDUE

Last Return Made Up To: 20/09/2009

Next Return Due: 18/10/2010

Last Members List: 20/09/2009

Link to post
Share on other sites
ryde

ryde

Posted
Posted (edited)

alisono

who actually collects your payments and writes nasty letters is it capstone they appear to have many guises and pretend to be different people whats your contact phone number? ? spml is unfortunately very much still alive and bought it would seem both matlock bank,lmc and sppl.So actually own your loan,but your web is a lot more tangled than most.

only way this'll ever end is when this lot are busted out.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites
kegi

kegi

Posted
Posted
kegi

any news on your front think I've put the kiss of death on everyone here,not even any guests!

 

Ryde sorry no I have nothing to declare [and last time I said that I had all my cigs took off me coming back from tennerife

I have just been watching and taking it all in and at the same time reading a doc over and over for days on securitisation, re this suggests that the originator in most cases remains after securitisation as the servicer read that then as capstone :) read that then as if the originator falls into trouble then so does IT

Also points out that the spv cannot have standing in respect of title to sue as it was not part of the original contract something I mentioned before in relation to that US judges view in a recent case over there

 

I do get the impression that no matter what you come up with it will not alter things much .They have for a fact I know registered interests with L/R without notifying the borrower or maybe told some but not others ?

 

Its not so much spooky as it is a Masterpiece OF THE UPMOST DECEPTION

and he that thought it up would be in for at least 8 oscars if they turned it into a film

 

the point you made about SPV being remote from bankrupcy is correct

but not remote from becoming bankrupt :???:

kegi

 

Its the domino effect you need to happen ,trouble is they keep finding more of them than you:roll:

 

PS YOU HAVE GIVEN THEM ALL SWINE FLU [READ THAT AS CAPSTONE ALSO

Link to post
Share on other sites
ryde

ryde

Posted
Posted (edited)

napiernuts in response to above post.

It might be worth contacting CH to see if the director of SPML is still being prosecuted.

 

2008 accounts are only a few months late.

2009 accounts are not late and don't have to submitted for some months.

 

the sole director amany attia of spml as well as other entities in this group was at one stage director of sppl who are apparently now without any directors, but this is difficult to ascertain ? she may be being prosecuted for non submission of these accounts which were last submitted in 2006 and have incurred financial penalties for late submission of accounts for spml/pml of which she is the sole director, who knows its all wrapped in a veil of secrecy.

Could you please give an opinion to the very important question as previously posted, would an assignment of the legal charge and mortgage from eg. sppl to spml attract stamp duty and would the borrower need to be notified ,what would the consequences be of failure to notify the borrower,would this mean that only an equitable assignment had taken place so spml have no legal right to register a legal charge against the property as they only hold an equitable charge due to the non notification and therefore have no locus standi to bring a claim against the borrower on these grounds? the legal charge would remain with sppl who would have locus standi.

kegi

good to hear from you and good to know you've still retained your sense of humour , always the best medicine and lightens the load re your post think you may be right on possibly all counts except found out the b.stards have all been vacinated against all viruses,can nothing stop them.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nightmare4banks

Nightmare4banks

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi All!

 

Another two questions for Napiernuts to kindly consider:

 

1.What is the legal position say of a company immediately above in the hierachy of companies to the ones that seem to have no accounts/directors etc that was insolvent but was either sold,merged or had a management buyout with majority control i.e.51%?

 

2.Would one of the above mentioned possibilities affect these companies with no accounts/no directors?

 

3.If yes,how?

 

Thanks for your input.It is very highly appreciated.

 

As I believe that I have read somewhere that the trust company immediately above these no accounts/directors companies had a management buyout with 51% share and the Investors have 49% share.

 

I will be looking for the link and post it later if I find it.

 

 

Keep up the fight!

 

 

Cheers,

 

Nightmare4banks

 

UPDATED POST

 

THE LINK:

 

Lehman's asset management arm safe from bankrupcy claim

 

http://www.citywire.co.uk/selector/-/news/other/content.aspx?ID=314283

Edited by Nightmare4banks
Link to post
Share on other sites
kegi

kegi

Posted
Posted

place so spml have no legal right to register a legal charge against the property as they only hold an equitable charge due to the non notification and therefore have no locus standi to bring a claim against the borrower on these grounds? the legal charge would remain with sppl who would have locus standi. quote ryde

 

Ryde in the doc I was reading the author states that this is what they do do i.e

place a charge on prop and do not inform the borrower to avoid letting you know what dirty deals they are doing,and of course costs come into it, and that although it is not perfected it would in his view ;)be deemed forceable under equity:(

 

he also talks about if there is to much of a tie between it and the SPV for example common directers etc that this could be deemed a sham in other words it must be seen as a true arms length deal and must not be done on the cheap also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kegi

kegi

Posted
Posted
Notification is required for the mortgage debt not the charge.

 

that would make it more sense to me and why they get away with it .

It leaves you though with the then transfer or sale etc of the mortgage or loan what happens if they [or what can you do if they don't notify you of that]

thanks napiernuts

kegi

Link to post
Share on other sites
ryde

ryde

Posted
Posted (edited)
Notification is required for the mortgage debt not the charge.

What then would be the consequences of non notification of the assignment/transfer of the mortgage debt to the borrower.,would the transfer be invalidated?

Could you clarify the law and the mechanisms involved here for everyone's benefit.

It makes little sense.

1)A RIGHT OF ASSIGNMENT IS USUALLY GIVEN IN THE MORTGAGE CONTRACT ,.if this contract is assigned you state the borrower must receive notification.

2)Assignment of the charge securing the debt in the contract does not require notification?

What is the applicable law here.Surely one must go with the other,if you are notified that your mortgage debt has been assigned you also know the charge has been assigned.The legal charge cannot be assigned without assigning the mortgage debt. ?

You could not have a situation for example where sppl retained the mortgage debt but transferred the legal charge to spml.(then the borrower would not receive any notification)

3)Notification is required to transfer the legal title to the equitable titleholder but not the whole title in its entirety from one entity to another.

4)What are the consequences of spml buying sppl and its mortgage books is there then a transfer of the legal title and the mortgage contract of which in the latters case the buyer should be notified.

5)How does stamp duty figure in these transfers.

We would be all most grateful I'm sure if you could explain this fully and in simple easily understandable terms in the real life situation with regards to sppl/lmc/matlock bank and the purchase of these companies by spml as everyone is desperate to know how they stand and you seem to have a grasp of the applicable law and mechanics , which is extremely confusing to most .

This really needs to be sorted out once and for all.

LD the thread starter has had this problem now for 18months without anyone ever offering a conclusive answer and now there are others in the same boat.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites
ryde

ryde

Posted
Posted

sced

would you know why pml are posting their statement of capital on the CH website,non of the others are and there must be a reason for this,possible sale?

Secondly as all the loan repayments to pml appear to be going into spml's account as capstone have stated pml have no bank account when questioned about this ,its hard to see where this capital is actually held and why they wouldn't have a bank account.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ZillaK

ZillaK

Posted
Posted

hmm... so they notify me that it's been assigned to one company.. and that company bears the mortgage debt..

 

..meanwhile, another company has the rights of benefit and charge transferred to it..

 

..seems to me like a terribly good way to sink the losses but still end up with the cake.. is that what is being suggested?

 

Zilla :)

http://capstonewatch.wordpress.com/
Link to post
Share on other sites
ryde

ryde

Posted
Posted

napiernuts

thanks for the reply although I think most here will be little the wiser.

The question relates not in any way to the spvs or securitisation but to transfers/assignments inter company.

That is; as particularly applicable to the transfers between sppl/lmc/matlock to the company that purchased them spml.

Could you apply the above to this situation,I am sure I speak for all when I say we appreciate this is a personal opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm the bad guy?

I'm the bad guy?

Posted
Posted

"Nappy talk, keep talkin' Nappy talk,

 

Talk about things you'd like to do.

 

You got to have a dream,

 

If you don't have a dream,

 

How you gonna have a dream come true?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dedicated to the men & women

who fought & lost in JAW WARS

 

 

 

ITGG!

coming soon..

check local listings

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...