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

[Crapstone]

I'm way too short to be Crouch on the field but with these guys I'm rising well above them on paper (not you lot..the companies!) You could be a Beckham ..picking and riding the bones....Sorry couldn't resist that one! Old spice ......hehe.

 

Cole...weak, limp, lifeless.. I'm going off track but a bit of humour and all that

[ryde]

Cole...weak, limp, lifeless.. I'm going off track but a bit of humour and all that; quote crapstone

is he worth it?

No wonder Rooster wants to be Terry scoring on and off the field.

ITBG after being sent off in the opener for fighting, foul language and talking back to the referees is now on a yellow card in the final for putting the boot in and a professional foul.The crowd are on their feet.

They think its all over..................?

EIE

What have you started here !?

Edited March 6, 2010 by ryde

[enoughisenough]

I don't know...but I wish I hadn't.

 

If, as Crapstone says, I was a little harsh I apologise. It was not my intention.

 

As for posts getting pulled I'm very worried by this, especially when they disappear out of the blue with no explanation.

[brassed-off-2]

Standard & Poor's

 

Appoligies if this has been posted previously, but a little bit of interesting reading and some more number crunching here for standard and poors servicer evaluation for capstone jul 2009...

[enoughisenough]

Excellent post B-O-2.

 

Particularly revealing are the following:

 

In more recent times as the economic environment has deteriorated, there has been more emphasis on special servicing, with increasing arrears/possessions and losses in the portfolios. Capstone is experienced in special servicing and has developed proven processes and tools for debt management and loss mitigation.

 

Capstone Mortgage Services was created in 2006 from the combination of loan origination and servicing operations of Southern Pacific Mortgage Ltd. (SPML) and Preferred Mortgages Ltd. (PML), which were wholly owned subsidiaries of Lehman Brothers Holdings PLC (now in administration). Now defunct, both the SPML and PML brands were active in the origination of U.K. nonconforming mortgages for a number of years.

 

We understand that the Lehman administrators intend to retain Capstone and develop and grow the business, by retaining control over the loans owned by Lehman and diversifying into third-party servicing. Thirty-five long-term servicing contracts are currently in place, giving greater certainty to cash flow.

 

CHART 3 (Organisational flow chart) shows that the have a TCF (Treating Customers Fairly) Manager. Yes I bet they do since the FSA started sticking their noses in. Get their name and apply the pressure because they need real help doing their job properly. What a joke.

 

Capstone employed 481 staff as of March 31, 2009. 65% (314) are employed in either customer services (104) or default (special) servicing (210). As a comparison, there was 140 staff in special servicing when we reported in January 2008, representing a 50% increase in headcount in this area.

 

That's twice as many staff dealing with repos compared to customer services...

 

The work environment is positive, with culture-building in place through training, a company newsletter, and other activities such as philanthropy-related events.

 

That's where we've been going wrong...they're philanthropists not the abusive loan sharks we had them marked up as. All caggers should consider a serious attitude adjustment. They're nice people really.

 

Training is mandatory for all employees and incorporates all regulatory and legislative requirements.

.

 

Well at least their training takes note of regulatory and statutory requirements.

 

The primary responsibilities of the compliance team are:

 

Supporting the business regarding all aspects of relevant regulation and legislation;

 

Primary liaison with the Financial Services Authority (FSA);

 

Identifying regulatory, legislative, and commercial impact on the business and assisting in implementing any required changes to processes and practices;

 

You wouldn't know it would you...?

 

Capstone has provided its mission statement, which confirms a commitment to customer service. Its processes are established accordingly and give recognition to the concept of Treating Customers Fairly (TCF). There is a TCF manager/champion reporting directly to the director of servicing, who assists the business with ensuring that fair outcomes are delivered, and there is a steering group that meets monthly to debate issues arising and to maintain consistency.

 

Can we ask for a copy of the mission statement?

 

The general servicing team supports such key processes as indexing of scanned images into appropriate workflows, setting up direct debits and keying failed payments to accounts, and processing manual fees and refunds. The department deals with variations to customer agreements, e.g., lettings, deeds of postponement, and transfer of equity.

 

There we go. Clear as day. The great equity cash grab [problem]. Relieving people of the burden of looking after their own equity.

 

Capstone produced, on average, 3,847 redemption quotes per month in the first quarter of 2009.

 

Obviously we can't know how many of these were people who managed to remortgage away from Capstone/SPPL/SPML/Preferred etc (probably only a small fraction) but on this figure extrapolated across all 4 quarters that in my estimate makes Capstone responsible for about one-qarter of all possessions in the UK. THIS IS AN ASTONISHING FIGURE.

 

With no new loans now being originated, the size of the portfolio has been steadily reducing as demonstrated in table 4. Since our last report, management focus has continued to be on arrears management and recoveries processes, particularly in light of the nonconforming nature of the pools and the current economic environment.

 

April 2009: 412 Repossessions

January 2009: 347 Repossessions

October 2008: 494 Repossessions

 

That's 1200 families chewed up and spat out in the space of six months. Nice work Capstone. Hope you sleep at night.

 

TCF is embedded in arrears management to ensure that all customers, particularly those who have a genuine desire to resolve problems, are treated fairly and consistently

 

Anyone out there with any experience of such? I certainly can't recall ever being treated fairly, despite raising numerous issues with them.

 

As an overlay to the special servicing team, there is a loan modification (LM) team whose responsibility is to assess loans that have either: (i) the potential to go into arrears?say, if a customer contacts Capstone to advise that their income has reduced and that they cannot afford full payments; or (ii) loans that are already in arrears. This team has the authority within a structured mandate matrix to agree modifications.

 

We should write to the loan modifications team and ask what the criteria are of the structured mandate matrix and specifically ask if they can modify 50 loans a month what can you do for me...

 

On Repossession:

 

If a loss remains on the mortgage account post-sale, there is a recoveries team that will ascertain the likelihood of obtaining payment of the shortfall from the debtor. This is done via debt collection agencies (DCAs), of which Capstone has a panel of three. The DCAs operate on a "no trace?no fee" basis.

 

There we have it. Absolute proof that repossession is the beginning of the horror not the end. They will pursue you for years after they have stolen your home.

 

In addition, a review of the file is undertaken to ascertain whether negligence action can and should be taken against professional advisers, i.e., solicitors and valuers. There were 363 new claims in the past 12 months. Going forward, all losses will be reviewed in the context of possible professional negligence claims.

 

Unbelievable...when they have pushed you to the wall they then going after all of the other people in the machine that helped in this criminal enterprise. Even the solicitors, estate agents and valuers who assisted capstone in robbing you of your home have strong reason to be very wary indeed of the blood sucking ****.

 

NICE WORK B-O-2. A big rep click coming your way...

Edited March 6, 2010 by enoughisenough

[ZillaK]

I learnt to play fitba' in Scotland.. or are you saying that I'm so wide on the left that I'm actually still on the bench?

 

...

 

On the SFO subject - it wouldn't surprise me if they don't see the full picture of all this.. totally gutless wonders in comparison to the Feds when it comes to white collar crimes.. then again, what do we expect given the government is in cahoots..

[enoughisenough]

Posted In Error

Edited March 6, 2010 by enoughisenough

[enoughisenough]

A very interesting point emerges. If SPPL are a busted flush and it looks like their strike off at CH is imminent and if they are a subsidiary of a company that have filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in the USA WHO EXACTLY ARE WE PAYING?

 

If I SAR them (again!) where does the £10 get deposited? Would Capstone change the payee on the cheque and if they did so would that not constitute a fraudulent act.

 

Moreover as ITBG said it is a real worry when Capstone just 'emerge' out of the blue and start demanding payment. As Super has said how do I know I'm getting 'good receipt' for my payments. Capstone say ooh but you need to pay us and I say (in my naivety 'do I? Oh ok then). PwC then say why haven't you been paying SPPL and I say I thought I was and then as ITBG says they throw your sorry ass in court and laugh at your suggestion that you thought it was alright to pay capstone.

 

Sced raised this very point. Where is the proof that SPPL or any other of the originators have asked Capstone to collect on their behalf? It's a very reasonable request and no harm can come from making it.

 

The logical next step is to say well if you can't play show and tell I'm not paying you anymore and that's when it becomes dangerous. However given the repo roadshow has been stepped up as in the post above we might get repoed anyway.

 

I have also been thinking a lot about this web of companies all owing each other money and no-one calling it in. This is really puzzling but I think others such as Ryde ITBG? and Super fully understand this aspect of things so perhaps they can chip in.

 

As I understand it if accounts and balance sheets have been deliberately manipulated to conceal large sums of money from potential creditors as may well be the case this is clear evidence of fraud. I know an accountant ( Known him for years actually). Could someone post it all in one place so I can ask him to have a look? This might be quite revealing.

 

You may note that the directors of resetfan have now been appointed directors of the 2 preferred entities in which they are 100% shareholders

 

So why havent they promoted themselves as directors of sppl. There can only be one logical answer and that is so they can lose 55 million pounds worth of debt.

 

What is going on here? Super? Ryde? ITBG? and what does it mean?

Edited March 6, 2010 by enoughisenough

[mrsiphone]

If I SAR them (again!) where does the £10 get deposited? Would Capstone change the payee on the cheque and if they did so would that not constitute a fraudulent act.

 

You could always ask your bank for a copy of the cheque after it has been paid to see if the payee has been changed

[scedminc]

Posted In Error

 

I too have looked an cannot find it.

 

Sced

[mrsiphone]

Moreover as ITBG said it is a real worry when Capstone just 'emerge' out of the blue and start demanding payment. As Super has said how do I know I'm getting 'good receipt' for my payments. Capstone say ooh but you need to pay us and I say (in my naivety 'do I? Oh ok then). PwC then say why haven't you been paying SPPL and I say I thought I was and then as ITBG says they trow your sorry ass in court and laugh at your suggestion that you thought it was alright to pay capstone.

 

wouldn't the accounts statements come into play on this, in that they detail the payments made

[ryde]

eie

you got it in one,its a factually based value judgement can you see anything inflamatory about it.?

A company that is the sole 100% shareholder of another apparently owes this company55million then fails apparently deliberately to comply with company law by the appointment of directors or submission of accounts which are its sole responsibility being 100% shareholders causing the company to be struck off the register and losing 55million off their own balance sheet in the process.Have I got this badly wrong because prima facie this looks worthy of investigation by the relevant authorities.

[enoughisenough]

Morning Chaps......the forwards are playing a blinder but desperately missing the form of Rooney...

[ryde]

I thought it was the shareholders who appointed the directors at agms ,so who are the mysterious shareholders,get to that and you get to the root of it.

[enoughisenough]

wouldn't the accounts statements come into play on this, in that they detail the payments made

 

All they prove is that I've been paying Capstone. If I buy a fridge from Comet (on HP) and start paying currys because they said so I'd be a laughing stock...see where I'm coming from on this? What lawful rights do Capstone have to collect and how do I know that I am getting good receipt. I don't. Simple as...

Edited March 6, 2010 by enoughisenough

[enoughisenough]

I thought it was the shareholders who appointed the directors at agms ,so who are the mysterious shareholders,get to that and you get to the root of it.

 

 

Subject Access Requests are for Joe Public. Use the Freedom of Information Act on Companies House to reveal who the shareholders are. That's what Heather Brooke used to get at the MPs expenses information.

[scedminc]

Here is a what CH says about trading while insolvent.

 

"With regard to your reference to insolvent trading, I should point out that it is not an offence under the Companies Act for a company to trade whilst insolvent. As I understand it, there is unlikely to be an offence under the Insolvency Act until such time as the company is declared insolvent by the courts.

 

There are a number of situations under which a company may trade whilst insolvent. One of the more common ones is during the early years of the company. One of the grounds for liquidating the company is if it is unable to pay its debts. This situation may not arise if the company is supported by a director or its bank. However, trading whilst insolvent is an offence if a director knew or ought to have concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that the company would avoid going into insolvent liquidation.

 

If you have reason to believe that the company may have committed an offence by trading whilst insolvent, or you are aware of any misfeasance by the directors, I suggest that you send a full account of the circumstances together with supporting evidence to :-

 

Vetting Section

CIB

21 Bloomsbury Street

London

WC1B 3QW "

 

Seems everyone passes the buck. What a surprise.

 

Sced

[scedminc]

Here comes another cop out.

 

"I appreciate your concerns that a company may be on the Register for a little time without any recorded directors, before action to dissolve the company is begun. But, the fact that a company has failed to notify the registrar of an appointment does not necessarily mean a director has not been appointed as forms are sometimes filed late. I can confirm however, that where a public complaint is received we immediately make enquiries and start the dissolution process, if appropriate.

 

The Companies Act 2006, Part 11, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1000 outlines the process that the registrar may use to dissolve a company which he has reasonable cause to believe it is not trading. The first part of that process, as outlined in The Act, is to send a letter by post inquiring whether the company is trading or not. We must follow the statutory process and give the company and the public the chance to consider the implications of dissolution. It would not be in the public interest to remove a company from the register if it is trading, has outstanding issues or creditors who may wish to apply for a liquidator to be appointed or take court action against the company. "

 

Sced

[enoughisenough]

So CH proposal to strike off SPPL could be sitting on the list for months...

 

Their 28 Days are up now...

[ryde]

sced

this is the part that must apply here ;the ernst and young opinions give further support to it and the purchase of 25 million pounds wort of shares 3 weeks before having to go into admin by mable and 2 weeks before their parent went bust big time is further evidence.Are they trying to fool everyone by saying they didn't know?! The only hope lehmans had in the lead up was a massive bail out or buy out,yet mable ditches 25 million during this period into entities that are still alive today.

However, trading whilst insolvent is an offence if a director knew or ought to have concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that the company would avoid going into insolvent liquidation.

Theyre still trying to work out the mable admin 18 months on,see the ch listing ,what a mess,wonder who the creditors are and what they have been told.

[enoughisenough]

The only plausible explanation is that they did know...

 

The Fed Bank wouldn't bail them out and made that perfectly clear. Bob Diamond got on a plane and then returned having changed his mind pretty sharpish...BarCap bought the buildings and that was it. They were going down and the smart money knew it...

[ryde]

So CH proposal to strike off SPPL could be sitting on the list for months...

 

Their 28 Days are up now...

 

If a creditor objects to the strike off they keep it on (and guess who the creditors are),I think it may have to be advertised in the gazette 3 times as well.

[scedminc]

So CH proposal to strike off SPPL could be sitting on the list for months...

 

Their 28 Days are up now...

 

Hi would seems from their comments that it could sit there forever if they felt like it.

 

Sced

[scedminc]

If a creditor objects to the strike off they keep it on (and guess who the creditors are),I think it may have to be advertised in the gazette 3 times as well.

 

Hi Ryde.

 

It has to be advertised in the London Gazette for 3 months. So if the gazette is monthly then you are correct.

 

Sced

[scedminc]

sced

this is the part that must apply here ;the ernst and young opinions give further support to it and the purchase of 25 million pounds wort of shares 3 weeks before having to go into admin by mable and 2 weeks before their parent went bust big time is further evidence.Are they trying to fool everyone by saying they didn't know?! The only hope lehmans had in the lead up was a massive bail out or buy out,yet mable ditches 25 million during this period into entities that are still alive today.

However, trading whilst insolvent is an offence if a director knew or ought to have concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that the company would avoid going into insolvent liquidation.

Theyre still trying to work out the mable admin 18 months on,see the ch listing ,what a mess,wonder who the creditors are and what they have been told.

 

Of course they knew but it would seem that like everything they don't care and I am really starting to think they they have no need to care because they probably knew that they would/will/can get away with it because this country and its government are a show of s**t and turn a blind eye. They setup all these different agencies to make it look as though everything is governed etc but when it comes to the crunch they bail out and hide in fear from the criminals. There is clear evidence of this due to the responses you get from all these agencies by passing the buck or coming up with some crap.

 

Sced