Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • 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
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1123 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

I see the newly appointed directors of sppl are the same as Resetfan the parent of sppl namely one J.Brereton and R.Harper.

Which tends to lead one to believe that the submission of accounts and appointment of directors was compelled rather than a voluntary action or why were these functions simply not carried out before.

Can anyone please kindly post up the latest sppl accounts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou for the information enoughisenough I was unaware of the full extent of the FSA investigation.

In this particular case it would raise very interesting issues.

We are aware that capstone contracturally administer mortgages on behalf of their various client spvs and have yet to see such evidence to support such a role from the originator/lender for whom they also claim to act.

If indeed both lender and administrator are penalised the question then begs to be asked should the same apply to the hidden spv with whom the administrator has a fully evidenced (from the spvs own prospectus) contractural obligation.

Another issue of note is that capstone are applying charges from an apparent newly formulated table of tarifs in the name of the lender.

As the lender is dormant and was/is in 2 cases without any personnel who has actually constituted these new charge structures?

What I am attempting to establish is the direct relationship and instruction between capstone and the spvs rather than capstone and lender ,such proof may render the mortgage contract unenforceable (control and instruction being exerted by a non FSA regulated entity)

I hope you can see the thrust of this argument and would appreciate any comments.

 

Hi ANW

 

I certainly do see the thrust of your argument and agree completely with your analysis. It most definitely throws up some very interesting questions. Insofar as GMAC-RFC and Kensington are concerned I believe that these were originator/administrators. This is not the case with Capstone who are to all intents and purposes a TPA. We know that they do the SPV's bidding so IF the FSA WERE to haul them over the coals for their long standing outrageous consumer abuses and unlawful possessions who would ultimately carry the can?

 

May I humbly suggest that the prospectus offers a significant clue...and that clue points to a non recourse obligation of the issuer...

 

PS. I believe a posting and analysis of the accounts is imminent...

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon enoughisenough(wasn't that the title of a song by Gloria Gaynor, Chumbawamba,Donna Summer?)

Is there not also a non recourse clause to the originator/lender?

Once the mortgage is originated by the lender the" equitable title" is the sold to the spv and administered by capstone under the mortgage administration agreement.

In effect the originators/lenders functions appear to cease once the equitable title is sold to the spv and the legal title is held by them on trust for the spv,that is my understanding please correct me if I am wrong.

I will wade through the prospectus again to make sure.

Edited by actionnotwords
Link to post
Share on other sites

...Ah Chumbawamba.

 

Tubthumping

 

"we'll be singing, when we're winning; we'll be singing, when we're winning"

 

"I get knocked down, but I get up again. You ain't ever gonna keep me down..."

 

Not too keen on Gloria Gaynor, though that might upset a few people...

 

Remember the bucket of water over 2 Jabs Prescott at the Brits? Wouldn't it be great if Hector got a bit of them apples...?

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Ah Chumbawamba.

 

Tubthumping

 

"we'll be singing, when we're winning; we'll be singing, when we're winning"

 

"I get knocked down, but I get up again. You ain't ever gonna keep me down..."

 

Not too keen on Gloria Gaynor, though that might upset a few people...

 

Remember the bucket of water over 2 Jabs Prescott at the Brits? Wouldn't it be great if Hector got a bit of them apples...?

Thing is you can all keep the wolves from the door my Husband being self employed cant hence our position. I will stay with you all but we seem to be on our own. I wanted to carry on fighting after 5 years but CANT thats it i'm taken had enough just going to let it go----my home for 17 years- oh well hope you all get better than me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jet Li

 

I think you must think we are all middle class social workers or something like that doing this in our spare time as some kind of hobby. We are obviously here to act as counsellors and psychotherapists to everyone's wish and whim, like a government help line. NOT.

 

We give up our time and our efforts month in month out. We get deflated. We lose sight of our own battles and sometimes (YES) we neglect them when we shouldn't, because we are too busy here, or behind the scenes, trying to get things done. AND YES, WE ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO STAND ON THEIR OWN TWO FEET, SO THEY DON'T SCREAM WHAT ABOUT ME EVERY TIME THERE IS A LITTLE IN JOKE BETWEEN POSTERS.

 

We may keep the wolves from our door and then again we may not. Many of us simply do not know how it will play out yet. And yes it's true many others already do know.

 

Some of us don't have grown up kids. Some of us have nippers to care for. Some of us haven't had the luxury of being stable in the same house for the seventeen years you mention in every post.

 

Some of us are working round the clock on behalf of many others, sometimes wishing why the hell we had bothered. Not because we wish we hadn't but because having done so, we are then chastised for making light of something irrelevant to you against the backdrop of your unfortunate circumstances.

 

I don't know why you decided to sell and it's hardly the fault of myself or ANW that you decided to do so, after receiving a significant amount of help in fighting the orders against you. That's your decision though. And no amount of carping about a few comments made in humour is going to change that.

 

If two people on the site can't exchange a little bit of banter (equating to just three posts by the way) because it offends you and doesn't address YOUR own concerns then fine. Let it go...It's not MY HOUSE of 17 years. How's that for selfish individualism?

Edited by enoughisenough

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been to court AGAIN today,was adjourned.

LMC have to explain there negligence & breach of contract.

Judge is appalled,he stated that not one bit of contract made sense & contradicted itself.

 

I have now been in touch with local & national newspapers, I intend to let the whole of the UK of there dirty tactics.

 

Is there anyone out there who has been in the same boat & who would be willing to talk to the press?

Hi Littledotty27

You can count me in I have unfortunately got these barstewards as my second mortgage company and they have been absolute tw-ts. They are rude intimidateting abusive and downright obnoxious. Put it this way a couple of times I have wished the person i had been talking to was right there infront of me because I would have punched his lights out and I am not a violent person but these animals make my blood boil. They twist what you say, they lie, they break every rule in the book to suit themselves and as far as following the fsa guidlines well you may as well wipe your ass on them as far as sppl/capstone are concerned. Because they think they are above the law and everyone else for that matter.

So if you want me I am here!!!! I would love the opportunity to watch them get it both barrels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest MamaG1

Cheer69 cheer69

 

I am so up for the press thing.

 

They are such bastards and yes they do think they sre above the law, but only because no one has fought them all the way yet.

 

They are big and have loads more money to fight, but if we are determened to stand for fair justice to the vulnerable borrowers from this cowboy lenders and backs, then what are we waiting for.

 

W ehave to stand up and fight for what is righty our right.

 

They have been backing on borrowers getting so stressed out and then giving up to them.

 

What happened to all the capitalism re re re... this all just doesnt add up.

 

This guys think they are the law themselfs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest MamaG1

Jetli,

 

May I ask you why did you sell pls having had so much help as mentioned above by enough is enough.

 

Was that you only option then?? I am a bit confused, as I am in a bit if a similar position myself, though different. I have not follwed yr story all through, but presumably, you were forced to sell in order to pay off your lender??.

 

Was there no other options to you at all pls.

 

Apologies I know this is a very sensitive issue, but now that you have sold what do you to do as per a roof over your head and your family??.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jet Li

 

I think you must think we are all middle class social workers or something like that doing this in our spare time as some kind of hobby. We are obviously here to act as counsellors and psychotherapists to everyone's wish and whim, like a government help line. NOT.

 

We give up our time and our efforts month in month out. We get deflated. We lose sight of our own battles and sometimes (YES) we neglect them when we shouldn't, because we are too busy here, or behind the scenes, trying to get things done. AND YES, WE ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO STAND ON THEIR OWN TWO FEET, SO THEY DON'T SCREAM WHAT ABOUT ME EVERY TIME THERE IS A LITTLE IN JOKE BETWEEN POSTERS.

 

We may keep the wolves from our door and then again we may not. Many of us simply do not know how it will play out yet. And yes it's true many others already do know.

 

Some of us don't have grown up kids. Some of us have nippers to care for. Some of us haven't had the luxury of being stable in the same house for the seventeen years you mention in every post.

 

Some of us are working round the clock on behalf of many others, sometimes wishing why the hell we had bothered. Not because we wish we hadn't but because having done so, we are then chastised for making light of something irrelevant to you against the backdrop of your unfortunate circumstances.

 

I don't know why you decided to sell and it's hardly the fault of myself or ANW that you decided to do so, after receiving a significant amount of help in fighting the orders against you. That's your decision though. And no amount of carping about a few comments made in humour is going to change that.

 

If two people on the site can't exchange a little bit of banter (equating to just three posts by the way) because it offends you and doesn't address YOUR own concerns then fine. Let it go...It's not MY HOUSE of 17 years. How's that for selfish individualism?

 

A little harsh but I guess it has to be said that you have to act yourself and not rely on it being done for you. Things are going on in the background for the good of us all..I could walk away..I got my charges back.but I won't. Not until these bar stewards pay up. Kensingtons fine is a joke and I hope it's taken further....

 

I've had 12 years in my house..pass me the petrol and I'll provide the match. That's how much it means to me after SPML dug their claws in. It's not a home, it's a battleground.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks MamaG1

Well todaY I decided right you ****s I have had enough of your crap and I am not going to take it anymore. SO its War!!

I dont care now its do or die, I really have got to that point. I am sick of trying to get straight with them and all they do is put me further into debt with there interest and charges.

They have a susp repo on my house from 2007 and i have never missed a payment the court ordered me to pay until about 6 months ago i missed a payment because basically didnt have any money. I offered to clear this over the next 3 months over and above the original court agreement. they said ok but now its clear they want me to keep on payingthe extra and because i only paid it to clear the one payment and get the original agreement back on track they are saying that this was a new agreemnet and I am now in default . can you believe these arseholes well just posted a three page letter saying refund my charges and court costs and capitalise my arrears like you should have done in the beginning or ELSE !!!! oooooo I am sssooooo mad!!! will let you know the outcome i have given them 7 days. lol!! this is how i feel at the moment - (:mad::confused::p) well ya gotta put some humour into it or you would just crack up !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jetli,

 

May I ask you why did you sell pls having had so much help as mentioned above by enough is enough.

 

Was that you only option then?? I am a bit confused, as I am in a bit if a similar position myself, though different. I have not follwed yr story all through, but presumably, you were forced to sell in order to pay off your lender??.

 

Was there no other options to you at all pls.

 

Apologies I know this is a very sensitive issue, but now that you have sold what do you to do as per a roof over your head and your family??.

 

Firstly sorry if I upset anyone that was not my intention.

 

Answer to the above is yes it was our only option. Asked both lenders to cap arrears or pay interest only - Both said NO. Tried to get on the Mortgage Rescue Scheme - both lenders said no. When we were issued with a 7 day eviction order (which thanks to all on here we suspended) we decided having been packing for what seems like weeks that we could never have done that if they had won.

 

Lastly we are trying to rent but as everyone knows if your credit is bad then they appear to ask for about 6 months up-front. Hope after redemtion figures come in we will have that.

 

Hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly sorry if I upset anyone that was not my intention.

 

Answer to the above is yes it was our only option. Asked both lenders to cap arrears or pay interest only - Both said NO. Tried to get on the Mortgage Rescue Scheme - both lenders said no. When we were issued with a 7 day eviction order (which thanks to all on here we suspended) we decided having been packing for what seems like weeks that we could never have done that if they had won.

 

Lastly we are trying to rent but as everyone knows if your credit is bad then they appear to ask for about 6 months up-front. Hope after redemtion figures come in we will have that.

 

Hope this helps

 

Kensington -V- Capstone Capstonewatch's Blog

extracted from the above site which is an excellent point of reference for all information relating to these companies , to the credit of the originator.

FSA findings in relation to the Kensington case.

In particular, in some cases the Firm:

(1)
failed to discuss with customers all options available to them
with regard to the method of repaying a payment shortfall, such as a switch in repayment type from repayment to interest only, an extension of the mortgage term, or capitalisation of arrears;

(2)
failed to adopt a reasonable approach to the time over which the payment shortfall should be repaid
taking into account the customer’s individual circumstance, such as allowing the customer to arrange repayments over a number of years or indeed the remaining term;

(3)
failed to assess whether the customer’s offer of a regular payment was sustainable
; and

(4)
repossessed properties without first exhausting all attempts to resolve the arrears.

 

Jetli

Your problems caused by these lenders appear to be exactly part of the reason the FSA fined Kensington,it may be of some use to contact them and submit your own story as an example of the way you have been treated.If they applied the same principles to the likes of Capstone you would not be in the position you are in now.

I am attempting with others to draft a template letter when work commitments allow on this very subject of which your own personal tradegy is a prime example,there may be compensation which will never be enough for the ruination these people have wreaked,if the FSA simply applied the same principles.

There is of course the option to contact your lenders quoting the FSA findings and asking them that in view of these findings and the fact that you have a regulated agreement are they prepared to discuss the above options or do they wish you to refer their refusal of discussion directly to the FSA who will then no doubt implement similar punishment.

 

Edited by actionnotwords
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I was just checking through some paperwork and agreements I have and it states at the bottom of SPPL loan statement that southern pacific personal loans ltd is an appointed representative of southern pacific mortgage ltd mortgage ltd which is authorised and regulated by the financial services authority.

It also says on the bottom of all capstone letters that they are too authorised and regulated by the FSA.

 

Or am I mistaken if I am then I am sorry, maybe you have a different type of loan than I do. Just thought I would put what it says on mine it may be helpful to someone.

Whatever!!! I think I have the beginning of dementia:):-?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks MamaG1

Well todaY I decided right you ****s I have had enough of your crap and I am not going to take it anymore. SO its War!!

I dont care now its do or die, I really have got to that point. I am sick of trying to get straight with them and all they do is put me further into debt with there interest and charges.

They have a susp repo on my house from 2007 and i have never missed a payment the court ordered me to pay until about 6 months ago i missed a payment because basically didnt have any money. I offered to clear this over the next 3 months over and above the original court agreement. they said ok but now its clear they want me to keep on payingthe extra and because i only paid it to clear the one payment and get the original agreement back on track they are saying that this was a new agreemnet and I am now in default . can you believe these arseholes well just posted a three page letter saying refund my charges and court costs and capitalise my arrears like you should have done in the beginning or ELSE !!!! oooooo I am sssooooo mad!!! will let you know the outcome i have given them 7 days. lol!! this is how i feel at the moment - (:mad::confused::p) well ya gotta put some humour into it or you would just crack up !!!

 

Typical..you caught up with the payments and they didn't enforce any breach of the court order. Don't get your hopes up that they will reply in the way you want them to first time around. Be prepared for a fight with the ignorant f'''''s. The court costs is the hard part to get back, but it can be done if you show it shouldn't have gone that far. Ask them to provide you with the receipts. SAR everyone to get the info. you need against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from one of the GE threads but should be of interest here too..

 

The Supreme Court - Case details

 

 

What sparked my interest was the case name:

 

Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc (in substitution for Southern Pacific Personal Loans Limited) (Respondent)

v

Walker and another (Appellants)

 

 

Respondent name: Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc

 

 

Edited by Suetonius
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from one of the GE threads but should be of interest here too..

 

The Supreme Court - Case details

 

 

What sparked my interest was the case name:

 

Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc (in substitution for Southern Pacific Personal Loans Limited) (Respondent)

v

Walker and another (Appellants)

 

 

Respondent name: Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc

 

 

 

Thankyou for this post Suetonius and it is good to see you back.From my reading of this of which I of course will stand corrected sppl sold the equitable title of the loan to sps 05-2.

Because of the iminent demise of sppl at the relevant time this appeal was coming to trial (no directors, no accounts) the legal title to the loan must have been transferred to the spv from sppl, otherwise the spv would have no locus standi in appearing in sppl's place as it would only be the equitable titleholder to the loan.

The significance and importance of this is that it was a blueprint of what would have occurred wholesale had not sppl rose and resurrected itself like lazarus to all the loans it owned.

As has been said so many times before the loan debt does not disappear with the demise of the originator / lender it passes to the spv who in the case of mortgage loans I believe must issue a s136 LOP Act 1925 notification to the borrower for the legal title to pass and be legally effective.I wonder if this was done in this case?

Other tools are required to fight these lenders this helps in attrition of their assets but it is not the whole answer.

It will be interesting to follow this case and see what new issues it may raise concerning these matters and questions of contract and title to sue ,if the walkers have not received the s136 the spv does not have title to sue! as sppl are still the legal titleholders.

This substitution of parties and sppl's ressurection do tend to support the theory that sppl were COMPELLED to produce accounts and appoint directors.

Edited by actionnotwords
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...