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

[jetli]

Is this just OLD news though? seen all this before?

[Suetonius]

Is this just OLD news though? seen all this before?

 

Not really Jetli, I could be wrong but I think this is the first SPML/SPPL case that directly involves the SPV.

 

Hopefully when this case is concluded and published, it will detail why the SPV is the named respondent.

 

This case could have a significant bearing on future cases involving SPPL and SPML (where the loan/mortgage has been securitised).

 

Which by default may have an impact upon the ability for claims to be brought in the name of SPPL and/or SPML in the future and could also bring into question/doubt cases involving these companies that have previously decided, such as your own.

 

Of course until it is published this is pure speculation and may lead to nothing more than more debate.

[Suetonius]

Exactly ANW, this case will hopefully supply the answers to some of the questions that we have all been asking.

[JonCris]

I understand that it's being suggested in the States that the regulators are getting closer & closer to those who have profited from these what they are beginning to consider are unlawful securitizations unlawful because of the secrecy that surrounds them both in respect of investors AND borrowers

[enoughisenough]

Can anyone post a brief case history of the walker case?

 

I would do this myself but I am diverted by numerous other pressing matters.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

[Crapstone]

On appeal from the Court of Appeal of England & Wales (Civil Division)IssueThe correct definition of an amount of credit under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and whether the 1974 Act permits interest to be charged on a sum which is not part of the total amount of credit, but is a charge for credit.FactsOn 26 March 2005 the Appellants applied for a loan, and a fixed sum credit agreement was made between the parties on 20 April 2005. The Respondents loaned the Appellants £17,500 on the terms set out in the Agreement, which was secured by a mortgage on the Appellants’ home. That mortgage was the second charge on the home. The Appellants are in arrears, totalling at least £40,000, and risk losing their home. On 21 June 2007 a District Judge granted a suspended order for possession of the property on terms that the Appellants made the payments due and paid off arrears in instalments.

 

The hearing date is the 13th May and listed as a 1 day.

[Suetonius]

Sadly this case won't be as interesting as I had first thought.

 

Business Name

Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc

 

Company Registration Number

5456430

 

Licence Number

0572040

 

Categories

Consumer credit

Consumer hire

Credit brokerage

Credit reference agency

Debt adjusting/counselling

Debt collecting

 

 

SPS 05-02 has a consumer credit licence had has since 25 June 2005

 

I incorrectly assumed (always a mistake to make assumptions) that the respondent didn't have a licence....

[pt2537]

no no no no

 

this case is of extreme importance in many levels,

 

dont dismiss it

[Suetonius]

no no no no

 

this case is of extreme importance in many levels,

 

dont dismiss it

 

True but not what I was hoping for...

 

I was hoping that the respondent would be an unauthorised company(in terms of OFT and FSA). As would be the case in a similar situation with SPML SPV's (FSA rather than OFT)

Edited April 17, 2010 by Suetonius

[Suetonius]

It has at least dismissed one myth that has previously been posted in that the SPV will not bring proceedings (not good news)

 

It should also clarify the matters relating to assignment and the title to sue issue.

 

Also finally determine the correct definition of an amount of credit under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and whether the 1974 Act permits interest to be charged on a sum which is not part of the total amount of credit, but is a charge for credit. This of course is important to everyone and not limited to SPPL etc...

[Suetonius]

Ignore this post, not applicable to SPPL

[actionnotwords]

What interests me also is whether the Walkers received in the interim period the required s136 notice from sppl transferring the legal title to the loan to the spv.If no such notice has been served the legal titleholders are still sppl.The significance of this being that that the substituted spv has no title to sue as they are only the equitable titleholders.

This could entail to the embarssment of the spv the resubstitution of parties with sppl being restored as the claimant.

 

1. The Walkers fell into arrears, which already top £40,000. They risk losing their home in the possession proceedings taken by SPPL. According to SPPL's Statement of Estimated Costs lodged in this court a grand total of £100,021 in legal costs is also claimed against the Walkers if SPPL win the appeal.
   
2. For their part SPPL said that, if the judge was right, the Walkers would stand to gain a windfall of over £40,000 and the clearance of the second charge on the Property. SPPL would be faced with the prospect of cases of irrecoverable loans made to other borrowers
   
3. .As extracted from the original appeal court decision made in favour of sppl the costs of these proceedings for the loser will be astronomical for the sake of a £17500 second mortgage,for the Walkers probably certain bankruptcy.
   

Edited April 17, 2010 by actionnotwords

[jetli]

Heres a wierd thing!! Got a redemption from SPPL - no headed paper and gave me the account details to pay into - account name in there name - OK fine BUT it was sent with their Solictitors letter informing me that there is an additional charge for there legal fees on top of redemption and they have givin me their account deatails to redeem the mortgage. On the letter from SPPL (not headed) it states that the figure includes all legal fees and arrears collection fees:???:

 

I will be telling my Solicitors to pay SPPL as obviously there solicitors cannot remove the charge. Dont you think it is all abit strange. I requested this myself as ou Solicitors have asked Capstone for redemption - it will be very interresting to see if there figurs differ and they ask us to pay into there account.

[cher69cher69]

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.

 

 

Just thought I would let you know crapstone never miss an opportunity to suck the last drop of blood out of you they are at it, at every turn.The data info you suggested i ask for will cost me £10.00 lol!!

 

Not to mention that every time I phone sppl or crapstone on their 0845 numbers, they are profiting from my phone calls, so just to make the most of it they stick me on hold for ages and when they finally get back to me I am paying them to give me abuse. Am I insane??? I can find someone off the street to do that for free. lol!! Their isnt a strong enough word in the english dictionary that could describe adequately enough how I feel about these morons.

[TFD123]

Can I just remind people that the cheapest contact number for Capstone is ......................

 

Customer Services Direct Phone & Fax: 0207 532 9527

Switchboard: 0207 532 9000

 

Forget the 0845 numbers

[jetli]

Heres a wierd thing!! Got a redemption from SPPL - no headed paper and gave me the account details to pay into - account name in there name - OK fine BUT it was sent with their Solictitors letter informing me that there is an additional charge for there legal fees on top of redemption and they have givin me their account deatails to redeem the mortgage. On the letter from SPPL (not headed) it states that the figure includes all legal fees and arrears collection fees:???:

 

I will be telling my Solicitors to pay SPPL as obviously there solicitors cannot remove the charge. Dont you think it is all abit strange. I requested this myself as ou Solicitors have asked Capstone for redemption - it will be very interresting to see if there figurs differ and they ask us to pay into there account.

 

BUMP MY POST

[Crapstone]

Just thought I would let you know crapstone never miss an opportunity to suck the last drop of blood out of you they are at it, at every turn.The data info you suggested i ask for will cost me £10.00 lol!!

 

Not to mention that every time I phone sppl or crapstone on their 0845 numbers, they are profiting from my phone calls, so just to make the most of it they stick me on hold for ages and when they finally get back to me I am paying them to give me abuse. Am I insane??? I can find someone off the street to do that for free. lol!! Their isnt a strong enough word in the english dictionary that could describe adequately enough how I feel about these morons.

 

Do it as a dispute. Tell them you want the info and you are not going to pay for it as you believe they had made errors. You have to be very firm otherwise you'll go around in circles with them. I made it clear it wasn't my job to follow up their mistakes and I certainly wasn't going to pay for it.

 

Don't call them..put it all in writing and mail or fax it to them. They lie all the time over the phone. Establish a contact name for you complaints, and insist it's dealt by them and not some numpty.

 

It takes time but I know how you feel right now. xxx

[cher69cher69]

Do it as a dispute. Tell them you want the info and you are not going to pay for it as you believe they had made errors. You have to be very firm otherwise you'll go around in circles with them. I made it clear it wasn't my job to follow up their mistakes and I certainly wasn't going to pay for it.

 

Don't call them..put it all in writing and mail or fax it to them. They lie all the time over the phone. Establish a contact name for you complaints, and insist it's dealt by them and not some numpty.

 

It takes time but I know how you feel right now. xxx

 

Thankyou for your advice hun:)

I will do that and I already said in my last letter to them that I refuse point blank to deal with them by phone and pointed out the reason as being that they lie and make you out to be a liar too. So I want every thing in writing so there is no confusion. In a letter back to me at the end they put we have noted that you do not wish to communicate by telephone, however we telephoned you on an number of occasions today and could not get a reply. Jeeez are these guys stupid or what???

[cher69cher69]

sorry think i should have started a new thread of my own i just got carried away.I am going senile so many apologies if anyone thinks i have tried to hijack this thread, it was not intentional. Cher69:oops:

Edited April 19, 2010 by cher69cher69

[enoughisenough]

Don't think you have hijacked at all cher!

[actionnotwords]

I have received news that the excellent site formerly called capstonewatch has now been renamed for the sake of wider and greater exposure as capstone mortgage services.

The renaming should hopefully bring the site to the attention of the thousands in need of assistance from the behaviour of these gutter scoundrels.

This is the link,please visit the site for all the information you require.It is essential reading and a compilation of all the relevant material contained in these 300 pages and more.

http://capstonemortgageservices.wordpress.com/author/capstonewatch/

 

(copy and paste into your browser)

Edited April 20, 2010 by actionnotwords

[enoughisenough]

Hi ANW

 

Your link doesn't seem to work, but don't worry; with a little bit of digging I was able to find this.

 

About this blog… Capstone Mortgage Services

 

Is this the one you meant?

 

EiE.

[scedminc]

 

Hardly inspires confidence does it?

 

Nor does the grammer.

[enoughisenough]

am not sure what you are implying, i hope its not negative

however, since i started my investigations, i have found the straight forward solution to get the information you want and make a case,

i have progressed to actually taking action,

if you clarify what you are saying and have any questions to raise you are welcomed,

just dont make up your mind before you know the facts

 

sincerely

 

Let's put any doubt concerning 'implication' to one side.

 

I'm stating unequivocally that many people come here for advice. They don't come to be fleeced for more cash than they have already been fleeced of by the sub-prime jackals and fraudsters.

 

If you have gleaned something from your participation in this site, then have the good manners to share it with others FOR FREE as hundreds of others who have gone before you have.

 

I've received and given tons of advice here and I've never been charged, nor have I charged, for any of it.

 

I WOULD NOT DREAM OF DOING SO AND IF I DID I WOULD BE RIGHTLY BARRED FROM POSTING HERE.

Edited April 20, 2010 by enoughisenough

[enoughisenough]

Message for the site team. Rather than move this offensive money grubbing post can I make a plea for its continued inclusion so that the rest of the thread can see it and comment upon it?

 

Much appreciated. EiE.