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

[Gallahad]

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.

 

I will endorse that.

G

[enoughisenough]

still trying to find your mortgage securitization transaction,

we can investigate and find problems you may have had with your mortgage,

for securitizaion you may yourself make the case from the data found in our investigation,

we can make cases for ppi claims, and make claims for any dodgy dealings that may have been involved with the mortgage,

our fee is low £250 to gather and investigate then 19% of the money recovered , the process may take up to 7 months , though for a higher fee under priority it can take less

let me know pm if you would like this service

 

regards

 

Just in case anyone was wondering what the fuss was about and the post was no longer there....

[Suetonius]

Come on for £250 you would expect them to at least spell securitisation the english way...

 

Not very professional fmann...

 

P.S there is nothing that company or any other for that matter can do for you that you can't do yourself

[enoughisenough]

Come to think of it....

 

I am now charging myself out at the following rates:

 

£2.50 per random post

£4.00 per post in response to a question

£25.00 per month of unlimited PMs

£20.00 per customised letter (SARS OFT etc)

 

Should be able to clear the alleged arrears pretty sharpish. Although on 2nd thoughts the overpayments never feckin' well clear them!!!

[Suetonius]

Lol

 

Cheap at twice the price EIE

[enoughisenough]

I'll post up my revised tariffs and sundry charges as soon as I've made them up.

[Suetonius]

Remember to charge anyone that is late responding to one of your posts.

[actionnotwords]

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.

 

THIS IS THE ONE,THANKYOU ENOUGHISENOUGH.

 

I was under the impression that the prospectuses for all the Lehman's entities securitised loans concerning Eurosail etc could be found at this link here: http://www.ise.ie/app/specSecList.asp

 

Simply type eurosail or the applicable southern pacific securities into the box marked debt search and voila a whole host of them are revealed all saying very much the same thing.Click on one of the spvs (the end letter D in a box) and you will be able to download the whole prospectus without charge.

An exhaustive list of spvs can be found in your lenders accounts posted on the first link above clarified by the laudable and inexhaustible enoughisenough.

 

Has anyone any news of the bad person I must say I miss his acerbic,straight talking, sledgehammer witticisms,is he still in exile for what amounted to the most paltry of offences?

Edited April 20, 2010 by actionnotwords

[Gallahad]

We will suit ourselves by not paying up front fees to parasites I guess

G

[Suetonius]

As I understand it the selling of pigeons / doves (aka touting for business) is against the site rules

[andrew1]

Wouldn't I just love to have someone acting on my behalf who constructs his/her sentences like that, spellings and attitude, that'd be £250 well spent or should I go for gold and get the expensive fast track service?

 

Suetonius you are a right scream, I'd hate to be arguing with you on the doorstep - not a Jehovah are you?

 

 

p.s.No offence to JH's intended, I have some good friends who are.

Edited April 21, 2010 by andrew1

[enoughisenough]

Since I sort of kicked this off I'd like to finish it off I may . Fmann do you have your firms authorised licence number and registered office address?

[iconoclash]

"the process may take up to 7 months,"

 

ooh, that's six months for general validity of cheques plus one month to clear off then...lol

[AnimalMagic]

Quote:

If its a full body job could be worthy of consideration.

 

Ooo I misread that...

 

I would've thought you could settle a debt for less than 19%....

 

I am assuming that most people commenting on this thread have re-mortgaged post Oct 2004 otherwise why not use s140 - seems pretty potent to me, but little mention of it.

[TFD123]

Has this thread turned into a selling area, if soo i have a 1978 Ford escort for sale:D.

Do you think Fmann (great name) has got the message to go away yet?

This site provides free advice and does it soo well that many people have had good results through here (including myself) without the need to pay outsiders.

If FMann has not got the message yet then please accept this as confirmation.

Keep Up The Fight!!!!!!!!

[enoughisenough]

Seriously...

 

Who would trust anyone with their paperwork even for free when they post massage instead of message?

 

Leaving aside a 1000 other things wrong with this. Dear me. Shoddy, not even amateurish and very definitely on the make.

 

Go and tout somewhere else Fmann.

 

AM

 

To which s.140 are you referring? Surely not the CCA (1974)?

Please advise...puzzled...?

[AnimalMagic]

AM

 

To which s.140 are you referring? Surely not the CCA (1974)?

Please advise...puzzled...?

 

Yes CCA 1974 and it's s140B - my mistake

 

Mentioned earlier here but no further mention...

Edited April 21, 2010 by AnimalMagic

[enoughisenough]

Hi Animal Magic

 

We keep hitting a brick wall with this one. Say a second charge loan was entered into in 2005, but was over the £25K limit for the purposes of the CCA. It doesn't get covered by the CCA 74 or CCA 2006.

 

Is it a loan or is it a mortgage? To me there seems to be a great big regulatory black hole here. They claim (as they would that it is unregulated)

 

Equally there seems to be no mention of this as a risk factor in the prospectuses. They were concerned about "dual regulation" but not about no regulation.

 

I've often though a professional legal opinion was desirable here. Is there any such beast as an unregulated consumer contract?

 

You're right on one thing though. It does seem to be a very powerful basis for challenging these contracts.

 

Thoughts? Sue? I really am confused about the status of such a loan. Was this a free for all gap in consumer protection law? I'm fairly sure there is no retrospective effect to the CCA 2006 which abolished the limit.

[AnimalMagic]

To quote from the quote

The unfair relationships provisions apply to credit agreements whether regulated or not.

[citizenB]

Suetonius and EiE, apologies for the cagbotting you will no doubt receive. Any forward references to the posts that fmann made have been unapproved.

 

fmann, I have removed reference to your request for people to pm you for information. Regardless of whether it was meant in good faith, fmann, CAG does not encourage users to pm for information where a charge is also being requested.

[enoughisenough]

Hi all

 

I just want to look at this again: See Animal Magic's link above...

 

The unfair relationships provisions apply to credit agreements whether regulated or not. The sole exception is where an agreement is exempt under section 16(6C) of the 1974 Act because it is a regulated mortgage contract under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

 

CCA 1974 As Amended states:

 

(6C) This Act does not regulate a consumer credit agreement if—

 

(a) it is secured by a land mortgage; and

 

(b) entering into that agreement as lender is a regulated activity for the purposes of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

 

This is what I mean about banging heads against brick walls. I cannot get my head around this try as I might. Which part of the FSMA 2000 will tell me whether

 

a) Part 8 provisions are applicable for a loan concluded in 2005 over the 25K limit for the purposes of the CCA 1974

b) Whether such an agreement as outlined comes under the FSMA 2000 and if so which are the relevant provisions

c) Is it a loan or mortgage or treated as either?

d) whether in fact such loans fall through a regulatory black hole.

 

You will not believe the people I've asked, including Treasury officials who helped in the drafting and NO-ONE can tell me.

 

Sue says it's unregulated. But with respect to Sue I don't know what that means. I'll probably end up getting a dictionary definition of unregulated posted now.

 

Do such loans have no consumer protections applied to them at all? Is there no recourse?

[enoughisenough]

That's a shame CB as there was quite a lot of humour in those posts and God knows we need our spirits lifting here.

 

A lot of us are being stiffed by the sub prime garbage peddlars.

 

Any chance of lifting ITBG's ban? Real results were achieved against the filth. In any case the catalyst for his ban was a post from someone else publishing private details of Attia.

[citizenB]

That's a shame CB as there was quite a lot of humour in those posts and God knows we need our spirits lifting here.

 

A lot of us are being stiffed by the sub prime garbage peddlars.

 

Any chance of lifting ITBG's ban? Real results were achieved against the filth. In any case the catalyst for his ban was a post from someone else publishing private details of Attia.

 

 

I appreciate that EiE, but we were getting lots of reported posts pointing out the "touting" and frankly we have enough to do already:D

 

Erm, who is ITBG I will investigate for you.

[frettful38]

Hi Animal Magic

 

We keep hitting a brick wall with this one. Say a second charge loan was entered into in 2005, but was over the £25K limit for the purposes of the CCA. It doesn't get covered by the CCA 74 or CCA 2006.

 

Is it a loan or is it a mortgage? To me there seems to be a great big regulatory black hole here. They claim (as they would that it is unregulated)

 

Equally there seems to be no mention of this as a risk factor in the prospectuses. They were concerned about "dual regulation" but not about no regulation.

 

I've often though a professional legal opinion was desirable here. Is there any such beast as an unregulated consumer contract?

 

You're right on one thing though. It does seem to be a very powerful basis for challenging these contracts.

 

Thoughts? Sue? I really am confused about the status of such a loan. Was this a free for all gap in consumer protection law? I'm fairly sure there is no retrospective effect to the CCA 2006 which abolished the limit.

 

Great post EIE, now here is my layman point of view, please correct if it is not so, anyone.

 

People who want to buy a home or property apply for a loan from the lender and with that money buy their property and then that property is owned by the lender/bank until all the loan is repaid right?

 

Now second charge loan whether prime or sub-prime loan money to people who mostly use the money for home improvements, debt consolidation or splash out on champagne and caviar, whatever their reason. Now after the second charge loan companies loan this money they need some kind of security, and that is your property. That's why they place their charge on it in case you xxxx up tomorrow then at least they are safe as they can repossess you and still get their money back provided there is equity.

 

So these second charges on our property's are not mortgages, they are a security that we give so that we can obtain money to spend where we need to, yes? and the majority of second charge lenders will not give a loan unless you let them place their charges. See they knew what they were doing from day one. They also know that they have put the majority of us in a catch 22 position. Were damned if we do and were damned if we don't.

 

But don't despair everyone, where there's a will there's a way out, its just we have to keep searching where that way is:D.

 

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

[AnimalMagic]

 

CCA 1974 As Amended states:

 

 

 

This is what I mean about banging heads against brick walls. I cannot get my head around this try as I might. Which part of the FSMA 2000 will tell me whether

 

a) Part 8 provisions are applicable for a loan concluded in 2005 over the 25K limit for the purposes of the CCA 1974

b) Whether such an agreement as outlined comes under the FSMA 2000 and if so which are the relevant provisions

c) Is it a loan or mortgage or treated as either?

d) whether in fact such loans fall through a regulatory black hole.

 

 

I need to have another look to see if I can offer an opinion, but my current understanding is that the only exempt loan is a mortgage after oct 2004 and that is covered/regulated by the FSA who have stated that they will regulate in accordance with this legislation. I think it might be a good idea to have a separate thread specifically around s140B as it may well help many people facing repossession.

 

My mortgage co has threatened repossession, but since I mentioned s140b they've gone quiet - either their preparing for repossession or they're thinking very carefully about the implications. Given the result in bleman vs bentley I think financial institutions might just be a little concerned...

 

I'm a little busy at the mo, but I'll start a separate thread soon...