Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well you could say that you have pictures where the signs were not on the wall where you parked so would require strict proof of when they were erected . But in any case it was dark so even if a sign was there you didn't see as it was not illuminated. Little point in not having signs that can be seen at night though it obviously makes it easier to issue PCNs and pursue motorists claiming they have breached non contractual contracts whilst breaching those same motorist's GDPR.
    • It fizzled out, they kept delaying the complaints process. In the end I believe they stopped charging me for a bunch of services, unsure if it was deliberate or a mistake so I stopped bringing it up. Ultimately we bought a house and moved out.
    • There are so many factors, and local elections are often far more about local issues and people, but the one previously general rule in a general election are that the hard core Tories vote Tory and hard core Labour voters vote labour   Gaza seems to have dulled both the muslim and Jewish labour votes more than the Tories - and I can see why - but do the muslim voters really think that the Tories will do ANYTHING other than talk and then do whatever the Americans say - and thats support Israel whatever they do first and foremost in real terms? Reform has unquestionably affected the Tory local vote - so should affect the GE vote a bit more, but has largely been factored in - reform isnt new in any way - its all Brexitish although there seem to be far more ex 'conservative' core reform/ukip/brexitish voters than ex 'labour' core voters - about 6-8% of the national vote in a GE seems to me. A little up on prior brexitish/faragits scores But the large swathes of center ground voters who decide who wins the election seem to have utterly deserted the Tories in their millions - although they have gone to labour, libdems and greens - and many real conservatives are in limbo despite Sunak being naturally more a thatcherite than most - his party currently seems far less so. Johnson promised much, and many were taken in, just as people (inc me) made that mistake with Farage in the early days - but we now know that they are self serving liars who can't be trusted with anything - although I still think it likely The Liar will be back - but most likely after the GE (60/40) Starmer is lacking in charisma and presence, but others in his cabinet should shine. But Corbynistas could still cause trouble - another group that seem happy to drag everything down if they think it suites   Johnson perhaps could reunite some of the Tory party - but he seems to have numerous criminal and political convistions sitting in the background should he try Lying about giving preference to dogs in the Afghan evacuations - and lying about it Unlawfully proroguing parliament embezzlement re funds and spending (eg flat referb) .. repeatedly Taking jobs before he should after being booted - should lose his PM pension and rights over that IMO the list goes on ad nauseam
    • Hi I am negotiating with my ex (commercial) landlord's solicitor for a debt I owe for rent. This has been going on for a little while and I expect they may go ahead with the court action they threaten. I wanted to ask however, In the event this action goes ahead, I think will have a response pack sent to me from the court, along with the claim. Google tells me that a section of this response pack is a 'Admit the claim and ask for time to pay'. Would this time to pay, if accepted also mean a CCJ registered against me? Thanks
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • 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 1099 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

Ive just come off my fixed rate with Preferred or whatever they're called now. We rang to get our new rate that was very satisfactory thank you very much. They said they would change the direct debit to show the new payment rate. I checked on-line to day and our old D/D has vanished,in its place it simply says Testing-Test with our account number next to it. Iam very suspicious of these clowns as we all are, anyone any ideas what that may mean?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

itgg/itbg/iatwb or whoever? whatever you are doing please keep it up as it seems to be working,1 down 3 or 4 to go?! got to give you top marks,glad you're back,just sitting down for afternoon tea and biscuits, habits of a lifetime I suppose ,lifestyles of the poor and desperate.!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have further info from CH.

CH have now given notice to LMC that they have 28 days before they will be struck off. It will be gone, like SPPL. Notice went to PWC who are the adminstrators of the parent Mable Commercial Funding Ltd. This can be confirmed by contacting Kevin Hughes at CH.

 

 

After speaking with CIB, there is NO legal way, either LMC or SPPL have the authority to do court repos; as there are NO officers in these 2 'companies'. Its fraudulent activity under the Fraud Act 2006.

 

 

As for the mortgages the SPVs will have to register the titles(like the SPPL notice), but the SPVs will then have to explain how they owned the mortgages in the first place. Just like Super said.

That's when all the performance & contract issues will come in like JonCris/EiE/GusRex have stated.

Once the SPVs are exposed, then we will all have the strongest of cases to void the contracts.

As for right now, the courts have no idea that LMC/SPPL repos are illegal.

 

2 down, 2 ongoing.

 

So it looks like we could all get or new years resolution after all!!!

Edited by littledotty27
Link to post
Share on other sites

'I'MTHEGOODGIRL', you are WRONG and should not give misleading information about the absent ITBG?

 

I have further info from CH.

CH have now given notice to LMC that they have 28 days before they will be struck off. It will be gone, like SPPL. Notice went to PWC who are the adminstrators of the parent Mable Commercial Funding Ltd. This can be confirmed by contacting Kevin Hughes at CH.

 

 

After speaking with CIB, there is NO legal way, either LMC or SPPL have the authority to do court repos; as there are NO officers in these 2 'companies'. Its fraudulent activity under the Fraud Act 2006.

 

 

As for the mortgages the SPVs will have to register the titles(like the SPPL notice), but the SPVs will then have to explain how they owned the mortgages in the first place. Just like Super said.

That's when all the performance & contract issues will come in like JonCris/EiE/GusRex have stated.

Once the SPVs are exposed, then we will all have the strongest of cases to void the contracts.

As for right now, the courts have no idea that LMC/SPPL repos are illegal.

 

2 down, 2 ongoing.

 

So it looks like we could all get or new years resolution after all!!!

 

Really sorry I am with Capstone and I hate them so waht does this mean if my Loan was taken out with SPML and I deal with Capstone? New on here what does CH mean?

 

Sorry to be thick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

littledotty

quote After speaking with CIB, there is NO legal way, either LMC or SPPL have the authority to do court repos; as there are NO officers in these 2 'companies'. Its fraudulent activity under the Fraud Act 2006.

 

This is outrageous how many repos have this lot undertaken since having no directors which has been for months.Capstone knew about this as they have undertaken the repos supposedly on their behalf and authorisation and completely illegally.

Millions of pounds and misery is involved here and everone even the administrators has just turned a blind eye,anyone directly affected must contact their mp immediately.

Also lmc is involved in many of the eurosail spvs so how will that lot be untangled.

None of this makes any sense ATTIA is a director of spml/pml/capstone yet for the sake of her simple appointment to lmc/sppl they seem to have thrown this lot to the dogs with all the expense and massive aggravation this will cause and the question is WHY for 5 minutes of paperwork ,thats all it is.

 

HAS ANYONE ANY IDEAS??????

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

littledotty

quote After speaking with CIB, there is NO legal way, either LMC or SPPL have the authority to do court repos; as there are NO officers in these 2 'companies'. Its fraudulent activity under the Fraud Act 2006.

 

This is outrageous how many repos have this lot undertaken since having no directors which has been for months.Capstone knew about this as they have undertaken the repos supposedly on their behalf and authorisation and completely illegally.

Millions of pounds and misery is involved here and everone even the administrators has just turned a blind eye,anyone directly affected must contact their mp immediately.

Also lmc is involved in many of the eurosail spvs so how will that lot be untangled.

None of this makes any sense ATTIA is a director of spml/pml/capstone yet for the sake of her simple appointment to lmc/sppl they seem to have thrown this lot to the dogs with all the expense and massive aggravation this will cause and the question is WHY for 5 minutes of paperwork ,thats all it is.

 

HAS ANYONE ANY IDEAS??????

 

I may be that no one is prepared to be put into the firing line as it all unravels Also isn't it possible the current 'director' finds themselves already in trouble with the authorities

Link to post
Share on other sites

Confused! My loan is with SPPL yet Capstone have always contacted me? Statements have been from SPPL. Our susepended repossesion is under the name of SPPL - so really confused as to what they can and cant do? HELP think im going mad:shock:

Link to post
Share on other sites

jetli

Capstone are the collectors/administrators for sppl they will tell you they are authorised to act for sppl.

Why don,t you put them on the spot and ask to see their written authorisation to act for sppl which will be extremely difficult for them to produce as sppl has no employees!!!!!!!!!!!!you could also mention that you have been told sppl is insolvent and you need to contact their trustee in bankruptcy re your loan.

You have nothing to lose by doing this and in fact there could be a chance that you could offer to redeem your loan for a considerable discount, well worth a shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

jetli

Capstone are the collectors/administrators for sppl they will tell you they are authorised to act for sppl.

Why don,t you put them on the spot and ask to see their written authorisation to act for sppl which will be extremely difficult for them to produce as sppl has no employees!!!!!!!!!!!!you could also mention that you have been told sppl is insolvent and you need to contact their trustee in bankruptcy re your loan.

You have nothing to lose by doing this and in fact there could be a chance that you could offer to redeem your loan for a considerable discount, well worth a shot.

 

 

WoW that is exiting..

 

Mr W

Regards..Mr Worried :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do ask to see their written authority. And if you get one, then ask them exactly who the hell SPPL are when in fact they don't exist. In the meantime, as I understand it, it seems that Companies House are about to strike them out. So phone Companies House to check when the Companies Registrar will strike them off...because

 

If SPPL are defunt, kapoot, gone, no more, do not exist....then there is no legal entity. Gone. Dead. Finished. No legal entity to enforce anything. No legal entity means no legal standing to bring claims against you and (for those of you whom SPPL have a judgement against you) no legal entity that can take enforcement action to enforce their SPPL judgement! And if there's no legal entity, then Capstone are acting for no-one! Hot air, the fairies but certaintly not a legal entity.

 

That could be the end of your problems...the fraudster extortioniser is no longer able to extort money from you...hooray! If SPPL are registered as your mortgagee and they don't exist, well why should you pay Capstone unless Capston prove to you that they are entitled to receive payment on behalf of SPPL...but then, that will be a catch-22 situation for them, especially when SPPL don't exist!

 

Good luck...for the brave...use this golden opportunity

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok back for the new year just in time. Paid my so called dues to the high Wycombe criminals in time for jan ist no doubt to be informed in march April when the next qaurterly is due just how much I have been overcharged in late fees interest arrears etc. I have had a small none existant victory over the vultures but this has taken a whole year of sh1t to achieve. So if the feckers at sppl are well and truly a busted flush and we all now know they are how can we get the barstewards to eff off permanently? I'm Reading the advice above with great interest but I like many others will go down in flames if we stop paying the extortion money. Is there a safe way of doing this?

 

Rambling and non informative as this post has been I will be back to my better self soon.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

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

As always a warm welcome to our guests. CIB. SFO. Do it! I will...

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

Welcome back to the boards super.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

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

Do ask to see their written authority. And if you get one, then ask them exactly who the hell SPPL are when in fact they don't exist. In the meantime, as I understand it, it seems that Companies House are about to strike them out. So phone Companies House to check when the Companies Registrar will strike them off...because

 

If SPPL are defunt, kapoot, gone, no more, do not exist....then there is no legal entity. Gone. Dead. Finished. No legal entity to enforce anything. No legal entity means no legal standing to bring claims against you and (for those of you whom SPPL have a judgement against you) no legal entity that can take enforcement action to enforce their SPPL judgement! And if there's no legal entity, then Capstone are acting for no-one! Hot air, the fairies but certaintly not a legal entity.

 

That could be the end of your problems...the fraudster extortioniser is no longer able to extort money from you...hooray! If SPPL are registered as your mortgagee and they don't exist, well why should you pay Capstone unless Capston prove to you that they are entitled to receive payment on behalf of SPPL...but then, that will be a catch-22 situation for them, especially when SPPL don't exist!

 

Good luck...for the brave...use this golden opportunity

 

 

Quite Also by paying Capstone you (the debtor) could be breaking the law in that you are treating Capstone as a preferential creditor which is illegal under insolvency laws:D

 

If you intend to keep paying them demand an indemnity confirming that they are the true creditor & that you are not circumventing the insolvency laws by continuing to pay them

Edited by JonCris
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi EIE,

 

My personal thoughts on a safe way of doing it is: pay the money into court....or, seeing as they are so very very fond of TRUSTS, open up a savings account and tell them that you will pay the money each month into this savings account and that you formally declare that particular savings account number XXX is money that you (as the trustee for SPPL) will hold on trust for both them (SPPL) as a beneficiary and also you as a beneficiary. Tell them that you will continue to pay the money into court (or into the TRUST fund that you have set up for them and declared your self as a trustee for them) until they have produced satisfactory evidence that they are lawfully and legally entitled to receive the money on behalf of SPPL. Oh, and do mention that you will only pay the money over when you receive written confirmation from an SPPL director and that the trust will terminate the earlier of either: your receipt of a letter signed by an SPPL director, or a letter from SPPL's bankruptcy trustee, or the 2nd Anniversary of the notice of the trust. If by the 2nd anniversary you haven't received either of the two letters, then as trustee, you (as the trustee) can pay the money back to yourself as the beneficiary. Check it out with a solicitor...anyone can create a TRUST...e.g. if you're a parent, then you're probably already a trustee with a Child Trust Account for your kids anyway.

 

Also, if when SPPL are struck off, then as JonCris has mentioned, you must not pay them because by law SPPL's bankruptcy trustee will be the entity you must lawfully pay.

 

In the meantime, who are you paying? If it is not a bank account that is SPPL then you are not getting "good receipt" for your payments. Only SPPL as the so called "legal" owner of the charge can give you good receipt for your payments. Thus, if you are paying into an account called say "Capstone", then without Capstone proving to you that they are lawfully SPPL's agent then Capstone can't give you good receipt.

 

In the meantime, here's and excellent bit of fun

(if link doen't work then youtube "Bank Aid - Do they Loan this Christmas"

 

Hi EIE,

Still hanging on in there with the faith...there's plenty of good people out there especially you. Oh and check out the video...there's so many of us who know what's really going on and sometimes it's good to make light of it....helps maintain sanity in the face of all this corruption.

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

zither

to clarify

1)sppl are in the throes of being struck off the companies house register as they have no directors and the spv to whom they have sold the beneficial interest in the loans has instructed the administrator/collector capstone to transfer the legal title to the loan (ie the charge registered in the name of sppl at the land registry) to the spv(southern pacific securities or whatever) they must notify you of this then the spv must register the charge at the land registry.

2)london mortgage company according to littledotty are on the verge of the same fate and are on a 28 day time deadline from the compliance section of companies house,again they have no directors.

3)the 2 major players spml/pml have a single director but have not submitted accounts since 2006 and are on the verge of prosecution and further action from companies house.Their fate is as yet unknown.

4)capstone and the lenders they collect your payments for ie sppl/spml/lmc/pml (although the reality is they collect for all the spvs to whom your loan was sold) are reportedly due to be heavily fined by the fsa for their practices as were gmac.

The reality is the spvs should all be fined as capstones contract is with them not the originators spml and the like,so it will be interesting to see who if anyone actually gets fined.

hope I have got this right and am sure fellow caggers will amend and further clarify where necessary,but this is how I currently see it all at present.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...