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

[actionnotwords]

Seen all this and sent to Solicitor - she is becoming not intersted!!

probably too much work and too complicated and beyond her comprehension

 

There are of course the parent RESETFAN and 100% shareholders signed 11/02/10 accounts particularly the directors report on page 4 clearly showing SPPL has no directors and will therefore not demand the debts owed to it of 55million yet in contrast your debt to sppl has to be paid.

The link:http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/accounts/Reset%20Fan%20Accounts.pdf

 

ONE RULE FOR ONE........and yet more creative and illegal accounting.

Edited March 26, 2010 by actionnotwords

[enoughisenough]

Signing off

 

Busier than most sceptics realise...

[TFD123]

All

Maybe i missed something here as i am still waiting on replys from SPML/Capstone i.e.SAR before i can post more, but thought i would mention that i dont pay any charges for being in arrears whilst i have an arrangement in place.

[enoughisenough]

Hi MWSPML

 

That's nice of them. I wish my performing arrangement immunised me from their charges which they apply whenever they feel like applying!

 

Toss3rs

[scedminc]

 

Toss3rs

 

Indeed

 

Sced

[actionnotwords]

Reflecting on the various posts of yesterday concerning the role of Capstone and their apparent current status of authorisation and reading through many many posts it has been stated by many participants on this site that their mortgage contract contains no condition by which their mortgage is serviced by Capstone.

Capstone in fact have an administration contract with the spvs as detailed in the respective prospectus this is not an agreement with the lender.It is clearly authorisation to collect money and administer the mortgage on behalf of the spv.

 

The simple answer is to just write to Capstone and ask them to produce written authorisation from your lender as you have never received directly anything from your lender that they have such authorisation and you are concerned about the destinatiom of your repayments and capstones ability to give a valid receipt given the apparent precarious position of your lender.

[enoughisenough]

ANW

 

This is correct. BUT. Consider this.

 

Just because it says that in the prospectus does not mean that they have observed the formalities and actually have a valid and legally binding Mortgage Administration/ Service contract. If they had they would just say...here it is...shut up and pay us...BUT THEY DON'T DO THEY? What are they hiding/afraid of? Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

[enoughisenough]

Sced...YOU'RE IN! Check your mail...!

[actionnotwords]

Mortgage account no:.............. ................................... . name

Lender ....................................................................... address

....................................................................................date

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am greatly concerned about the status of my lender whom I believe was a wholly owned subsidiary of the now bankrupt Lehman Brothers.It has been impossible to contact my lender directly by either telephone or post .Mail I received indicates that you appear to have been acting for my lender for some considerable time but I have never received any signed and written confirmation from ny lender stating that you are fully authorised to act on their behalf. Until you can supply me with such written authorisation it is impossible to understand how you can supply a legally valid receipt for all my repayments.Would you therefore by return please supply me with full current written authorisation directly from my lender that you are able to receive my repayments,give a legally valid receipt and act fully on their behalf.

 

 

Yours Faithfully............................

Edited March 26, 2010 by actionnotwords

[actionnotwords]

Above template letter any further modifications or input welcome.

 

Just because it says that in the prospectus does not mean that they have observed the formalities and actually have a valid and legally binding Mortgage Administration/ Service contract. If they had they would just say...here it is...shut up and pay us...BUT THEY DON'T DO THEY? What are they hiding/afraid of? Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

quote eie

Their administration contract is solely with the spv,the spv as shown in the prospectus clearly assumed the role of the originator/lender was over except for retention of the legal title to carry out enforcement action against the borrower.The only role of the lender was to originate loans for the spv no more and act as a frontman.

There is a clause that their is no recourse back to the lender from the spv if the loans fail to perform(barring fraud or misrepresentation)and also the lender insolvency clause where the legal title is transferred to the spv for obvious reasons(as in the sppl situation)

What has to be remembered is that these arrangements were made in a booming market ,the current situation was never imagined or catered for it had never happened before

As far as I am aware capstone simply cannot produce such an agreement with the lender because it does not exist hence the subterfuge.The spv is concealed because of their direct involvement in the mortgage pool rendering the original regulated agreements possibly unenforceable as has previously been posted and with which I concur.

As I believe scedminc posted, pml was in the unique position in that they had their own servicing staff which was later transferred to capstone but the "naieve borrower "being their cash cow was never consulted or notified by the original servicers of an authorised change of servicers and now the original servicers have gone there are in 2 cases no employees to give such authorisation(lmc and sppl) and in the other 2 cases (pml and spml) only one employee left to give such authorisation,if that makes sense.

The only agreement capstone currently hold is with the spv,otherwise why not just produce a simple signed letter of authorisation from the lender.

Legally it would appear they cannot and should not have conducted any litigation on behalf of the lenders.

Edited March 26, 2010 by actionnotwords

[enoughisenough]

Nice work ANW.

 

Keeping it nice and simple. Nothing gets lost in the woods then. Simple question, simple answer. Yes we have it and here it is, or...

[sawyer]

All

Maybe i missed something here as i am still waiting on replys from SPML/Capstone i.e.SAR before i can post more, but thought i would mention that i dont pay any charges for being in arrears whilst i have an arrangement in place.

 

You are very lucky if not.

 

Spoke with FOS recently, told me they deal with a lot of Capstone complaints and know exactly what they are like. So looking good

 

In contact with my local MP re FSA also.

[enoughisenough]

Excellent news Sawyer. I have been banging on the FSA's door for a year now. They are useless. They know what is going on. How could they fail to know?

[enoughisenough]

Hi ANW

 

Again quite correct. Shoddy thinking and a slip of attention in my post. Well spotted. End result is the same though isn't it. They bring claim in the name of the OL and they have no authorisation to do so. This could and should feck 'em. Three cheers for that if it does. Serves the barstewards right. They should have played a bit more fair and even.

[actionnotwords]

Mortgage account no:.............. ................................... . name

Lender ....................................................................... address

....................................................................................date

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am greatly concerned about the status of my lender whom I believe was a wholly owned subsidiary of the now bankrupt Lehman Brothers.You appear to have been acting for my lender for some considerable time but have yet to produce any signed document directly from my lender granting you authorisation to act on their behalf.Until you can supply me with such written authorisation it is impossible to understand how you can supply a legally valid receipt for all my repayments.Would you therefore by return please supply me with full current written authorisation directly from my lender that you are able to receive my repayments,give a legally valid receipt and act fully on their behalf.

 

 

Yours Faithfully............................

 

LMC and SPPL borrowers would be fully justified into paying their monthly repayments into a seperate account pending an answer to this question from Capstone (which they cannot legitimately answer)SPML and PML borrowers would have a similar argument although Capstone could obtain authorisation from Amany Attia.

[jetli]

LMC and SPPL borrowers would be fully justified into paying their monthly repayments into a seperate account pending an answer to this question from Capstone (which they cannot legitimately answer)SPML and PML borrowers would have a similar argument although Capstone could obtain authorisation from Amany Attia.

Will use this letter today and Thanks, I dont know what I would do without you all:)

[actionnotwords]

Hi ANW

 

Again quite correct. Shoddy thinking and a slip of attention in my post. Well spotted. End result is the same though isn't it. They bring claim in the name of the OL and they have no authorisation to do so. This could and should feck 'em. Three cheers for that if it does. Serves the barstewards right. They should have played a bit more fair and even.

 

This is exactly correct they have been instructing solicitors on behalf of all these lenders to carry out litigation in the name of the lender without producing any written authorisation.It is only recently that this has been challenged in the courts as in the case of mortgagewithspml and a sharp District Judge has spotted the anomalies.Did Capstone ever come back with the written authorisation? (no? and why not? post #5620)

In the case of jetli the action by SPPL was never properly instigated but because this was an eviction hearing perhaps as she has a buyer this could be the best outcome.

To challenge an eviction on the locus standi of sppl dependent on the vagaries and mind set of an unknown District Judge would have been of extreme high risk.The challenge would have possibly had to go to appeal and the costs and risk of losing at that level an equity wipeout.

There is still room for manouvere and such a letter to capstone does no harm but I must urge her not to lose or jeapordise her sale under any circumstances if there could be any resulting delays and time is of the element.

Edited March 26, 2010 by actionnotwords

[actionnotwords]

Of course the colossal implications of invalid or non authorisation as well as being fraudulent misrepresentation is that every repossession conducted under this authorisation would be illegal and could be challenged and set aside and if appropriate substantial compensation claimed.This would also obviously apply to any and all litigation I would believe.

 

 

WRITE THE LETTER then

BRING 'EM ON and

SHUT 'EM DOWN!!

Edited March 26, 2010 by actionnotwords

[actionnotwords]

I have now modified my template letter in response to a pm ,in essence it is still the same except for a slight change and reinforcement of words.

 

IN ORDER TO GAUGE ANY RESPONSE COULD ANYONE WHO HAS USED THE LETTER PLEASE SIMPLY POST:

SHUT 'EM DOWN as in the old L.C. days

[actionnotwords]

Mortgage account no:.............. ................................... . name

Lender ....................................................................... address

....................................................................................date

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am greatly concerned about the status of my lender whom I believe was a wholly owned subsidiary of the now bankrupt Lehman Brothers.It has been impossible to contact my lender directly by either telephone or post .Mail I have received indicates that you appear to have been acting for my lender for some considerable time but to this date I have never received any signed and written confirmation from my lender stating that you are fully authorised to act on their behalf. Until you can supply me with such written authorisation it is impossible to understand how you can supply a legally valid receipt for all my repayments.Would you therefore by return please supply me with full current written authorisation directly from my lender that you are able to receive my repayments,give a legally valid receipt and act fully on their behalf.

 

 

Yours Faithfully............................

 

the letter in modified form.

[iconoclash]

Good evening - I have been reading another members thread about OHL and noted the posters reference to 'Legal Consideration' within contract law. I am not familiar with this but wondered whether there would be any scope in this ? just an idea - I paste a bit below:

 

Consideration is one of the three main building blocks of a contract in English contract law....

 

....A contract must be "met with" or "supported by" consideration to be enforceable; also, only a person who has provided consideration can enforce a contract.

[actionnotwords]

campari2

The consideration which is one of the usual 4 conditions of a legally binding contract in this case would be that for the loan of a sum of money the lender has been granted security for the loan by placing a first or other charge upon your property and in the event of your default in repayment will be able to sell your property in recoverance of the debt you owe.

The owner or legal chargeholder in this case the original lender is the only person entitled to enforce this security unless they have assigned the debt and notified the borrower in accordance with s136 LOP 1925.

I believe the actual offer offers more scope for dispute because it involves regulated agreements and non regulated spvs.

[iconoclash]

Hi thanks ANW - so would the third party as assigned to, have to show the same consideration as per one's original contract - I mean if the original lender advances say £100k for such and such terms that is the consideration itself and the bargain struck so to speak and would it have to remain the same in cost of assigning so that the contract is still the same?

[actionnotwords]

The assignee would have to honour the original terms of the contract as signed for with the borrower by the assignor(lender) hence in this particular scenario here the conflict from moving from the regulated assignor(original lender) to the new unregulated assignee(the spv).

This scenario is a distinct possibility with the demise of sppl.

This is also why the third party regulated administrator capstone's role and authorisation requires clear determination.

They collect repayments of the mortgage pool on behalf of the spv who has been sold the beneficial rights(ie the income) to the loans.

[What a Life!]

Please help. I have a first charge with spml and also have a second charge with sppl. I have a warrant for eviction for 15 April by spml. i went to court yesterday and because of the discrepancy on the balance of arrears the judge has adjourned it. The solicitors letter stating that they were applying for a date and also the eviction notice is for spml but when we went to court it was Capstone versus ourselves - thought they were just for administration - if they granted repossession would that mean that it would be Capstone that had the rights to my home, although they are not allowed to hold customers money? Really do not know legalities of this but lady in court suggested we do not go back to court because we will face extortinate solicitors fees and it will drag out, she said to come to an arrangement with Capstone before the court date, but they are not prepared to accept any offer i put to them without a lump sum of a few thousand pound, which i simply do not have. Can somebody please give me advice, have been evicted by sppl once in september 2008 then they let me back in - long story. Now i have it with sml. Just need some advice, nobody, even the judge is not aware of Capstone, solicitor for spml just said it was sister company and he accepted it.