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

[scedminc]

Hi SS: you are right I know, its funny that my sol. says we challenge the rest of our case with these institutions isnt it. what a larf! I've tried sending complaints about companies b4. And, having specifically asked about the claimant not actually owning the mortgage anymore all I got was a shrug of the shoulders - and I dont know about that. Really, we are up against it, it is very hard for an individual to deal with this stuff alone, when the so called help doesnt even know how to help and the stupid government think that there is representation for everyone in all courts - so not living in the real world! Just wish we could join forces on this stuff - strength in numbers and all that. any takers? proposal, petition?

 

Hi Campari2,

 

I think everyone agrees you are correct that we all need to stand up fight as there is no support from the government and won't be in the short term if ever. I have been talking with SuperSleuth on a different thread and i am in the process of building a case against my so called lender as i have suspended repossession order on my house and there is no way they will take it without a fight. I have spent months of trying to get my head around the whole thing and thanks to SuperSleuth and a few other am i finally starting to understand what is/has happended. I suggest that everyone that has a definate interest and enough fight in them to do lots of research and learning and put up a fight as well. Then just maybe the government will have to open there eyes and look at what happening.

[scedminc]

Had another email from ITN today,they are looking into securisation & its perils & will be doing the story very soon.

 

Is anyone wanting or should I say willing to have there say on the securisation?

As I have seen many a post of other CAG members wanting too have there say & let the courts, other borrowers & Land registry know of what is going on.

So come on don't be shy!!

 

Hi LittleDotty,

 

I may be interested as i want to bring these idiots to justice and make then accountable not only for me but the people of past, present and future. What are ITN saying and have they said what they are looking into and how they intend to report it?

[scedminc]

The editor has said he has set aside friday to look into the securisation & its perils & that he wants to do the story-soon!!

He has not said on how they are intend to report it or look into it.

 

I am totally with you Scedminc on bringing these cowboys companies to justice for the sake of others.

 

LittleDotty,

 

I'm sure that when the editor starts looking into it he will need more than friday lol hope that don't scare them off.

 

I am interested so if i am needed then let me know. I think we all need to sign up to this so we can all stand out together and make a bigger impression.

[scedminc]

being a complete novice in matters of law can someone please tell me I am wrong when after just reading the case of paragon vs pender that the penders lost and a lot of what has been written here in brilliant detail I might add viz a vi securitisation matters that they have been blown out of the water by this ..... please tell me I am wrong

 

kegi

 

Just for anyone else interested in the Paragon vs Pender case a link to it can be found on this thread I posted it to.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/175426-mortgage-securitisation-preferred-3.html#post1961907

[scedminc]

Hi LittleDotty.

 

Like you say it sounds like they dont want your payment so they can make you look bad. The only thing I can think of is keep a record of the date and time of calls and names etc. Do a transfer from your bank online if you have the facilities or go to a branch and do it. Although the payment will show late on your account you would be able to show the courts payments was made before the end of month and explain about the calls. If they argue then ask the court to adjourn the hearing and ask the court to order them to disclose call logs which relate to today. If you can call them back and record the call so the judge can see how stupid these people are.

 

Thats all I can think of which is probably not ideal. Maybe someone else can suggest better?

[scedminc]

I cant write on here what I think of these underhand idiots. If you are trying tomorrow then record the call and take it as evidence to court. You do not need to tell them you are recording the call. Instead of doing a CHAP's and paying extra I would just do a regular bank transfer. The account number will probably be the same as you used for the CHAP's and use your mortgage account number for the payment reference. That is all you can probably do. At least you wont be made to look bad in court and the tables will be turned. I know how annoying these idiots are and I feel like shouting at them all the time. I tend to just keep calm and ask difficult questions instead. They soon do what you ask within reason as they want to get rid of you.

[scedminc]

Hi all,

 

For all that is actively looking into or wants to know some more about securitisation of mortgages then look at this post as it makes good reading.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/175426-mortgage-securitisation-preferred-4.html#post2009103

[scedminc]

Received witness statement this morning from the claimant nit picking at everything i have put in the witness statement,stating its not a proper statement.

They have admitted they took over in may 2006 & we was informed(but wasn't).

Also stated that the contract sent was only mortgage offer(even though its signed by us & was obtained from solicitors office).

The mortgage deed we got from solicitor states matlock bank & was signed by us on 11/01/06.

According to the LR SPML put there charge on that date.

Credit file states a/c opened 21/12/05 & still shows as matlock bank.

In court this afternoon,will let you all know how we get on.

 

Good luck for this afternoon.

[scedminc]

Hi LittleDotty,

 

I remember shaking with fear when I very first went to court. However after seeing that it is kind of informal I now feel much better on return visits. If it was me going I would take everything I could possibly take to discredit them. It may be too late for you now if you are in court this afternoon as I believe you are better going armed with things in a structured way so that the DJ doesn't get bored or think you are just clutching at straws. I would certainly ask some difficult questions though.

 

Hope this helps.

[scedminc]

I have actually got all info in a file to take with me.

The prospectus,the contract,the deeds. etc

Everything they wrote in the witness statement contradicts itself,so I have marked it to confront them about it.

This isn't the 1st time in court,this has been going on since 2006.

 

In which case then I would go for it. At the end of the day they dont care what they do to you. If you have got everything in place then fight them and see what they say. I should imagine the solictor wont be able to answer anything of what you put to them. On the other hand they may dismiss your evidence as any evidence you wish to use should be sent to all parties prior to the hearing. I have just noticed SuperSleuth is online. It may be worth sending him a message as he will be the best person to advise you seeing you have only a small window of time left.

[scedminc]

Hi all

 

I have been thinking about the information we all need to obtain from the 'false' Claimant regarding the SPV & the transaction details, so that we have them to hand to fight repossession.

 

I seem to recall somewhere that there was an alternative to sending in a SAR, and that was to ask the 'fale' lender to to fully disclose the relevant documents that the borrower feels are material to the case against them?

 

I believe that there has been a discussion somewhere on these threads of asking for disclosure of documents 'pre-action' on the basis that they be material. Given that legal action has already started in most of these cases, surely a request for disclosure can be made of the 'False' Claimant? An application to the courts to suspend/hold the action until the material is disclsoed by the lender. An application to the court could made on the basis that there is liklehood of lender having this information and that this has come to light very recently in evidence put before the Treasury Committee on the bnaking crisis. It might put a bit of backbone into a District Judge to agree that the transaction documentation should be disclosed as part of the repossession proceedings, and therefore halted until complied with.

 

Sorry if this has already come up and been answered. Any legal minds out there?

 

Supersleuth?

 

 

 

Dangermouse

 

 

Hi Dangermouse,

 

Are you referring to Part 31 of CPR which covers Disclosure and Inspection of Documents. Specific interest may be section 16 which is disclosure before proceedings commence.

 

A link to this is here for reading.

 

PART 31 - DISCLOSURE AND INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS

[scedminc]

Good find SuperSleuth. Not be around much lately so have had to catch up on the threads. Just read what you just posted and sounds like FatBigot has run away and hid in a corner now with nothing else to say lol. Just goes to show if they are a barrister that either condone and probably work for these criminals or just do not understand. You would think though that as a barrister they would have at least look at a prospectus and not just assumed that a deal is done on equitable interest.

[scedminc]

So what are you guys suggesting on here - a mortgage is unenforceable by the original loan company if it's been secutitised? Geez, That then begs the question of who could enforce it...The banks won't like this one jot!

 

I dont think it would ever be deemed to be unenforcable as this would inturn mean that 80% of the UK mortgages are also unenforceable. If there is a serious legal issue uncovered and they were seen to be unenforceable then steps would be taken to change this as the whole market would collapse and this just wouldnt be allowed to happen.

 

Sorry i just saw you said the unenforceable by the original lender. In that case well yes maybe but then I am sure if this was made public then the SPV's would soon show there hand and start doing things correctly and they would be forced to do this to avoid economic disaster.

[scedminc]

Can I just push the boat out into slightly deeper water here then as I have friends this happened to. Would it be fair to assume that if someone who has had their home repossessed by one of these finance companies and it was thereafter proved through this researching that the loan was actually owned by one of these SPV's, the people who were repossessed could have a claim against the finance company for some kind of mis-representation and compensation? ( I really hate this claims culture-but this could be serious and just deserts for these bankers)

 

Hi,

 

Yes you are probably right they may have a claim if all this came out but at the same time I dont think they would as it would all be covered up and things would be put in place to stop claims etc. I think the only good that may come of all this is that policies / laws change so these people cannot and do not do this anymore and if they it is done correctly and fairly. No consumer past or present is going to make any money out of this thats for sure. But i'm sure i speak for most that no money is wanted from this and all we want is fair treatment etc.

[scedminc]

Not wishing to be too reactive here, but what would you or anyone tell their loved ones who are sitting there wondering what has happened to their lives as a result of the wrong company suing them for repossession? "Mr Judge, please allow ABC finance company to take our home even though they don't own it"?

 

It is testing the limits I know, and I understand what you are saying, but what is the point of us uncovering all this if it's not to put things right?

 

CAG members have done this with the bank charges and many other causes on here. If the banks sold our homes then surely it is they who need to take the fall? I'm sorry if I sound harsh, I'm not normally, but this is the same old issue over who has the rights LEGALLY to do what and from what I read and see being uncovered by all these wonderful exposures is precisely that...I wouldn't want to go into court, and we all know how distressing that is, and have rough justice no more than anyone else, but if my mortgage was with GE and Marks and Spencers owned my house rather than GE I don't see why GE has the right to repossess and if they did conning the Judiciary into believeing they did then I'd want compensation and GE pulled in front of the court to explain themselves because I might have had a completely different result if dealing with M&S...get my drift?

 

I agree entirely just thinking of the reality of it and what the government would allow. For example the test case that is with the bank charges will almost certainly result in them being deemed unlawful etc etc etc but I bet your bottom dollar that no one else is going to get paid out indefinately due to the financial implications on these people that are continuously protected. Don't get me wrong I'm in on the fight with all this and will do everything and anything I can to bring them down but I'm also looking at the reality it and how the government will step in regardless!!

[scedminc]

well that's what all the banks thought didn't they over bank charges and PPI and people didn't think they could ever take them on as they were far too big to take on..WRONG

 

Indeed correct but look at them now they're not paying out anymore and problem wont have to either. Therefore once we blow this out of the water and expose the mortgage criminals they will shortly be protect in some way.

[scedminc]

If by what we do on here saves just one person from being wrongly repossessed and it all closes down after that, it's been worth it.

 

Correct but i think missing my original point i was trying to say maybe.

[scedminc]

Oh ok lol

[scedminc]

GUYS

 

It's clearly **** or bust. Therefore we need the following:

 

1. Someone with the balls and the nous to take it on. So anyone who has a repo in the next month from any of these sharks should be working flat out to get it 110% copper bottomed as LOTM has suggested. Every i dotted & every t crossed.

 

Superslueths advice is 2nd to none on this but even He/she (sorry supersleuth I haven't read your profile!) can't do everybody's (or even one person's) documentation, assembly of evidence and preparation of bundle. So it needs someone to test the water, because if no-one does then the sad tide of repos will go up and up and up at everyone's (ever long lasting expense)

 

2. No-one should, in the words of the great W Bush 'misunderestimate' the nature of the task. However, this is after all a pilot show, a toe testing of the water. County court decisions are NOT binding either on other County courts or further up the hierarchy. However there is an appeal process if the District Judge is not interested.

 

They're handling more and more repos and don't want complex legal argument and masses of documentation put forward before them as if it were a case in CA or HOL. Treading carefully is therefore of the utmost importance. In fact i regard this of such fundamental importance that we peeps need to keep shtum on this because there will always be a trawler for the oppo.

 

3. More is needed to make this stick but one man challenged the banks on their charges and....

 

 

I have more to say on this but only on PM

 

Just for the record despite my possible controversal comments on the outcome of this becomeing public and the government protection after. I am actually in the process of building a case against my so called lender in respect of the fact they did not have a legal right to issue proceedings against me which resulted in a suspended reposession order. My case it taking sometime to build as I want to be sure that I have everything covered and I understand as much as I can everything I am going to say and everthing that maybe thrown back at me. I am also writing to my so called lender and asking them questions that in turn the responses i get back will be used against them in court. I have a suspended order in which my so called lender breaches every month so when I do finally take this to court they will look stupid from the moment the hearing starts.

[scedminc]

Lost sight of your prior controversial comments. will need therefore to go back through the posts. In the initial circumstance could you give some basic details of their claim and your defence, and why it resulted in a suspended order? THIS WOULD BE MOST GRATEFULLY RECEIVED! Your lenderv if you want to PM me would also be good

 

Cheers EIE. Keep the Faith.

 

Hi,

 

Read a thread which I started a while ago and gives some details of my situation for your information.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/175426-mortgage-securitisation-preferred.html

 

Out of interest did you ever find your SPV?

[scedminc]

Hi All,

 

Just a thought for those that are asking for Carmel's help then as SuperSleuth suggests the house of commons evidence to point to the fact that she is a New York lawyer. However that said Carmel did reference this website so it maybe likely that she looks at this site and even this thread so again is most likely if this is the case then the help we are all looking for is being done in other ways like the House of Commons evidence as that i'm sure didn't just spring from nowhere. It maybe worth a thought that Carmel is unable to use this site for professional reasons etc.

[scedminc]

my mortgage is with capstone but letters are from spml

 

Hi and welcome,

 

Your mortgage is with SPML and Capstone administer it for SPML. However if you read this thread you will soon learn that SPML infact no longer owns your mortgage.

[scedminc]

Hi LittyDotty.

 

Did you ever hear anything back from ITN?

[scedminc]

We are now being hounded by harrassment phonecalls,even at weekend.

I asked politely to put everything in writing and still ignoring our requests.

Sent telephone harrassment letter today,so should receive it tomorrow.

 

Has anyone else had any luck when sending harrassment letter?

 

 

Hi LittleDotty,

 

I had the same about 3 weeks ago when I got a call on a Sunday. I too will be sending a letter but have not had time as of yet. Let me what they say and I shall do likewise. I doubt they will care. They recently failed to comply correctly with an SAR so i wrote to them saying I give them a further 7 days to comply as a goodwill gesture otherwise I shall obtain a court order obliging them to. Guess what, they ignore me so I am going to be issusing proceedings within the next week.

[scedminc]

CRAPSTONE

 

Heres one for you off my list on my dsar crap....

 

xx/xx/09 Tallyman: xx/xx09 Standard Memo - exception removed as not contetious.

 

I think this could refer to the LBA they received but not sure?

 

Any ideas what the cretins could mean? Anyone!!

 

b-o-2

 

 

Hi,

 

This maybe something to do with when you illegally get information from your credit report. Take a look at this from experian.

 

Debt collection and recovery software - Tallyman - Experian UK and Ireland

 

Sced