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

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[ryde]

Have noticed the guest view escalated considerably when the specific question of an objection to the possibly pending sppl transfer was under discussion.

The mortgage contract from what I have seen mentions assignment and agreement to assignment it does not qualify and specify the degree of assignment.

The Point is all with sppl loans need to know:

1)Is their loan regulated by the F.S.A. or any other relevant legislation

2)Is there a possibility that the possible pending transfer of the paper title from sppl to the spv or an. other can be objected to on any ground before it is registered at the land registry

3)The effect being that the loan then becomes unsecured

4)Power to negotiate would then swing to the borrower

5)Has the borrower the right to rescind the original contract which was signed for a regulated contract with a regulated lender which has now been sold in full to an un-regulated spv who now wishes to place a legal charge on the property.

This is all relevant to current sppl borrowers who need answers (I am not one of them)_

napiernuts and anyone else

I am sure your opinion, input and advice would be welcomed by all in this situation on these specific relevant positive points.

If other lenders in the gang of 4 are going the same way this has even more added relevance to the same extent as locus standi /title to sue.

Edited January 6, 2010 by ryde

[supersleuth]

Absolute Assignment of either a chose in action or a chose in possession is not solely achieved by the content of a contract

 

Wrong.

 

An absolute assignment is achieved by the content of the contract. Once the contract is agreed and the contract provides for the absolute assignment of a title, that absolute assignment is a legal assignment. It is a legal assignment because it assigns, as Napiernuts said earlier, "absolutely everything".

 

Once the buyer has paid for the property so absolutely assigned the legal assignment is complete. The legal title is "attached" to the assignee.

 

Napiernut's statement quoted above refers to the steps that must be taken AFTER the contract has been signed.

 

Following the assignment of the legal title, the assignee must then "perfect" its legal title. "Perfection" is achieved by registration at the Land Registry. Napier nuts is now talking about the assignee's perfection of its legal title. So whilst we all know that the assignee (in violation of law) has not "perfected" its legal title at the LR, it does not change the fact that the contract assigned an absolute assignment, that legal assignment "attached" to the assignee once the contract was signed by both parties. Which means a contract that agrees an absolute assignment with full title guarantee is an assignment of the legal title. The assignor, has just assigned everything!

 

The fact that the assignee has chosen to violate the law and not perfect its legal title at the LR, does not change the fact that at law, the contract provided for an absolute assignment. Once the assignor has assigned its legal title, it can no longer lawfully claim to own the legal title.

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[supersleuth]

What confusion? Your confusion?

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[supersleuth]

As I said, you were asked a straight forward question which required a simple yes or no answer. You prefer to give a politician answer which details many ruses and manoeuvres, each of which are necessary to avoid that which is patently obvious i.e., the assignee has the legal right to register its legal title at the Land Registry because: it was assigned the legal title.

 

Goodnight

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[napiernuts]

Post deleted to allow ITBG? to continue to live in his fantasy world.

 

Follow his ill informed and often incorrect advice at your own risk

Edited January 27, 2010 by napiernuts

[wot2do?]

An absolute assignment is achieved by the content of the contract.

 

Isn't it the "perfection" Supersleuth that turns an equitable assignment into a legal assignment.

 

Until the assignment is "perfected", surely it will remain equitable regardless of what the mortgage sale agreement says.

[ryde]

itbg/Lord Cagger

welcome back thought you,d abandoned us,when were you let out??!

any chance of a new composition for the new year.

in ITBG/Lord Cagger

i trust

 

Will someone clarify is an assignment the same as an outright sale.

In normal english if I assign Lord Cagger my car I would transfer the rights to him without necessarily selling it to him outright and receiving a consideration for the sale (ie I would be just passing it on)

Any chance of devoting some investigation into the sppl question now faced by many?

Edited January 7, 2010 by ryde

[ryde]

deleted crazy stuff

Edited January 7, 2010 by ryde

[ryde]

This is getting really frustrating,this thread was started by littledotty 13 months ago.

Is there any possibility of anyone actually mounting a serious legal challenge on any issue with the remote likelihood of any success,or are this lot immune to everything.

gmac have been fined for actually charging less in arrears fees than capstone who have the highest charges in the industry yet carry on with impunity.

 

is anyone aware of this case re brokers posted from another interesting thread

Wilson v Hurstanger | OUT-LAW.COM by Pinsent Masons LLP

RECISSION OF CONTRACT

 

THREAD

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/239658-unegulated-secured-second-charges-2.html

 

ROCKET

the lot i,m involved with haven't paid the b.stards for 3 years!!! as they cannot register their charge.

WHAT HAPPENED TO DISCLOSURE

everyones been diverted again

Edited January 7, 2010 by ryde

[supersleuth]

Hello SS,

 

I am work at the moment, so can't do anything until I get home.

 

Using CAG on a mobile phone is hard enough for me let alone searching Bailii etc..

 

I will start looking into arguments for disclosure as soon as I get home tonight. I'll start by looking at previous cases (most likely unrelated to securitisation) with regard to arguments used to force (or gently push) a Judge to order disclosure of documents.

 

Hi Ryde,

 

Disclosure is the live issue which was mooted at around page 180 (around post nos. in the 3590's), and we've been hoping to hear from Suetonius. He's always good for developing the depths of a subject so hopefully, he'll be able to share the benefit of his thoughts soon.

[supersleuth]

This is getting really frustrating,this thread was started by littledotty 13 months ago.

 

WHAT HAPPENED TO DISCLOSURE

everyones been diverted again

 

 

Hi Napiernuts,

 

You seem to have access to a lot of legal knowledge, do you have any wisdoms on the Disclosure issue to share?

[ryde]

Thanks for help super hopefully this issue can be reignited.

[ryde]

Legal assignments of things in action

 

(1)Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice—

(a)the legal right to such debt or thing in action;

(b)all legal and other remedies for the same; and

©the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor:

Provided that, if the debtor, trustee or other person liable in respect of such debt or thing in action has notice—

(a)that the assignment is disputed by the assignor or any person claiming under him; or

(b)of any other opposing or conflicting claims to such debt or thing in action;he may, if he thinks fit, either call upon the persons making claim thereto to interplead concerning the same, or pay the debt or other thing in action into court under the provisions of the M1Trustee Act, 1925.

(2)This section does not affect the provisions of the M2Policies of Assurance Act, 1867.

 

 

Assuming that this section of LPA 1925 may apply to the charge which will be registered by the spv against the property in the case of sppl loans,relevant sections in bold.

It states that the assignation is effectual in law from the date of notice given to the debtor subject to any priority equities over the right of the assignee.

1) So if you have a pending claim for refund(with the fos for example) of charges/fees against sppl (ie a monetary claim) would that constitute the grounds for an objection against the assignee ie.sppl and afford an application for a restriction against the disposition/assignation of the charge be applied for to the registry preventing registration of the charge until your claim was decided ??!

such a restriction would cost £40 if the registrar considered there was sufficient grounds for the application.

 

Trying hard here.

Edited January 7, 2010 by ryde

[enoughisenough]

Echoing Ryde

 

All with SPPL Loans must try to enter a restriction at LR. You must do so ASAP and make a convincing a case as possible. Any chance of Ryde knocking up a quick dear Sir letter which we can then modify? (Sorry Ryde but you seem to be in the box seat on this one.) Let's just test this in the fire. A couple of hours and the price of a postal stamp. That's all and it might just have a significant effect.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

[enoughisenough]

YOUR ADDRESS

 

DATE

 

LAND REGISTRY ADDRESS

 

FOA MR KEVIN HUGHES

 

Dear Mr Hughes

 

RE LAND REGISTRY TITLE XXXXXXX (Proprieter (S) MR AND MRS XX)

 

THE ARGUMENT

 

IMMINENT TRANSFER

 

NOTICE t`o BORROWER REQUIREMENTS

 

OBJECTIONS

 

WHAT WE WANT???

 

ADVICE OF LR LEGAL EAGLES....

[ryde]

eie

will do today, as you say got to give it a go,may be able to email your local land registry as the post is a no go at the moment.

The thing is you have to have an interest in the charge(eg you are owed money by sppl) not the actual property which you obviously have, as you are the registered owner! , as have personally been down this road before.The other thing to consider is a possible third party interest(eg a non registered family member)who has acquired an interest between the date of registration of the sppl charge and the date of notification of the new charge by the spv.

You can see how difficult this is.

 

super/sue/napiernuts

any chance of any help on the legal side of this?

Edited January 7, 2010 by ryde

[not another b----- letter]

I have not got the brain to join in some of the legal arguments so lets look at things in black and white. Our loan is with SPPL who are authorised by the OFT and hold a consumer credit licence, the agreement is also governed by English law and to the jurisdiction of the Courts of England and Wales.

 

My agreement states:

 

ASSIGNMENT

9.1 You agree that we may assign or transfer some or all of our rights and obligations in relation to the loan and the mortgage at any time.

 

9.2 You consent to the transfer of our rights at any time and agree that you will be bound to whoever we transfer our rights to in exactly the same way as you are bound to us and on such transfer we will be realeased from any further obligations to you.

 

So how can I protect our interests after any transfer?.

 

What if the transfer is to a company not licenced or regulated by the OFT or not governed by the Courts of England and Wales, I signed an agreement protected by the CCA and with a company regulated by the OFT what are my rights?.

 

The legal charge on our property is still in the name of SPPL, how can a company with no directors and no staff transfer any of there rights?.

 

10.08. From 1st February 2006 until further notice the administration of this secured loan will be undertaken by Capstone Mortgage Services Limited, a company which forms part of the same group as SPPL

 

Only one licence holder required for a group, but what happens if the one holding the licence is no longer a company?. If SPPL are struck off by Companies House and there licence revoked by the OFT how can Capstone continue as administrators, and what would be my chances if I went to court to get the charge removed, unfair contractual terms?, unfair relationship?.

 

Can anyone tell me when the last named director of SPPL resigned?.

 

Just had a look at the CCA, a regulated agreement can not become an unregulated agreement, so if any transfer took place that altered that agreement would that be unfair contractual terms or create an unfair relationship.

 

We were delighted to have found this tread I thought help at last but a couple of months later we are still in the same position, all the legal debate is very good but we could still be here in two years time with the same arguments, this is going at the same speed as the FSA, we have got something smoking now is the time to pour on the paraffin and start the fire.

 

We have been subjected to harrassment and bullying by a company that should be put out of business, now lets put all our efforts into just that, we could be still talking about the spv and legal assignments when we have all been repossessed.

 

OFT guidance to lenders:

 

5.3 Any charges on arrears or default should be limited to covering the

lender's necessary costs. Charges should be set out clearly and fully as

part of the credit agreement and in periodic statements.

5.10 Where appropriate, lenders should act with forbearance with a view to

enabling the borrower to remedy the position, for example by freezing

interest and other charges for a period, or allowing deferred payment of

arrears.

 

6.3 Lenders should not seek to repossess the borrower's property except as

a last resort, where other forbearance options have failed or have

otherwise not proved suitable. This means they should explore all other

possible options for dealing with the problem, and should give proper

consideration to any reasonable offer by the borrower to pay by

instalments. They should not insist unreasonably that the arrears are

paid in one payment or in large amounts or within an arbitrarily short

period. They should not institute court proceedings unless and until all

other avenues have been explored and have failed or have otherwise not

proved suitable.

 

lenders and brokers should not act in any way which is deceitful,

oppressive, unfair or improper, whether unlawful or not.

 

Capstone have ignored the above guidance from the authority that allow them to operate, Companies House have been slow in dealing with SPPL, but why are they still licenced by the OFT?, so lets all sing from the same hymn book, lets start with the OFT.

 

EiE

I believe you wrote to the FSA with a complaint, now I know that the FSA and OFT cannot deal with an individual complaint but they do read there mail so lets make them aware of whats going on, we could try to get CAB to make a super complaint just needs enough people to write but would that be about all lenders not about one named?.

 

We also have our MPs God bless them, has anyone tried writing to one of them?, 649 MPs, thousands of people getting harassed and unfairly treated or have already been repossessed, it would only need one letter posted on here, copy it put your own name and address print it off and send it to your MP.

 

I hope I get a positive response to this post, if not I am going to try the small claims court they are now trying to get me to agree to remortgage somewhere else and settle my loan with them I wonder why?, and I thought the loan was was over a ten year term.

[not another b----- letter]

eie

will do today, as you say got to give it a go,may be able to email your local land registry as the post is a no go at the moment.

The thing is you have to have an interest in the charge(eg you are owed money by sppl) not the actual property which you obviously have, as you are the registered owner! , as have personally been down this road before.The other thing to consider is a possible third party interest(eg a non registered family member)who has acquired an interest between the date of registration of the sppl charge and the date of notification of the new charge by the spv.

You can see how difficult this is.

 

super/sue/napiernuts

any chance of any help on the legal side of this?

 

From my point of view I signed an agreement which gave gave them the right to transfer or assign any or all of there rights and obligations in relation to the loan.

 

If I pay the land registry the £50 or whatever to put a restriction on the charge to stop any transfer, then Capstone would have to negotiate, can you see that happening?, they would take it to court and I know what the judge would say "you signed the agreement and you are bound by it".

 

Others with SPPL same agreement?.

[enoughisenough]

Hi NABL

 

two very good posts and I am mostly in agreement. But try looking at it this way. If a restriction were to be granted it has the potential to cause them a headache. They would have to extract ie pull each if these mortgages from the pool at the very time they are trying to effect a legal transfer. They would have to go to court on the backfoot. Unfair termss would become central, something that the court could not ignore. Locus standi would raise its head and again could not be ignored. Disclosure would be central and probably ordered which is the last thing they want. We wouldn't be contesting the case as dirty arrears ridden **** who need to be taught a lesson for our breaches. All the contractual and performance issues would be of central relevance. Also consider who would bring the claim. SPPL? Struck off! Eurosail? Not on your nelly! Capstone? Hardly! Finally remember that this would start to educate the courts as to what is really going on and although few and far between there are SOME good district judges. If this can be pulled of I consider it fifty quid very well spent indeed. Hell, even if it's nothing more than a nuisance for the **** it's worth it. And ryde is right. The guest count seems to soar whenever this is discussed. One carefully drafted letter and the green light from LR would put the feline firmly amongst the feathered IMHO.

[not another b----- letter]

Hi EiE & Ryde

 

Was just trying to get something to happen rather than getting bogged down in more legal argument, you have a very good point who would bring the claim?, a defunct company?, if we are going to do it lets go for it whose going to write the letter?, will ring land registry tomorrow sound them out spoke with local office on Tuesday try main one next.