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

[littledotty27]

Have today received a letter from CIB here it is below

 

You have already complained to us on two occasions regarding these companies. We received your complaints on 22/10/09 and 10/12/09 and I refer you to the terms of the letters of acknowledgement which we sent you on 25/10/09 and 17/12/09.

 

I will add this letter to the existing complaint files. I can assure you that your complaints are being given due consideration.

 

What is there to consider??? They have no directors & are trading frauduently!!! Surely theres nothing to consider,apart from bring the B*****ds down!!!

[I'm the bad guy?]

LD,

 

its annoying, i know, but stick with it and keep at them with any new info;

if there is an email address on your letter from CIB use it, or at

charlotte.allan@cib.gsi.gov.uk

 

i can guarantee there is an investigation, but it will take some time, pressing CH is actually quicker as they are guided by timed regulatons for company returns(theory) etc.

 

 

admire your dedication, keep it up.

 

 

 

 

ITBG?

end game.

[ryde]

Have today received a letter from CIB here it is below

 

You have already complained to us on two occasions regarding these companies. We received your complaints on 22/10/09 and 10/12/09 and I refer you to the terms of the letters of acknowledgement which we sent you on 25/10/09 and 17/12/09.

 

I will add this letter to the existing complaint files. I can assure you that your complaints are being given due consideration.

 

What is there to consider??? They have no directors & are trading frauduently!!! Surely theres nothing to consider,apart from bring the B*****ds down!!!

 

LD.

 

I'd suggest you write them another letter.Will draft it out very shortly,stick a white hot poker up their fecking asses.Throw the law at them theyve had 5 months and done nothing and there f.ck all to investigate as they have no directors so are in breech of company law.Its all there in public in front of the tw.ts,its a f.cking disgrace.

Edited February 18, 2010 by ryde

[littledotty27]

Thanks Ryde.

I'm also still waiting on a reply from LMC as to why they have added litigations charges to the account,considering I havn't been in court for over 7 months & a reply from Lightfoots asking them to explain why they are asking us to breach court order.

 

Court is waiting for them to reply & for me to send the response,so the court can bring them up before a judge.

I've got my defense armed at the ready,but obviously they can't answer my letter can they???

 

I know I started this thread,but,I want to be the bitch that brings them down.

[ryde]

Dotty youre not the bitch but more like the angel of vengeance.

 

Draft for your consideration.

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thankyou for your recent communications with reference to my numerous complaints concerning London Mortgage Company Ltd.I detect in your reponse an impatience with the continuity of my complaints which is wholly unjustified as the first complaint was made on 22/10/09 nearly 5 months ago on discovery from the public register held at Companies House that this company was in breach of the Companies Act 2006 part 10 Chapter 1 section 154 in that it had no directors and has had none since 15/10/09 and had and still has failed to submit up to date accounts.Despite your department being made fully aware of this fact you have still failed to take any action whatsoever to immediately shut this company down.This company has been conducting litigation and repossessions of peoples homes continually since you were made fully aware of these facts.There is a real probabality that many people have been made homeless as a result of your failure to act promptly .It is remarkable that solicitors are being given instruction from a company without directors or personel and is downright fraudulent.Your awareness of these facts may entail considerable and substantial claims by the dispossessed against your department because of your continual failure to take the appropriate action at the relevant time.There is in fact nothing to investigate, the public register still shows the same status as that reported to your department nearly 5 months ago.I find this whole affair scandalous.

Would you please inform me directly how a company in continual breach of Statutory Company Law,having no directors or personel can in fact continue to litigate in the Courts and repossess peoples' homes when in reality they have no legal standing to carry out such actions.I believe that you have a duty to inform the Courts and the general public if so requested that this company cannot instigate legal proceedings without the appropriate legally prescribed personel .I am therefore making a formal request for an answer to this question:Would you please confim that a company with no directors or personel and thus in direct breach of Company Law can have no legal standing to instigate legal proceedings.?

Logic itself alone determines that there is no one employed in the company to issue such directions.

You are public servants ,your department is funded by the taxpayer and my patience is now exhausted. I wish to make a formal complaint about your handling of these matters,would you therefore please advise me immediately of your complaints procedure.I am sending a copy of this letter to my Member of Parliament, the Minister in charge of your department and the Press.

 

Yours faithfully littledotty

 

What do you think??

kill 'em all

associates as well

no mercy

Edited February 19, 2010 by ryde
emphasis

[I'm the bad guy?]

..LMC second strike off notice imminent, look out for it.

 

 

 

CAG Hall of Fame #1: littledotty27

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ITBG?

kaggaz with

attitude

[uneverdid]

Hi, re my earlier post

 

The name on the court papers is preferred. Does this mean its all above board ???

 

Thanks for your replies

[littledotty27]

Dotty youre not the bitch but more like the angel of vengeance.

 

 

I've always been taught to stand up for myself,revenge has always been no 1,my family think they have created a monster!!!

 

As for the letter,it's perfect,will get it sent off tomorrow.

Can I ask how many others have complained to Charlotte Allen on more than one occasion & got the same response?

 

I'm ready for filing my defense at court,i've had enough & i'm not going to take it lightly, I'll do there job for them if they fancy paying me their wages.

[I'm the bad guy?]

..frequently sending updates to her by email, her job is to collate and pass it to the investigating officer.

 

 

 

 

 

..bring the pain.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ITBG?

end game.

[littledotty27]

Do you get same response ITBG?

[ryde]

Hi, re my earlier post

 

The name on the court papers is preferred. Does this mean its all above board ???

 

Thanks for your replies

 

Unfortunately as far as the courts concerned yes

 

Dotty

any govt dept hates a formal complaint being registered cos it then moves out of their cosy control.

[I'm the bad guy?]

..pretty much, so I keep sending info and follow it up with a call or 2.

 

I really could'nt give a monkeys. I'll keep emailing & calling, till the investigator shuts the JAWs down., but then you know me...

 

 

 

 

 

ITBG?

KwA

Edited February 18, 2010 by I'm the bad guy?
splinter cell

[littledotty27]

http://www.adjudicatorsoffice.gov.uk/pdf/ao6.pdf

 

If anyone feels like the CIB have not done us any justice,get your complaints in here..

[I'm the bad guy?]

..nice one LD. i'll let charlotte know its on its way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ITBG?

KwA

[ryde]

LD + INTERESTED PARTIES

this means if you request a complaint procedure the malingerers at cib have to give you an answer as to why they have took so bloody long to act on your 5 month old complaint and let countless illegal repos carry on in the meantime.

Same question could be asked of sppl same situation exactly and 5 months down the line.

Wonder if there is the possibility of a claim for those repoed ,would have to be negligence.

Edited February 18, 2010 by ryde

[littledotty27]

Wonder if there is the possibility of a claim for those repoed ,would have to be negligence

 

I wonder if there is a possibility of a claim for all of us,put into consideration the amount of stress & illness it has caused us borrowers.

 

I wouldn't mind but i've started going grey since taking a mortgage with this lot!!

[ryde]

dotty

have beefed up the letter a little and have tried to put them in a position where they have to declare lmc's locus standi which if you could get a quick answer to in the positive(ie no directors no locus standi) would immediately wipe out any litigation problems.Cannot see theres anything to lose from this and everything to gain as same will apply to sppl,ie no locus standi.They have to deal with this letter and give you a final answer otherwise you can refer it to their Adjudicator as you posted,so you are really putting them on the line here with as much pressure as anyone can possibly exert.They will hate this but it might negate the PWC influence and factor which has obviously been at work here.

Edited February 19, 2010 by ryde

[Crapstone]

I took a different path against SPML and our friends, as well as following the main road. Nothing negative to report.

[ryde]

Breaking news

Jetli got away with a suspended and prevented an eviction.(may already have been a suspended)

Its now caggers 3 **** 0 in 2 weeks!!!!!!!!

She sends thanks to all from the other thread.

 

It appears Itbg/LC has already been reprimanded severely for naughtiness and rudeness by ANW and will now be a potential target of the feared and dreaded rotarians!!!

Edited February 19, 2010 by ryde

[littledotty27]

It appears Itbg/LC has already been reprimanded severely for naughtiness and rudeness by ANW and will now be a potential target of the feared and dreaded rotarians!!!

 

I agree with freedom of speech,but I think the newbies of this thread need to spend a good few days reading all the posts & look at the help he has given & especially Ryde,EIE & Super for all their tremendous input.

[supersleuth]

That doesn't hold any water. It's already been argued and discussed.

 

Hi Crapstone,

 

It's good news to hear that it has already been argued and discussed. Could you let me know the name of the case?

 

Also, do you know where the county court gets its jurisdiction to enforce orders in excess of £5,000?

 

Many thanks

Supersleuth

[mrsiphone]

Jetli may be interested in this. Enforcement of Eviction warrants.

 

Go to the court and insist on a copy of the Warrant. Usually, both the court and the bank will want to conceal the warrant from you...but...if the Warrant is issued against YOU (which it is) and if they are enforcing a warrant against YOU then they must let you have a copy of it. See CPR Part 5 which states that a person has the right to see documents on the file concerning HIS/HER case. The reason why you want a copy of the actual warrant is (1) the bank MUST certify the costs of the litigation on the certificate (which they usually don't so that they can shaft you for extortionate costs later); and (2) because at law, there can be no enforcement until the litigation costs have been decided (and in the context of repossession, the borrower is never ever told what the litigation costs so the costs are never "decided").

 

Anyway, when researching the law on enforcement of Warrants, I noticed that the County Court Bailiff does not have jurisdiction to enforce a warrant that is for a judgment in excess of £5,000.

 

Here's the relevant laws/rules:

 

1.The Warrant should be set aside or stayed on the grounds that the Warrant is void and unenforceable for want of compliance with the law. The Warrant is void at law because:

i.The Respondent cannot lawfully make a request for enforcement of its Order until it has complied with CPR Part 70 r.70.1.3. (Note, that CPR rule refers to the fact that a judgment cannot be enforced until costs have been decided. Usually, the bankers will not tell the borrower what the costs of litigation were because they want to shaft them on costs later. Thus, this rule is never complied with by the banks nor the courts.) On the ground that that rule is not satisfied, the Respondent was not lawfully entitled to make its Form 325 Request (note, this is the form used by the banks to request the warrant be issued) and is not entitled to enforce its Order;

ii.The Request was not in compliance with law on the grounds that the certifications that are that are mandated under CCR Ord. 26 r. 17(3A) are wholly absent. The court clerk erred at law when it considered and granted the Respondent’s Form 325 Request;

iii.The Warrant is ultra vires on the grounds that it has been issued in excess of its county court jurisdiction under s.85 of the County Courts Act 1984. On the grounds that s.85 is expressly made subject to article 8 of the High Court and County Courts Jurisdiction Order 1991, the county court does not have jurisdiction to enforce an Order in excess of £5,000.

2.In these premises, the Warrant and the Notice of eviction should be set-aside or stayed or postponed.

 

Therefore, anyone who wishes to research and use this argument and/or give it to their legal representative to argue it, has all the rules and legal pointers that you need.

Point is, the county court may have jurisdiction (power) to order the repossession, but it does not have jurisdiction (power) to enforce its order. The order needs a High Court Warrant.

Therefore, if a County Court Judge says that it has got jurisdiction, ask the judge exactly which rule of law gives it its jurisdictional powers. They are certaintly not in The County Court Act nor Article 8 of the Statutory Instrument. If anyone does know where the County Court may found its jurisdiction to enforce orders in excess of £5000, it would be interesting to know. One thing I know for certain, the County Court Judges (of one court) didn't know and couldn't say and nor could the barrister...the Judge just got his knickers in a twist over the question and went into a teenage tantrum...basically because the County Court Act doesn't give them jurisdiction to enforce a repossession order.

 

Also, do you know where the county court gets its jurisdiction to enforce orders in excess of £5,000?

 

Many thanks

Supersleuth

 

My thoughts are that it is a possession order and not a monetry order that is being enforced.

 

comments........

 

I am told that an order for recovery of land is enforceable by warrant possession.

County Court Rules -Order 26 - Rule 17

 

This is done in writing using a Form N325 It even says County Court on the form

Edited February 19, 2010 by mrsiphone
added a couple of links

[saintly_1]

No what has been unapproved is a Private Message that you posted which should remain private as the title of them suggest

[I'm the bad guy?]

..this is a standard pHp system, so you have access to all PMs, considering this is an open thread, why was the original PM saying why 21 posts were erased(being minor) not posted on open?

 

everybody speaks their mind on this thread, help us to help ourselves, YOU know the gravity of cause, and bank charges pale into insignifcance considering the illegal repos taking place.

 

the repeated posts, was to aid kaggaz to verify and seek their own confirmation for their particular circumstance, why erase a 'guide' to help?

 

are we not human. please reply on this thread, we would like to know.

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

blade runner

[saintly_1]

No we dont have access to PM's the post that was unapproved actually stated that it was a PM