Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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 1134 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

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!!!

 

Thank you for That You are wonderful (amongst others!) I love you all what a strength WE ALL HAVE lets all stick together xxxx It was a Suspended order so even more of a BIG THANKS to all of you. Your strength is unquestionable WELL DONE i love you all XXXX

Edited by jetli
Link to post
Share on other sites

..so it was honesty, what about the 21 posts(same), which were erased, when some FNGs, who just post without reading any of the previous posts, crucial to the understanding of the issue by the Vets(not one), have no understanding or here as jackals(touts), then the 'guide' helps the real kaggaz and expose the jackals..comment?

 

will you replace the 'guide', so people have some kind of summation of the issue at hand and what actions they can take?

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6236

 

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

..to jetli a sus.repo, is a repo, so now any manufactured default they donot need to go back to court to evict? correct as necessary. your fight has just begun, be prepared.

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6236

 

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Round of applause for Jetli , I was watching your thread looks like ellen really worked her magic

 

Really really pleased for you

She did and I thank her amongst others Your all great and l love U WHAT A FORUM YO SHOULD ALL BE PROUD Love u all and thank U again xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

..to jetli a sus.repo, is a repo, so now any manufactured default they donot need to go back to court to evict? correct as necessary. your fight has just begun, be prepared.

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

Because it was a suspended repo your right but could fight it again but might only have 7 days as I did today thats the way it goes i sure you know that? its why people on here have 5 x suspended repos X

Edited by jetli
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

..to jetli a sus.repo, is a repo, so now any manufactured default they donot need to go back to court to evict? correct as necessary. your fight has just begun, be prepared.

 

I am in the same situation as I was before. Dont understand your question? EXPLAIN WELL done would be nice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

..not sure as said, maybe a vet can clarify a sus.repo?

 

 

 

get as much info on SPPL, it has no directors, so who ordered the repo, what was it your solicitor said on that?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6236

 

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

..not sure as said, maybe a vet can clarify a sus.repo?

 

 

 

get as much info on SPPL, it has no directors, so who ordered the repo, what was it your solicitor said on that?

As said on earlier thread he was woz interestd but not in my case at the time. Said deal with this after we have got you through this ....... I have come out the other end thank God and alot of this is down to the forum. Like said been in my home for 17 years Kids neally bornn here (19 and 21) they were behind me 100% like my Husband and that took alot into accout at hearing today coz they contribute. So not just 2 of us but 4

Edited by jetli
Sorry do you mean the thread earlier on SMPL about County Court Judges? Really tierd after today!
Link to post
Share on other sites

..regards LMC/SPPL with NO directors/no employees since October09;

3 solictors/1 barrister/CIB/CH & last but not least an MP;

 

ALL SAY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THESE TWO LENDERS TO CONDUCT REPOS, AS THERE ARE NO OFFICERS IN THE COMPANIES TO DO SO.

 

 

..dig deep. the truth is out there.

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6236

 

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

..regards LMC/SPPL with NO directors/no employees since October09;

3 solictors/1 barrister/CIB/CH & last but not least an MP;

 

ALL SAY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THESE TWO LENDERS TO CONDUCT REPOS, AS THERE ARE NO OFFICERS IN THE COMPANIES TO DO SO.

 

 

..dig deep. the truth is out there.

 

I AGREE but this is becoming difficult, yes they are doing (like us today) wrong rpo orders the court said SPPL like you know! What is the concrete evidence - No directors etc etc etc does not get a Solicitors back up? Ive BEEN there and DONE it today to keep my Family together. Even the free Solicitor said he did not want to say too much to the 'sub prime Mortage' (hope that means something to you) because they are charging 8.9% and not nice people ( in so may words he was not givin them the time of day when we took the loan out at 14.8%. He did not like dealing with these people as they were charging such a hugh interest rate and charging late interest arrears and charges of £115 per month and consequently are gaining their money back 4 fold!Its just a matter of time and thanks to you all we have it to fight with you, undertand what you are all saying but think because the threads are endless there is something to do so lets all go as a group as all VERY STRONG. What ive been through with you and what you have got my familly through. Dont you think? Safety in numbers???

Edited by jetli
Link to post
Share on other sites

..regards LMC/SPPL with NO directors/no employees since October09;

3 solictors/1 barrister/CIB/CH & last but not least an MP;

 

ALL SAY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THESE TWO LENDERS TO CONDUCT REPOS, AS THERE ARE NO OFFICERS IN THE COMPANIES TO DO SO.

 

 

..dig deep. the truth is out there.

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

 

If we can get just one of these people or govt departments to put this in writing.sppl and lmc are flushed down the tubes and could be in for a massive counterclaim for all their illegal repos since 15/10/09 at least,exposing the whole sordid racket.

When you just think about it how can anyone instruct anybody to instigate litigation when there is no personel its absolutely farcical.Lets say the last directors last instructions were to capstone to carry out all future litigation for the company now that his appointment was terminated and the company was immediately in breach of company law.Its just completely ridiculous.and in reality exposes the workings and agreements between capstone and the spvs.

JETLI

Important thing today was survival,things are moving again here,the directions changed,hopefully this lot really are now on borrowed time.

no mercy

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can get just one of these people or govt departments to put this in writing.sppl and lmc are flushed down the tubes and could be in for a massive counterclaim for all their illegal repos since 15/10/09 at least,exposing the whole sordid racket.

 

 

..it is possible, to pay for a specific legal opinion, on the legal status of LMC/SPPL, from a solicitor. This is common, and I have used it before, the cost could be £150-£200+. You go to one of those weekly 'free' solicitor sessions(you get 20min), put all the paperwork to him/her-CH print out, accounts etc. and then ask 'does this lender have the legal authority to conduct repos in court'. If, the answer is no, pay the money and you will probably get a 1 page opinion on headed paper, which you can show the court. That is a certified legal opinon, which at the very least should cause the judge to doubt the JAWs right to claim.

 

Anybody with SPML/PML, as Attia still there, have to go for her to be struck off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makaveli

KwA

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6236

 

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

 

SHUT'EM DOWN!!!!> SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi can someone please advise me who SPPL are i originally took my mortgage out with preferred admininstered by capstone. My payments always appeared on my statements as capstone until roughly a year ago when they started appearing as SPML. As stated in my previous posts i queried this and was told its easier for capstone just to use one account as the administer several mortgage companies. I asked that it went on my statement as capstone and after much debating they agreed in writing to do this. However that was a few months ago and they have still not actioned this. They then asked for me to assign my insurance to eurosail which i have not done. When i queried preferred status and said that if i sold my house tomorrow should i make the cheque payable to preferred i was told quite clearly NO AS THEY HAVE NO ACCOUNTS AS THEY ARE BEING DEALT WITH BY PRICE ??????(SORRY FORGOT THE REST OF NAME). They said i would have to make the cheque payable to SPML but my land registry records still show preferred as my mortgage company.

 

On another note they have taken up their option to restore my case to court following one missed payment in a year. However they have been very accommodating and have said if i make 2 normal monthly payments plus £50 they will cancel the new hearing. This has baffled me as they are normally unhelpful and downright nasty.

 

Could it be that they just want to grab as many payments before major decisions are made about their future.

 

Incidently they are claiming £5500 arrears however almost half of these are charges !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Any comments appreciated.

 

 

Hi Uneverdid,

 

Re: paying Capstone or SPML - you don't have to pay either of them. Neither Capstone or SPML can give you - want is called "good receipt" for your payments. If Preferred do not have a bank account, do not have directors then you don't have to pay until you get a letter from PREFERRED telling you that they've assigned to another entity. You could stand your ground and tell Capstone that you want the bank details of PREFERRED. Then when you get the sort code and account number, you could ask your bank to check that the account name is PREFERRED. If the repo claim is in the name of Preferred, and they don't tell you Preferred's bank details, you could ask the court for an order that they disclose Preferred's bank details. This would really be damming for them.

 

A word of warning to all. When these [problematic] tell you that they will "cancel" a hearing never ever believe them. It is not possible to unilaterally "cancel" a hearing. No body has the right to phone the court and say, oh, I've changed my mind and want a different appointment!

 

What they really mean when they say "cancelled" is that they may write to the court and ASK the court for an adjournment. You too, could write to the court and ASK for an adjournment. It is not like they are doing you any favours, they can only ASK! Plus in Uneverdid's case it sounds like they WANT and maybe need the adjournment because they have NO good grounds to ask for the possession order! As Uneverdid has complied with the terms of the order. It could be your chance to get an order that they credit back to you all the obscene fees which the FSA have declared unlawful - see GMAC PLUS, they cannot bring you to court and ask for a repo order on a complaint that you breached the order because you did not pay SPML!!!!!!

 

The court will decide whether or not IT WILL GRANT an adjournment. So never be deceived by this nonsense that they will do you any favours when they say they will "cancel" a hearing. And, even if they tell you they HAVE cancelled a hearing, never believe it - check for yourself whether the court has GRANTED an adjournment. In which case, the court will send you a NOTICE that the court has ordered an adjournment. If not, then you must turn up or the court will make decisions in your absence. Take heed and be warned. Healthy doses of skeptism when you hear them promise to "cancel" - don't be fooled by it!!!

 

My experience: I was once told that a hearing was "cancelled". I went to the court anyway, and discovered that the hearing was not "cancelled". So I was there, but the lender wasn't. The judge had a letter from them ASKING for an adjournment. I had to opportunity to be heard, and got the case DISMISSED! End of case. Finished. Gone. Point is, that a hearing is as much an opportunity for you to get what you want the court to do, just as much as it is for them. Never give up YOUR opportunity to be heard. Hearings are NOT CANCELLED. It is a judicial decision of a judge whether or not to adjourn, not a court clerk's decision to rebook an appointment.

 

Supersleuth

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another idea you may like to consider:

 

For those of you who are not paying the entity named as the Chargee at the Land Registry....

 

Given that you are not getting "good receipt" for your payments, it is possible that you could make your payments into the Court Funds Office under your case number on the grounds that you do not have the bank account details of the entity named as the Chargee and on the grounds that the entity named at the LR has no directors and no filed accounts etc., such that you do not know how to pay Preferred who are the only entity that can give you lawful "good receipt" for your payments. If you pay to the Court Funds Office, then e.g. in Uneverdid's case, Preferred will have to make an application to the court to retrive that money...which means...they'll have to prove they lawfully exist!!!...and you get the chance to object to Capstone or SPML taking the money from the Court Funds Office. Plus, there can be no argument that you failed to comply with the terms of a suspended order. And, if Preferred never prove that they lawfully exist then you could ask the court for an order that the case be dismissed and for the CFO to return the money to YOU.

 

The court cannot order you to pay anyone except for the person/entity registered at the LR. Not even Capstone, unless you have had a letter from the entity named at the LR telling you to pay Capstone.

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that you are not getting "good receipt" for your payments, it is possible that you could make your payments into the Court Funds Office under your case number on the grounds that you do not have the bank account details of the entity named as the Chargee and on the grounds that the entity named at the LR has no directors and no filed accounts etc.,

 

Super

 

Last time in court their barrister they sent,asked the judge if we could make our payments to the court fund,as they constantly refused to take payment.

The judge was disgusted that the barrister even asked,if this was a possibility.

If that was a problem then,what are the chances they will reconsider?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RE. preferred mortgages

For a company to have capital stated at some 39million on the CH register and have no bank account is preposterous.Where do they keep the capital then in a large biscuit tin?

If only we could get some of these statements capstone make over the phone in writing.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dotty

re, the draft if you think its inappropriate or too heavy please don't feel obligated in any way to send it if it would in any way compromise your own personal position.I'm just trying to think up some way we could get someone in authority to produce a statement that could be used undisputed in court that these lenders having no directors ie sppl/lmc have no legal standing to bring claims in court,the simple fact alone being that they have no personnel to issue any instructions which is basic common sense for christsakes!Have you or anyone else got any ideas

If it was made by CH or CIB it could not then be easily argued against as its a fact not an opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Super

 

Last time in court their barrister they sent,asked the judge if we could make our payments to the court fund,as they constantly refused to take payment.

The judge was disgusted that the barrister even asked,if this was a possibility.

If that was a problem then,what are the chances they will reconsider?

 

Hi LD,

 

The Judge was right to be disgusted in those circumstances. The lender's barrister was essentially telling the judge that his client was being uncooperative and causing the court administrative system unnecessary work. I also do not believe that the barrister had authority from his client to make such as suggestion, and guess that the judge knew it. The barrister probably said to overcome your complaint that his client was not accepting your payments. The judge was probably irritated because it was likely he believed your complaint and it is no answer for a barrister to tell a judge, my client won't accept the payments so tell them to pay the CFO. It was the bluff that the judge was irritated at, not the fact that you could pay the CFO if the lender didn't accept your payments.

 

Anyway, your reasons for paying into the CFO go way beyond the lenders deliberate refusal to take your payment (which as you know are refused in order to contrive your alleged breach). You have many more grounds for paying into the CFO - LMC don't exist!! Call the CFO and check out procedure - it may be another avenue to explore and then decide whether it will work for you.

 

Supersleuth

Link to post
Share on other sites

LD,

 

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think you need a court order to say you must pay to the CFO. You just need an active case under which you are making payments to a claimant. E.g., if a litigant is making a Part 36 offer (to settle a claim), the litigant would pay it into the CFO and the court must not know about the CFO payment as offer to settle. Thus, I don't think you need a court order to pay the CFO, you just must have an active case. Check it out with the CFO. The fact that you cannot pay the actual entity registered as Chargee at the LR is very very strong grounds for paying the money to the CFO, irrespective of the fact that Capstone decline your payments.

 

Make it work for you, turn it on them! Capstone can decline your payments because they can't give you "good receipt" and at law, you should be paying LMC!!!!...So agree with Capstone, they must, and are at law right, to decline your payments, hence you must pay CFO as you don't have details of LMC's bank account. See how they like that! And besides, at law if LMC/Preferred etc do ever declare bankruptcy then it may be the case that you should be paying LMC's bankruptcy trustee - nobody know who to pay. Stand on your rights - you don't have to pay anyone except for the Chargee named on the Register at LR.

 

Supersleuth

Edited by supersleuth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear,dear me ,the bad person is in trouble again.I second littledotty's motion wholeheartedly that the bad person should not be constantly harangued,he is a maverick , admittedly a rather unusual one who has apparently invented his own language. Despite his rudeness he has helped many people and I am convinced a rough,bluff and uncouth exterior hides a very kind heart.People here should not be so easily offended and have thicker skins.History shows that the good have been persecuted and died for their beliefs,please don't make the same mistake and persecute your messiah.This man is a reincarnated John the Baptist and can handle the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Supersleuth, re my posts.

 

I currently have a complaint with the FOS and i am considering starting one about data protection. The reason being enclosed in my pile of paperwork was a copy of a letter with all my details on it that was sent to a solicitor. Believe it or not the letter stated that i was deceased and could the solicitor please let capstone know who was going to continue paying the mortgage. When i contacted the solicitor he denied ever having received this letter and capstone said it was simply an error.

 

Its a no win situation with capstone, i have asked if they would let me rent out the property to help pay the mortgage. They answered YES if you pay off all arrears and charges and pay us an extra 1% a month. Does it matter to them as long as they get their money.

 

I despair at times with them i really do. I only took this mortgage to free myself of an ex-husband and keep a roof over my two childrens heads. Perhaps in hindsight i should never have done so and looking through my paperwork today i discovered the photographs on the original surveyors correspondence are not even of my property and homeloans landed themselves a nice fat £1875 payment for setting up my mortgage. I realize i may of been stupid its just i was in a very vulnerable situation at the time because i was already under a sus poss order with birmingham midshires.

 

I think next time round im sticking with renting. !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Sorry blast off done now just needed to do that.

 

Thanks to everyone who continues to support each other on this wonderful sight. xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Supersleuth, re my posts.

 

I currently have a complaint with the FOS and i am considering starting one about data protection. The reason being enclosed in my pile of paperwork was a copy of a letter with all my details on it that was sent to a solicitor. Believe it or not the letter stated that i was deceased and could the solicitor please let capstone know who was going to continue paying the mortgage. When i contacted the solicitor he denied ever having received this letter and capstone said it was simply an error.

 

Its a no win situation with capstone, i have asked if they would let me rent out the property to help pay the mortgage. They answered YES if you pay off all arrears and charges and pay us an extra 1% a month. Does it matter to them as long as they get their money.

 

I despair at times with them i really do. I only took this mortgage to free myself of an ex-husband and keep a roof over my two childrens heads. Perhaps in hindsight i should never have done so and looking through my paperwork today i discovered the photographs on the original surveyors correspondence are not even of my property and homeloans landed themselves a nice fat £1875 payment for setting up my mortgage. I realize i may of been stupid its just i was in a very vulnerable situation at the time because i was already under a sus poss order with birmingham midshires.

 

I think next time round im sticking with renting. !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Sorry blast off done now just needed to do that.

 

Thanks to everyone who continues to support each other on this wonderful sight. xx

 

 

I'm no lover of Capstones or their ilk but renting out a property which has arrears is dodgy for any tenants who may suddenly find themselves being evicted. In such circumstances a court order would not even be required the firm could simply demand possession

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...