Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I sent the parcel on the 10th of September.   The package contained shoes.    The parcel is worth £70, and that's what I marked it as on the lost claims form.    I paid £3.04 for delivery.   I was refunded £23.04   So I am owed £50.  
    • No real update as such I ordered another 5550 via the sales route (24/9) after finally getting a quote to agree (£400 more than the original but with technical arranging a cashback of the difference). Got it earlier than the estimated date and instantly knew it would be another off the shelf product = same trackpad issue.  New builds take a couple of more weeks to get to me for obvious reasons. Sure enough, it had it too along with a couple of other issues so it was boxed up within minutes of opening.   They picked this up last week and have refunded it.  In the meantime, the new build via technical with the FIXED part has moved yet again to now the end of November (4th time the date has moved?)   I decided to give them another option of an on-site repair with another new purchase to speed things up but leaving the new replacement option open too should there be other faults on the new purchase.  They agreed, but the quotes were beyond ridiculous and beyond the cashback/refund allowance they were giving me (15%)   From the last purchase a few weeks ago, the quote went up 17.43% with the wrong cpu,  19.82% with the right cpu but wrong screen and finally a whopping 44.16% to the original cost with all the spec being correct citing "promotional offers in June July meant it was cheaper" despite the previous one being only 12% more in September.   So we are now back to just one single route which is the technical route replacement when they have the part in stock - this is at the end of November supposedly.  I still have the option of a full refund of the original cost back in July from now until sign-off on the new machine or if the new machine fails to materialise.   The way I see it with this option is I am essentially using the machine for free until they pull their finger out or until I find a better alternative which I am exploring on a daily basis because a the end of it, I either get a brand new working replacement that is fit for purpose or I get a refund after using it for several months.    
    • Thanks uncleB   One other question: Can a mortgagee in possession refuse to sell? And instead rent?   Or do they have legal obligation to sell? The property has been taken off-line and hasn't been marketed for last 2 months.  
    • It seems to me that you could probably apply for judgement on 30 October. However it's a good idea to keep on checking regularly to see if it is permitted before then. As soon as it allows you, do it.
    • Deemed service on a company is two days after issue. Deemed service on a litigant in person is five days after issue – unless something has changed. I've already said that proposing to send further particulars is generally speaking unnecessary and only complicates matters as you are finding out. However as you have indicated that you are sending further particulars, send them further particulars and simply state in the body of the particulars that you have nothing to add to the particulars of claim contained in the original claim form at this moment. Send that straightaway so that when you apply for judgement you can click the box and say that yes you have done that. It might not have been fatal not to have informed them that it was a laptop – but it is better that you did and the important thing is that they had been told of the item and of the value at the time that you entered into the delivery contract. I think that you will find that laptops are one of their prohibited items – along with almost everything else in the world
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

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

Recommended Posts

..no need a KwA special forces unit on site,


will finish ODJS, and give mission debrief on completion..stand fast.



sitref quote itbg other thread.


ITBG/LC Jackalfinder General.

Message from Commander in Chief Littledotty27 and the Joint Chiefs.

Covert ops suspended

INTEL reports.... other thread...... JAWs diversionary tactics to split forces

JAWs now attacking on all fronts

Defences and shields holding at present

All covert ops units recalled to Headquarters.... immediate

For discussion of new strategic Battleplan AND RE ARMAMENT

Troops wilting,morale low in the face of unrelenting JAWs attacks and aggression.

We're all in strung out shape, but stayin' frosty, and alert. We can't afford to let one of those b.stards in here.




Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi All,


I have a suggestion for applying some pressure to our friends.


How many of you have ever received notification from PML, SPML etc that your account will be administered by Capstone??? (Very few if any at all).


What I suggest each person does is contacts Capstone and ask for an up to date letter from them and your Lender authorising Capstone to administer your account.


Each and everyone of you signed an agreement for a loan/mortgage from your lender and it is them you were led to believe would also be administering it. Suddenly Capstone appear and everyone seems to just assume that payment should be made to them with no questions asked. For the likes of PML payments usually show on your bank statement as being made to SPML. I believe that Capstone are unable to provide good receipt for monies paid in the absence of some written authorisaion. This is a basic approach that seems to have been overlooked by everyone and I think it needs addressing.


I for one have raised this question with Capstone and have been refused the information and therefore as a result I am now refusing to pay to them unless they can prove they are entitled to administer my account. Until such a time I do not have any more legal obligation to pay Capstone than I do any of you on here.


Anyone in a vunerable position with your lender should be aware of some risk involved in upsetting Capstone with this approach but I dont think there is a lot they can do as the burden of proof is on them.


Anyone with a suspended repo for example has an order by the court to make payment to their lender not Capstone and therefore unless Capstone can prove that they are assigned the administration rights then as far as I see it, your lender has provided you with no means to pay.


It is clear they have something to hide and are more likely unable to provide a written document of assignment as none of the lenders have any employees to provide this and it this may have been a massive oversight on their part in the beginning.


I for one am fed up with being bullied by these idiots and I think its time for people to start bullying them.


Based on Capstone's refusal to provide proof I am considering an LBA notice to Capstone for fraudulently extracting money from me and making false misrepresentations.


Any thoughts on this guys?



Link to post
Share on other sites


Thanks for holding the line and stepping into the breach.

You're right with this.Capstone are the cash bond administrators for the spvs I don't think they have such an agreement with the originator/lender.This is coupled with the fact that they have no chance whatsoever of receiving current authorisation from sppl or lmc to act on their behalf in litigation or in fact collection because these companies have ZERO employees.So whos giving the authorisation, some divine entity.Yet sppl/lmc are still carrying out repos and litigation through capstone and the courts are letting them get away with it.

Dotty THIS APPLIES PARTICULARLY IN YOUR CASE.Wheres capstones authorisation?????If you're a solicitor you show written instructions from your client where's theirs from their non existent principal??

THE ONLY PERSON FROM THE OTHER LENDERS WHO CAN GIVE SUCH AUTHORISATION IS THE SOLE REMAINING DIRECTOR AND ONLY EMPLOYEE.(Which actually she's not as the accounts say she is employed by Lehman brothers now defunct,so work that one out)

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Capstone appointed a new director yesterday-JEFFREY ANDREW LUNDGREN

Edited by littledotty27

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s, of the investigating & prosecuting organisations:


DO NOT 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) : tel#0207 637 6236  


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capstone appointed a new director yesterday-JEFFREY ANDREW LUNDGREN


hmmm - take it this is the same man who was with Gmac for 11 years in the USA and then in UK - its all the same little clan as ever

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's commander special field ops itbg/lc/jfg and bar,

a casualty ? m.i.a. presumed to be no more.

Overwhelmed by the mongojackalhordes.?




What chance did he ever have against this lot.?

He's probably at this very minute on an express elevator to hell; going down!

Search party despatched.



Encouraging news a sole survivor has been spotted by the drones!!!!!

Could it be?


Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all


We took mortgage out in May 2005/repoed Oct 2008.


Always paid to London Mortgage Company


Got into areas, not sure for how much, but on 03//2005 said in SAR small areas letter to be sent.


Then 07/2005 Unable to issue claim in court at his stage, due to an error on the part of sols who acted at the time, we do not have a legal charge.

The bwrs completed a mortgage deed in favour of (blanked out) which was registered at Land Registry. They insisted we use their sol.


02/2006 saying they would not agree to payment change.


We signed charge March 2006 to London Mortgage Company (March 2005)



04/2006 they say that now charge has been registered they can start proceedings. They put in a claim against original solicitors for £4,250 fees were taken from this of £3,820.61 with the remainder being applied to this account.


It goes on and on sometimes up to date with shortfall of only 20p said to monitor payments. They had suspended order from court, for £1,500 each month plus £500 he could not keep up, never knew true arrears.


To this day we do not know any breakdowns.


We were in arrears, but would give us any help.


Any thoughts


Agatha c

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to have been absent for so long. Illness.


And with impeccable timing, I opened mail today which I had been unable even to open since Feb 19 owing to temperatures of 103 and being quite beyond anything more taxing than blinking.


Guess what, letter from SPML dated Feb 19 telling me I have eviction date set for March 15th.


I have just 12 days !


So now I really have to get my skates on get this case going.


I should be getting my mortgage interest paid in full at present as I am on benefits as a single parent bringing up a child full time. But this hasn't been paid owing to bureaucratic and other complications for over a year, but should be sortable.


The question is, if I fill out N244 and ask the judge for time to allow me to liaise with the benefit people to sort this out, will the Judge give me time or just say stuff you ? If I does I will be evicted.


BUT, it is now time get going with my claim, which is what I had in mind when I started this thread. Class action. My claim contains elements that nearly all of us here have experience of.


It amounts to mis-selling and downright fraud. I have both, and I believe I have evidence.


It's time to go get them. And where are all the rest of you with the same experiences ? Doesn't anyone actually want to do anything about all this ?


I am disappointed at what seems to be a spectacularly lukewarm response from viewers of this thread - over 2500 of them.


It seems to me that we do all suffer the same signifigant problem. We all seem to know that we have cases against these lenders, and we all talk endlessly about it. But absolutely nothing happens.


It occurs to me this is because, no matter how clever some of us might be, or how many little snippets and fragments of law we know or are discovering, we are not lawyers and cannot look at our own cases or those cases of other people and say, yes, that looks like a legal action is possible against the lender for whatever reason.


So, it seems to me that none of us will get anywhere at all unless we can tap into some (initially quite basic ) legal advice.


And to do that we need to outline our own cases/experiences to see and to allow others to see how a case might be brought against a lender.


It is simply not possible to proceed without these outlines for lawyers to look at.


This is why I suggested earlier in this thread that people write their cases out, so it is possible to pinpoint where the action is, so the speak, and to develop the possibility of taking legal action.


Legal action can only exist with a statement of case. It cannot exist as woolly mouthings and imprecations of how dreadful lenders are and general woffling and cursing on forums.


It needs more than that.


I would have happily outlined my case and certainly intended to as an example, but haven't had the time.


But, here's a small start.


- I was on benefits looking after very ill partner and three small children. DHSS was paying mortgage interest in full to Alliance & Leics. DHSS suddenly spat venomously at me “you’re a dealer’ meaning because I told them I was selling my possession to keep afloat they decided I was claiming fraudulently. What a joke.


- DHSS stopped all benefits and demanded all my finance related documents. This results in Alliance & Leics repossessing, actually telling me ‘we will get you out of that house’ - a clear indications of pointless, meaningless malevolence.


- I am hurled into the subprime cess pit and hurriedly re-mortgage with Kensington because it is a better option than being homeless etc.


- Kensington mortgage rapidly becomes unmanagable so re-mortgage with ING, ditto, sell house to avoid repossession.


- Starting with mortgage of only £100k with Alliance & Leics, it has now ballooned to £283k and I am dazed and incompetent, not least because I have a seriously ill partner and three children.


- selling house for just over £400k, I’m left with just £80k and buy a basic, ex-council house for £161 000 with a fraudulent broker who knows I am unemployed etc. Lender is Spml. Churn mortgage nine months later to Birmingham Midshires on bad advice from another fraudulent broker who say he specialises in getting mortgages for people who are unemployed and on State benefits.


- Birmingham Midshires treat me like a piece of S**t (long story, will fill in later). they foreclose - repossess.


- In desperation I re-mortgage yet again using Capital One (the big American credit card company) brokers who are so devious it is almost beyond belief ( will fill in here too)


They tell me the lender SPML comes to their office a couple of days a week to check over final paperwork and approve loan for final money transfer to borrower at very last stage. The broker makes it clear the lender is in their office doing this job.


In other words, the broker is not remotely independent and the whole situation is completely fraudulent. Unsurprisingly, the minute Lehmans collapses, Capital One make their broker company completely vanish in an instant, very early on in the credit crunch, as they know from their other experiences in the USA, that they have been thoroughly fraudulent and are now trying to cover their tracks, double quick.


- SPML seemed to have just about doubled my monthly interest payments with various penalties ( a totally unfair, clear example of loan sharking to bring before a court.Parlianemnt/EU & uncle Tome Cobley).


- They have now issued second eviction order.


So, the bottome line is that I have been successively milked of at least £500 000 of equity in my house and am now threatened with homelessness and the inability to properly look after my eleven year old son. Aslo, with severe medical problems threatening to turn nasty and possibly kill me, I stand little chance of surviving this if the lender has their way.


Call me angry or what ?


Another aspect of this is that once I started having to deal with the severe illness of my partner and then became a ‘client of the State’ entirely dependent on their bloody handouts and mindlessly stupid bureaucracy, I found that almost every experience I had was one of State sponsored bureaucratic violence.


Take this little gem.


On questioning me about how I housed myself after I sold my house and was left with £80k, the council official dealing with my imminent eviction and homelessness issues said she was ‘gobsmacked’ that I had used the £80 k to actually buy a house. She said I should have used the money to rent until it ran out then claimed housing benefit.


She disapproved of people buying houses, and used her disapproval to make this bizarre claim I had made myself intentionally homeless and would therefore not receive any help from the council when I was evicted and could expect nothing more than a shop doorway to bed down with my eleven years old son for the night.


What a charmer !


On those grounds she pompously announced her decision that I had made myself intentionally homeless. She actually put that in writing.


Here’s another. I paid £85 to set up a company three years ago as part of process to commence work. the council saw this dormant company ( by virtue of their rather silly snooping activities) and then refused to allow me housing benefit. The company is a possession - like a table or a chair. It is worth nothing because it has never traded, it is entirely dormant and there are not even accounts for it.


Bureaucratic spite or what ?



Link to post
Share on other sites


My personal advice is to forget eveything short term and concentrate entirely on preventing your imminent eviction.

Firstly immediately get hold of Ell-enn for help with procedure.

All other grievances and actions can wait until you're in better health.

You have to absolutely get your benefits situation sorted out immediately and get a letter from them stating how much in backpayment they will pay.

Show them the eviction notice and jump down their throats ASAP.

Your major difficulty is you will have nothing to pay towards any arrears as you have no income so how do you propose to get around this?






What is your strategy and defence here?

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All!


Rocket1,In reply to your post and in my view:


1.As Ryde has stated you need to focus on stopping the repo proceedings.

Personally,I think that as long as the interest will be paid through the benefits system and you have written confirmation of such this will enable a judge to order a review say 6 months down the line and hopefully by then your benefits will be sorted out.


2.You know for a fact the arrears amount is and will never be accurate - so again this is another line of attack - to get an order against the lender for the correct breakdown of the arrears amount.


3.Regarding the further action,as Ryde has suggested get your health back on track and then we will see how to help each other.


Anyway,I hope this helps.


If you have any questions,just ask.


Keep us posted.


All the best!





Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Nightmare & ryde,


Of course you are both quite right. The priority is to stop eviction. But it is an integral part of that to start getting serious about me bringing a case for miss-selling etc.


There is no doubt that I have been 'an ideal serial victim' of the sub-prime dishonesty nonsense - milked of hundreds of thousands of pounds (maybe £500k +). and I am sure I have evidence.


It is just time consuming and difficult to build the case and unearth any evidence. I have some taped conversations, for instance, but will need to listen carefully to maybe 50 tapes to get the juicy bits. I'm also kicking myself about not being more meticulous about taping everything at all times. I would really have some gems. But maybe I still do anyway.


It maybe a key issue that SPML gave me one fraudulent mortgage, knowing I was without income of any kind, and I then churned it on the advice of a broker who told me he 'specialised' in getting mortgages for people on benefits.


At this point I was on benefits again, so another fraudulent mortgage I was forced into completely against my will. I never wanted any of these mortgages, but had to take them as the only option to being re-possessed and made homeless.


In each case brokers whispered seductively that each mortgage might be onerous, but " I would be able to re-mortgage in a couple of years with a less onerous mortgage and get my life back on track when I became properly employed etc etc'.


Then after I left SPML for Birmingham Midshires who repossessed me in a miasma of savagery, SPML took me on yet again, knowing full well I was in receipt of income support and I stated unequivocally I intended to be claiming benefits after the mortgage was finalised.


Also, I just cannot get my head around how when a borrower gets into some genuine difficulty, this is used as an excuse to effectively 'steal' huge amounts of money in 'penalties' which would be plainly just illegal if it wasn't for the weasel word 'contract' - you signed a mortgage contract with small print which says we can extort money from you in an immoral manner should you ever have difficulties with your mortgage.


We need to get a petition going about this and get questions asked in Parliament etc. Get a regular campaign going with big name supporters like MPs etc.


This mortgage market is just plain wicked. And this is not just my opinion, obviously.


Others who hold this view clearly include that Parliamentary Select Committee who recently produced that excoriating report, and various USA Federal States who brought an action in 2006 against one lender, Ameriquest, which was settled out of court.


If that was done there, it can be done here too. We need to find out more about that case and the documentation outlining that case.


Any offers of some help with that. I don't have the time to do everything ?


Frankly, with all this body of information coming out of the woodwork about the mortgage lenders here in the UK, I am completely astonished that there is such incredible inertia that no meaningful actions about fraudulent lending practices seem to have taken place yet.

Edited by rocket1
Link to post
Share on other sites


How have you actually got away with not paying spml anything for nearly a year?? correct me if I'm wrong usually its a couple of months and they're litigating.

A class action just won't happen,people on here are mainly skint and struggling to keep up payments so no funds to instruct a legal expert and there's a general apathy until they get the court papers.Its honestly been discussed on here so many times.

For brokerage issues see this case

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

I know for a fact that spml and the like gave secret commissions to various brokers to push their products.

An eviction hearing doesn't seem to be the right place to raise this issue as a defence.But if you have nothing else you will have to.

This is a real tricky one.Assuming your benefits are back payed will that cover all the mortgage costs?excluding arrears charges added,because a judge is going to want to know that you can afford to pay back any arrears and from what you say you have no extra income.

There is a whole raft of fsa guidelines re misselling and affordability you can use but this is complex and time is short.

EIE has posted re:his contact with an investigative journalist this is a great positive way forward but it won't help you,times running out.

You have to get hold of Ell-enn today and the benefits agency immediately.

What is your proposal for a viable defence?

You have to focus solely on this matter,beat the eviction and buy yourself some time.

Take the weekend out and you've got less a week and a half court hours to get this together.

You have to start now.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites



I've just had the wind knocked out my sails with a telephone call just received from the pension credit gnomes telling me how hard they are trying to help me by asking me a vital question so they can make an instant decision today without (would you believe it ) needing the actual paperwork from me showing the evidence of borrowing figures etc.


But, they flagged up a wacky problem that's new to me. Two years ago, before I turned 60, I was receiving DHSS income support and mortgage interest relief. there was a limit of £100 000 at that time on the maximum mortgage the government would support. this figure changed to £200 000 ( I think) since the credit crunch farce.


So I was confident my current mortgage of about £171 000 would be paid in full.


BUT, the pension credit people now tell me they have a maximum limit of £100 000 for mortgage interest relief. So I will have about £71 000 of mortgage not being paid for, So no hope of evading eviction now, it seems.


But, what the hell does anyone claiming and being for a mortgage of more than £100 000 on income support do when they turn 60 and suddenly find their mortgage no longer paid and them being led into certain eviction by the rapacious and wicked lenders ?


I find things just getting even more bizarre at every turn.


In answer to your question. they did litigate and I got a suspension over a year ago and I've been hanging by a thread since.


The pension credit people just didn't do anything for some reason, but they should have been paying.


So my defence was going to be, 'look, I am legally entitled to the full interest being paid but it is in the hands of a bureaucracy and can I please have more time to allow them to sort it out'.


Now that is not looking good because I've just been told the full amount won't be paid.


But I'm hoping it must be wrong. Surely they would be a national uproar if the govmnt said they had upped the mortgage limit to £200 000 (which they did) but then everyone found out that when they turned 60 they were turfed out of their houses because of 'the rules'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shelter England - Support for mortgage interest

rocket see above link it seems ridiculous that groups of pensionable age would be excluded from this and the old level would apply

it says the figure was increased from 100000 to 200000 from the start of 2009 so has be worth giving them a call and telling them your circumstances

Your defence of blaming bureaucratic bungling might just work if you can find supporting documentation.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites


I had the same problem when I started to get my state pension. and as you are female, you get your state pension when you are 60. This counts as income and before you turned 60, you received no income except pension credit. This then affected the amount of pension credit you were allowed because it is income related. Also, because you have turned 60, you are classed as retired and it is only those people receiving income support that can claim interest up to £200,000. Those of us who are receiving our state pension can lump it as far as the government is concerned. I sometimes think that they would really like to just put us to sleep when we reach retirement age. Its funny that no one in the government has said anything about the mercy killing debate that's going on at the moment!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as class action is concerned, as I understand it they are not possible in the UK until rule changes are made that allow a judgement to be applicable to number of people. At the moment, a judgement is made for an indivdual. Also, it would require a change in the protocol for the legal profession, because they are not allowed to take their fees from the damages paid to their clients. For a much better explanation go to google and type in class action uk and a link will be shown to The Lawyer magazine in which there is an article about class action in the UK, (tried going directly to the Lawyer site but it does not show article).

Edited by eagleforms
typo. wrong info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another black hole!!?

Anyone nearing retirement age with a mortgage over 100k being paid by the benefits agency is done for and facing certain repo.

How can the lender give a mortgage in the first place theres the affordability test set supposedly by the FSA guidelines which should have taken this event into consideration.

That has to be part of any defence.


it looks like you may be left with misselling and brokerage issues here.There are test cases in your favour already posted on this site,so some quick research is required I know I have posted 2, will find links later.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

rocket the first has already been posted above the second is here hope it is of assistance .





Key repossession ruling opens door to mortgage mis-selling complaints


An Ombudsmanlink3.gif's verdict offers hope for homeowners who are battling to keep a roof over their heads. Neasa MacErlean reports

A remarkable Ombudsmanlink3.gif victory for a householder who had his home repossessed after being mis-sold a hefty mortgage could set a precedent, preventing others from losing their properties as the recession bites, lawyers say.

This year an estimated 75,000 families - against 40,000 last year - will lose their homes, according to the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML).

But many who face handing back the keys could be helped by rules covering "suitable advice" for borrowers, buried in the handbook of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the City regulator.

Andrew Brown (not his real name) struggled to repay his mortgage but subsequently took his mis-selling case to the Financial ombudsmanlink3.gif Service, and has now won. Despite turning to the foslink3.gif late on and being repossessed, he will receive compensation - while other borrowers who begin cases at an earlier stage than he did might well be able to save their homes too.

A housing association tenant, Brown had the valuable promise of a rent fixed for life. However, a mortgage adviser persuaded him to buy the property and failed to consider "what would happen when the attractive discounted rate [set up on that mortgage] ended", according to an foslink3.gif spokeswoman.

Brown was repossessed and had to move; he then lodged a complaint with his mortgage adviser and ultimately brought the case to the foslink3.gif.

Industry specialists believe more claims of this kind are now likely to emerge. The main source of optimism for those in a similar position lies deep within the FSA's rulebook for mortgage advisers, Mortgage and Home Finance: Conduct of Business (MCOB).

This states mortgage advice must be "suitable for that customer" and that advisers "must make and retain a record" of it being suitable; this is known, crucially (and rather technically), as complying with section 4.7. Breaches of the MCOB rules are "actionable at the suit of a private person who suffers loss as a result", under section 150 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

"Undoubtedly, such cases would succeed," says professional negligence barrister John Virgo of Guildhall Chambers in Bristol. "There is a fundamental obligation under MCOB [rules] and I'm sure there will be a pretty big increase in this sort of litigation."

Philip Ryley, head of financial services and markets at solicitor Michelmores, is more cautious. He says: "It really depends on each individual case as to whether they have received a service which would breach MCOB rules. It is an issue that may be raised before district judges [deciding repossession cases].

"If it develops wholesale, it devalues the meritous cases that exist. The courts will soon become familiar with these arguments and will then require the borrowers to produce evidence at an early stage. to root out frivolous or unsubstantiated allegations."

Though there may be concern some borrowers might try to exploit the MCOB rule without good cause, there appear to be many cases of people being mis-sold mortgages they could not afford.

A Citizens Advice report entitled Set Up to Fail, on the sub-prime lending market in 2007, found the charity's repossession clients had often found themselves with "inappropriate and unaffordable" mortgages and secured loans, and that people buying council houses received "particularly poor advice".

One case it highlighted concerned a couple with a disabled child in south-east Wales who were persuaded to take a second mortgage on their home. The loan wiped out their equity and meant £1,300 - 87% - of their £1,500 monthly income went on mortgage repayments.

The CML accepts the rulebook can be invoked by consumers. "The MCOB rules are there for a reason: to protect consumers," says spokeswoman Sue Anderson. "Consumers have 'the ability and right' to rely on these regulations if they believe they have not been dealt with correctly," she says.

In 2007, Cash highlighted how cold-callers were using dodgy selling tactics to convince social housing tenants to exercise their "right to buy" and saddle these low-income homes with inappropriate mortgages.

Although the Ombudsmanlink3.gif found in Brown's favour, the issue remains complicated. The foslink3.gif is charged with restoring people, as far as possible, to the situation they would otherwise have been in - and that is not straightforward in circumstances such as these.

"Historically, you may not have been worse off," says the foslink3.gif spokeswoman, referring to the fact that when house prices were rising - until 2007 - people who had been mis-sold an unsuitable mortgage might not have lost out if the price of their house was rising. They would not have won compensation.

Now, the Ombudsmanlink3.gif is having to work out how to compensate someone who has not been protected by the rise in property values.

Have you got a claim for mis-selling?


• If you are in financial difficulty, first try all other steps to resolve your crisis: talk to the lender as early as possible about arrears; seek advice from a debt charity; curb spending and draw up a tight budget; and try to boost your income.

• Be brutally honest: if you've been in any way economical with the truth in your mortgage application, such as overstating your income (whether unwittingly or not), your case will be much weaker.

• You could have a case if your mortgage adviser never explored affordability with you, or dealt with you in a superficial way. Advisers should rely on past figures for income and outgoings, says Philip Ryley of Michelmores. If they don't have them, then you're off to a strong start.

• You might have extra grounds for a case of mis-selling if your mortgage stretched beyond your retirement date and your adviser did not explore that as an affordability issue.

• A case based on what's known as mortgage "misrepresentation" might also be feasible. According to Ryley, this might be arguable if you were "given a very hard sell, or told everything good about the product and given no information about what would happen when interestlink3.gif rates went up". If misrepresentation is argued successfully, the contract can be rescinded - as a case in 1991 proved.

• To avoid the expense of lawyers' fees, a homeowner can make a claim with the individual who advised on the mortgage, and if the response is unsatisfactory take the case to the Financial ombudsmanlink3.gif Service. The foslink3.gif would probably request that your repossession proceedings are put on hold during any investigation.

• Even if your mortgage began before the MCOB was ushered in on 31 October 2004, the rules could still apply, says one lawyer who wishes not to be named. "It makes no difference as to when the loan was entered in to, for the purposes of the arrears rules," he says.

• Publicity about such cases will take time to filter out, as they are likely to be settled informally. But if people do start making claims in significant numbers, it could snowball, says one unnamed financial services lawyer. "What would be interesting would be a group action," he said.

Edited by ryde
Link to post
Share on other sites

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s, of the investigating & prosecuting organisations:


DO NOT 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) : tel#0207 637 6236  


Link to post
Share on other sites



can you post up Resetfan Ltd, latest accounts?








in da VoJ


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!!!!





Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the above fine applies to a seperate type of investment than ours and has been going on for some time.


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, I'm afraid to say, is all concerning the investors in the mortgage securities.


It is obviously a rule of thumb that 6000 (various rich, greedy or corporate/instititutionalised investors) investing in £200 billion worth of securities (secured on your home and mine) on a promise of so designated "copper bottomed gaurantees" should be looked after first, whilst the poor bloody borrower, themselves a far more deserving recipient of the FSA's powers of compliance and recompense get strung out to the last before of course being thrown out into the street.


The copper bottomed guarantees were of course a mad joke that got the money flooding in on a tide of naivety, greed and other human frailities. And even those who Tommy Hilfiger like followed the crowd got suckered in, chewed up and spat out. And IN STEPS the FSA to protect the 'vulnerable'. RUBBISH.


The injustice is screaming out here.


I was always of the understanding that investments may go down or even kaput. I was never of the understanding that you could just make up arrears and throw people onto the streets with all the social carnage that creates.


If this was France they'd be burning the fecking barricades. WHERE IS THE FSA's objective 4.?


Follow Heather Brooke and put in a Freedom of Information request to the USELESS FSA.


Get the FSA to spill their guts bit by bit. And when they do a trickle becomes a flood. That's what she did to our marvellous MPs.


And whichever faith she follows, may that faith bless her for having the guts to do so. And if she follows no established faith that is equally fine by me.


Heather, please respond...

Edited by enoughisenough

Keep the faith. EiE.


Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law








Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633


Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643


Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955


Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders


Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231




"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...