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

[uneverdid]

Thanks midge61, i shall wait and see what happens then i should have my first initial response by wednesday then they have just over 7 weeks for their final decision and then FOS will take it onboard if im still not happy so many weeks ahead for me i feel.

 

I will updating as necessary

[enoughisenough]

Anybody think mass non-payment might work. It certainly did for the poll tax.

 

It would be great to organise one month where all payments due were donated into a fighting fund instead. And we tell them that they can have the money when they stop the charges. My only reservation is that it's really hard to get co-ordinated action going.

[JonCris]

To stop my continued hijacking, I am in the process of creating a dedicated thread. However, JC, could you please provide your thoughts..

 

Could the content of the sale agreement / deed of charge remove the requirement of a notice of assignment to effect a legal assignment ?

 

I only know from the behaviour of some SPV's that when confronted with the possibility of having to expose their dealings in court have withdrawn all action & I strongly believe their reasoning is because of some of the arguments that have been put forward on the web .....they fear putting it to the test again as this time they might lose

 

 

Anyway when you start your dedicated thread gis a link:D

[Suetonius]

I only know from the behaviour of some SPV's that when confronted with the possibility of having to expose their dealings in court have withdrawn all action & I strongly believe their reasoning is because of some of the arguments that have been put forward on the web .....they fear putting it to the test again as this time they might lose

 

 

Anyway when you start your dedicated thread gis a link:D

 

Here you go JC..

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/210243-mortgage-securitisation-equitable-legal.html

 

The thread has already been viewed a few times. However, no comments as yet.

[uneverdid]

Hi, well i got a phone call from the solicitor who had my information sent to them. He is maintaining that he has not got any letter that relates to me on the deceased gentlemans file. I am totally confused now why would my file with capstone have copy letters on it that have been sent to a solicitor who says he hasnt had them. Or are they watching each others backs i wonder sorry for being so sceptical but i dont trust anyone these days.

[enoughisenough]

Mmm... Now why would that be? The fact is that you have just as much documentation relating to this as they do. Stick to your guns tell them you are not satisfied and you will be sending a copy to the ICO for his information.

 

The next step is the sols. Unless they sort it out it's off to the law society SRA whatever the latest complaints bureau is. It changes very ten bloody months no doubt in the aim of confusing the plebs! Don't be confused. They rely on it.

[enoughisenough]

Oh and I just noticed it was a phone call! Never speak to these people on the phone except to say all business between us must be in writing. I do not conduct financial business by means of telephone conversation except at my discretion.

[uneverdid]

Hi EIE, i have to wait now for Capstone to get back to me the C O have told me to wait 8 weeks and then if im not satisfied with the response i get to fill in the complaint form thats on the way to me at the mo. But like i said in my earlier post human error is not a good enough explanation and the C O also agreed verbally over the phone with me. I just cant believe that Capstone dominate so much of my damn life at the mo.

[Crapstone]

In life, I have only found two things that were impossible.

 

1) Put your right elbow, in your left hand. Then try to lift your elbow out with your right hand.

2) A woman walking past a shoe shop without going in.

 

Therefore, I consider anything else possible

 

 

*THE ABOVE IS A JOKE

 

 

Now you tell me!

 

1) Does touching your toes using wrists and above count, whilst standing and legs kept straight?

2) You got me on that one.

[Crapstone]

Anybody think mass non-payment might work. It certainly did for the poll tax.

 

It would be great to organise one month where all payments due were donated into a fighting fund instead. And we tell them that they can have the money when they stop the charges. My only reservation is that it's really hard to get co-ordinated action going.

 

Now you'd really be losing the plot if you though that could possibly work. Each contract is different and so far removed from the poll tax it's just unreasonable to suggest it when homes are at risk.

 

If you haven't already then go through the right channels. It worked for me and the charges were refunded but I still have a whole new fight and have to do the same again for new charges. The law is clear that charges should be to cover only costs and not be used for profit and a clear explaination given why they have been applied in accordance to the contract.

[Suetonius]

You can forget wrists and above Crapstone...

 

If you saw the size of my belly, you would know I need a stick to reach my toes lol

[Suetonius]

As for a non-payment day, wouldn't that just be an open invitation to lenders to apply more charges and in some circumstances commence repossession proceedings...

 

I think borrowers rather than lenders would have far more to lose.

 

However, I like the idea of some kind of positive action. Just one that won't leave some people in a worse situation

[Crapstone]

You can forget wrists and above Crapstone...

 

If you saw the size of my belly, you would know I need a stick to reach my toes lol

 

Must be just me then:p!

 

My suggestion is to sort out the men from the boys and see who brokered what and find a common ground for misrepresentation and mis-selling. I named my broker who took the money and ran (Berwood Park Associates, Hilton, Derbyshire). SPML have lost all the submissions made by him, the solicitors lost their paperwork and SPML/Capstone have just the signed deed from us and a copy of an offer.

 

So then we go on from there after brokers, fees, insurance and then to arrears and repo'. Look at each step and walk before we run.

[Crapstone]

It may also be amusing to send them a warning 28 day copy S.D. if we can claim more than £750 between us in amounts owed. All above board from a very official DCA:D. I wouldn't expect them to do a darn thing but just the thought of it ..

[crazzycat]

It may also be amusing to send them a warning 28 day copy S.D. if we can claim more than £750 between us in amounts owed. All above board from a very official DCA:D. I wouldn't expect them to do a darn thing but just the thought of it ..

i agree with you, accessible explanation;-)

_________________

Searching for Attorneys Addresses

Edited July 24, 2009 by crazzycat

[enoughisenough]

Hi all

 

General notice

 

I am concerned to note that there is what appears to be new misleading information on any complaint form you submit to the Financial OMbudsman Service.

 

The information states:

 

"if you are complaining on behalf of a business charity or trust please fill in these details, it's annual turnover, annual income or net asset value( at the time you first complained)*

 

*We will need to see evidence of this. If it's over £1m, sorry, we won't be able to help you.

 

OK so just to clarify what this means.

 

1. It does not affect our right to complain.

2. It refers not to the businesses we make complain against but to businesses, charities or trusts who might want to make a complaint.

3. There is no impact on your ability to complain. You can still use the FOS.

 

Hope that's clear.

 

Cheers. EiE. Keep the faith.

[uneverdid]

Hi, Please please please can someone tell me if there is anything else i can do to complain against Capstone.

I now have 3 ongoing complaints as follows:-

 

1 - arrears payments of an additional £50 are not reducing balance because of the interest being charged on arrears and i am being charged £20 each month for paying on the 20th instead of the 1st even though this was what the Judge ordered.

 

2 - Data protection my details were sent to a solicitor of whom i have no connection with.

 

3 - Full subject data access request not complied with, Capstone have admitted this on phone today and have escalated the matter. I have asked it to be officially logged and i was gobsmacked to be rang back within 5 mins with the complaint ref. I had to wait 2 days before i could ring back for the other references.

 

Interestingly i have worked out between my complaint nos that there have been 154 complaints logged in the last 10 days.

 

I have now filled in the form for the information commissioners office for the data protection complaint. I have to wait 8 weeks for the Fos to take on the complaint.

 

What can i do now about the non compliance of the SAR.

 

I want to throw everything i can at these now i am totally fed up with my time and energy that they are getting from me.

 

Also can i claim for my time.

 

I await your responses which i know as usual will be superb.

 

Thanks all

[littledotty27]

Hi all

Had letter back from adjudicator at FOS today and they have stated that they do not consider that the evidence available would suggest that the lender has not acted innapropiately and as the account is heavily in arrears then they are entitled to seek possession.

 

It further states if I am not happy with there outcome I have till 3rd Aug to complain.

Any ideas what I can do? feel like im constantly hitting a brick wall.

Edited July 23, 2009 by littledotty27

[enoughisenough]

Hi Uneverdid.

 

They are an absolute pain. They never let up with their so called tactics. What these tactics do though is bury them into a deeper hole than they already are.

 

I recommend the following but hope that other caggers will also contribute constructive advice.

 

1. Insofar as their totally unlawful charges go use this:

 

There are numerous authorities for regarding such charges as unfair, and therefore not binding on the consumer.

 

In 1993 the European Union published a Directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts (Council Directive 93/13/EEC). The Directive was implemented in the UK via the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994, which came into force on 1 July 1995. The regulations were amended in 1999, in the form of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 2083) (the Regulations).

 

In respect of Schedule 2 of the regulations a non-exhaustive list is provided of terms which may be regarded as unfair. The most relevant in the instant case are the following:

 

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;

 

(m) giving the seller or supplier … exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract;

 

(o) obliging the consumer to fulfil all his obligations where the seller or supplier does not perform his;

 

(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

 

Regulation 8(1) ‘An unfair term in a contract concluded with a consumer by a seller or supplier shall not be binding on the consumer’.

 

MCOB 12 prevents a firm from levying excessive charges (which includes interest).

 

5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.

 

12. –(3) The court on an application under this regulation may grant an injunction on such terms as it thinks fit.

 

The continued application of such charges is in breach of the Financial Services Authority's Treating Customers Fairly initiative. The final deadline for implementation of this initiative by all licensed firms was December 2008.

 

"More generally, as my earlier brief example of the mortgage arrears fee shows, the application of extensive fees for customers already experiencing debt problems may not be fair treatment. Certainly it does not always sit well with the sympathetic and positive treatment of those in hardship.”

 

Source: speech by Tony Boorman, decisions director and principal ombudsman, at the CML's complaints-handling seminar –London, 12 March 2008.

 

Lesley Titcomb, FSA Director responsible for the Mortgage Sector, also said:

 

“As our data shows in these current market conditions more people are struggling to meet their mortgage payments and it is vital that firms treat them fairly. This means paying attention to their individual circumstances and not repossessing their homes when there may be an alternative solution. Repossession has to be the last resort. The FSA’s programme of actions to address the problem areas, includes a closer examination of charges, in particular the circumstances in which these are levied, and whether they are compatible with Treating Customers Fairly”

 

*Source: FSA reiterates call for firms to treat customers fairly in current market conditions - FSA/PN/087/2008 - 5August 2008

 

The Regulations are clear. They are binding on all courts by virtue of emanation from a Council directive. The regulatory authorities are in broad agreement. There must be fair treatment of consumers.

 

2. Complain immediately to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

[email protected]

 

3. The same as 2!

 

Give them absolute hell. And while you are on make a complainnt to the OFT the FSA and the FOS.

 

Office of Fair Trading

Fleetbank House

2-6 Salisbury Square

London

EC4Y 8JX

 

The Financial Services Authority (Mortgage Compliance Unit)

25 The North Colonnade

Canary Wharf

London E14 5HS

 

[email protected]

 

The FSA and the OFT will tell you to get lost but that doesn't matter. They have statutory duties and the more complaints they receive the more they are under pressure to do something. The point is not instant remedy. The point is constant pressure. Keep doing this and we will break through.

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

[uneverdid]

Hi EIE, i knew you would be along to advise me i am quite impressed with the FOS speed of reaction i spoke to them last week and Capstone told me today that they received a letter from Fos on Monday. Again capstone told me my first response would be received in 5 working days. I rang on Tuesday and was told the letter was on its way, rang again today and was told it was coming out today blatent lies but they still insist that when i have had their final response within 8 weeks they will not budge on it. Thats even when i said but the FOS will take on my complaint then if im still not happy. I really just don't want to pay them a penny and wish i could somehow legally put my payments on hold whilst investigations take place. If there is a loophole that lets me do this please do let me know. I will keep the faith and i absolutely refuse to be beaten down by this shabby lot any more especially when i read that they have the lowest number of mortgages yet the largest record of repossessions.

 

I appreciate all your help everyone

[littledotty27]

Any advice on post #1019 any help appreciated as time is running out,only got till 18th sept.

[enoughisenough]

Hi dotty

 

Will try to be along soon.

 

Uneverdid

 

please don't speak to them on the phone unless you are recording it.

[enoughisenough]

and wish i could somehow legally put my payments on hold whilst investigations take place. If there is a loophole that lets me do this please do let me know.

 

None that I've discovered, I'm afraid to say. Yet...

 

Keep the faith. EiE.

[enoughisenough]

Hi all

Had letter back from adjudicator at FOS today and they have stated that they do not consider that the evidence available would suggest that the lender has not acted innapropiately and as the account is heavily in arrears then they are entitled to seek possession.

 

It further states if I am not happy with there outcome I have till 3rd Aug to complain. Any ideas what I can do? feel like im constantly hitting a brick wall

 

Hi Dotty

 

Not sure moving forward how to help. I know your arrears are huge but have you been able to quantify the charges? This might be your only chance of success. At this stage the FOS are getting flooded and there's a kind of sifting going on.

 

Unfortunately they are more likely to intervene in PPI cases and very moderate complaints (easier to resolve) than get involved in anything that they see as the work of the courts.

 

If your charges are massive (i.e more than 50% of your alleged arrears) I would think about what you want to do next. 3rd August seems like a very tight deadline.

 

I would itemise the charges and then send that along with the post above on UTCCRs above to both your friends and mine at the FOS and the TPA masquerading as a legitimate operator.

 

You have been through hell with these people and they have paid no regard to your circumstances.

 

However it's also the case that very large arrears cases will not be dealt with at all sympathetically.

 

There must be some grounds on which you can fight.

[uneverdid]

Hi when i rang the FOS they did say to me that if a judgement had been made for a suspended possession or a repossession then they were unable to get involved.

 

I hope littledotty that you are able to get some help i think the whole system stinks and we should not let these poor excuses for human beings get the better of us.

 

Good Luck