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

[ryde]

crapstone

Totally off topic but I actually agree with the £75 fine. Knowing the area well , it's full of Canada Geese and the 'duck feeders' have promoted a huge increase in rats, as well as leaving their litter behind. It's well sign-posted not to feed the ducks, so there is no reasonable excuse to ignore it. quote.

of course you're in the midlands and it was smethwick,I'm a brummie not far away ,strong in the arm and thick in the head! and the victim of the fine told the paper there were no signs up !

[ryde]

crapstone

need some diversion at this time in the morning am watching duran duran at the moment some of bhams finest reminds me of thatcher who i hated at the time for wiping out manufacturing in our area but now am beginning to reevaluate her in the light of the shower that has followed especially with being sold out to europe can you imagine her standing for this ?, am ex brummie as made the mistake of going south but you never lose your roots and I have immediate rapport with anyone from home , you're a baggies supporter then?(and a nightowl)

crapstone

thanks have returned the compliment

Edited November 14, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

GR EIE

This was said on a light note late at night!!!! in a political rant born of increasing frustration Icertainly didn't wish it to be taken seriously and apologise for posting without any considered thought! I hated Thatcher she wiped out the manufacturing industry where I came from, we had street riots because of her policies,the mining industry was wiped out and the areas devastated and she bankrolled the back of all this by wasting all the north sea oil revenue .In her favour she was tough with Europe on the budget and our contributions(thats what i mean by the sell out),europe respected her as a powerful political figure instead of the wishy washy lot we have had since who have jumped on the euro gravy train expense bonanza eg the kinnocks.

Edited November 14, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

GR

Any joy in court the other day or is it all still going on?

ITBG

quote

under 3 :

(a) "I have absolute proof, from written evidence, that SPML is both balance sheet and trading insolvent. The last director, Ms Amany Attia, is now being prosecuted by Companies House, for failing to act in the role of director in providing 2 years of accounts. This can be confirmed by Mr Kevin Hughes, of the Compliance Team-Companies House. SPML, was a mortgage provider, and has no employees, has ceased trading, 1 director(under prosecution), and falsely claimed it is 'trading' at the same registered address as Capstone.

Furthemore, SPML has actively been conducting property repossessions through the courts as SPML, where it has so been in 'wrongful trading'. The courts and general public, are completely unaware of this, except Companies House. I believe this case is of great importance and in the national interest, as families are being evicted from their homes, by effectively a bankrupt company."

 

 

I am with you 100% on this.

Part of my defence in pending action which is drawing extremely close is the title to sue issue

.1)I have requested proof as to the solvency of the litigants when as a wholly owned subsidiary, their parent(lehmans) is in administration.

2)Proof they have not sold the loan on(their whole business being securitization)so no longer own it.

They have simply stated they own the loan and are not insolvent and the court has accepted this!!!

So your quote in 3 above is essential to my case and to any investgation by the relevant authorities.Can you post the proof as you state" that these companies is both balance sheet and trading insolvent."because we all know they are but proving it is a different matter.

 

I can then use it in both my defence and complaint because I would just love to see this lot bite the dust.

 

What needs to be determined is the contractual basis between spml /pml and the spv eurosail, are spml/pml contractually bound(prospectus needs to be carefully examined) to service the eurosail payments to the investors if they are they are trading whilst insolvent,if they are merely originators they can lie dormant for years without trading.

Edited November 14, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

The problem with all the law we seem to be dealing with here is that its all in the fine detail and hinges on a word and its interpretation there is no definitive answer and its all down to judges opinion,look at the barristers who get it wrong.

[ryde]

Great news OTC have just read your other thread a victory at last and something to cheer ,great that you and the other caggers worked through it all and made pml and capstone look total idiots.

 

Apologies for this long post of text regarding securitization but believe it may be valuable in:

1)understanding the whole process

2)concerns Ireland home of the spml/pml/eurosail securitizations of our loans

3)Surprise,surprise price waterhouse the administrators of lehmans are involved and have been from the start,the plot thickens considerably.

sorry for text could only lift it from a cached source as subscription only!!will edit it later.

 

Ireland is securitization's rising star

The tax features of securitizing assets through Ireland give the country many advantages in establishing a worldwide reputation for this type of transaction, argue Enda Faughnan and Harry Gleeson of PricewaterhouseCoopers

Today securitization is the funding and risk transfer method of choice for an increasing number of corporates and financial institutions and is the largest growing contributor to global capital markets. Following favourable tax and regulatory changes, Ireland has become one of the favoured EU locations for many financial transactions including securitization, collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), asset covered securities, asset repackaging transactions and other structured finance transactions.

Securitization should be of interest to any large corporate that owns suitable financial assets, whether a pool of debts or discrete revenue streams. For financial institutions, securitization can lead to lower regulatory capital requirements. It is estimated that about 20% of top European corporates have already conducted a securitization and it is expected that the European securitization industry will continue to grow at pace in the coming years.

In terms of choosing a location for a securitization special purpose vehicle (SPV), the following tax drivers are critical:

 

• tax neutrality for the SPV;
  
• the ability of the SPV to make outward payments free of withholding tax;
  
• the ability of the SPV to receive income free of withholding tax, and
  
• no local tax liability for the foreign note holders.
  

Ireland delivers on each of these key tax drivers and because it is onshore and a member of the EU and the OECD, it will continue to be a favoured location for securitization transactions.

Securitization explained

Securitization is commonly defined as the creation of tradeable securities out of an income stream or projected income stream generated by financial assets. It is a process by which assets are financed in the capital markets based on the credit strengths of these assets independent of the credit rating of the originator (owner) of the assets. In a typical securitization transaction, the originator sells a portfolio of assets to the SPV. The SPV will fund the acquisition of the assets by issuing rated bonds or notes.

Different terms of credit and legal enhancement are used to achieve a credit rating which is independent from, and would normally be higher than, the credit rating of the originator. The SPV will fund the interest and principal payments on the bonds with collections from the underlying assets. The structures would normally be limited recourse in that the payments on the bonds would be limited to the cash flows generated on the securitized assets.

Benefits of securitization

Transactions by the SPV can be structured with AAA ratings on most debt which means the funding cost should be reduced.

Assets that may not be readily sold could be grouped together to create a diversified collateral pool against which debt can be issued.

Securitization can increase the lines of credit for a company which can be recycled quickly to generate additional assets and free up long-term capital.

A corporate can raise capital through an SPV as a private placement which would enable sensitive business and financial information to be kept private.

Securitization can allow a company to transfer risk to third parties in that financial risk from defaults on loans or contractual obligations by customers can be partially transferred to investors and credit enhancers.

Types of securitized assets

As the securitization industry grows and becomes more sophisticated, the types of assets that are securitized have expanded into non-financial assets and future cash flows. Examples of securitized assets include:

 

• aircraft leases
  
• boat loans
  
• car loans and leases
  
• credit card receivables
  
• equipment leases
  
• insurance policies
  
• mortgages (residential and commercial)
  
• railcar and train wagon leases
  
• real estate
  
• royalty streams
  
• trade receivables
  
• truck loans
  

Types of securitization transactions

As the objectives of parties to securitization transactions can vary (see the different benefits identified above), this creates requirements for different types of securitization transactions. The most popular transactions undertaken to date in Ireland include:

True sale

In a traditional "true sale" structure, the originator sells a pool of assets to the SPV and receives the proceeds from the issue of notes by the SPV as the purchase price for the assets acquired.

Synthetic

Unlike a true sale, a synthetic securitization will not provide the originator with cash. Instead the originator may use this transaction to transfer the credit risk on assets and to reduce regulatory capital requirements. The SPV will sell credit protection for a fee under a derivative instrument, which typically would be a credit default swap. The SPV will use the proceeds from the issue of bonds or notes to collateralize its obligations under the credit default swap. This means that the size of the bond issue required by the SPV should equal the expected credit losses in connection with the pool of assets rather than the aggregate value of the pool of assets.

Credit-linked transactions

These transactions are normally entered into by companies that are unable or unwilling to transfer assets off their balance sheet. This transaction would involve the issue of notes or the taking of a secured loan by the assets pool owner. The performance of these notes or secured loan is directly linked to the selected asset pool.

Irish tax rules - what is a qualifying company for securitization purposes?

Tax neutrality is one of the key drivers in identifying a suitable securitization jurisdiction. Before the introduction of the favourable securitization tax provisions, one of the major difficulties in establishing an SPV in Ireland was ensuring that the SPV was carrying on a trade for Irish tax purposes. If the company is not trading for tax purposes it would not be entitled to a tax deduction for its interest payments and expenses. The Irish authorities identified securitization as a key growth area in financial services and introduced significant tax changes in 2003 to enhance Ireland's attractiveness as a domicile of choice for securitization vehicles.

The securitization rules provide that a "qualifying company" will be subject to Irish corporation tax at a rate of 25% on its taxable profits. While this tax rate is high in comparison to the general corporation tax rate of 12.5% for trading companies, the taxable profit can be almost entirely eliminated through appropriate planning and structuring (that is, total return swaps, service fees, interest on subordinated loans/credit linked notes). The typical profit left in an SPV would be in the region of nil to €5,000.

A "qualifying company" means a company which:

 

1. is resident in Ireland;
   
2. acquires "qualifying assets" (see definition below) or as a result of an arrangement with another person holds or manages qualifying assets or enters into a legally enforceable arrangement with another person and the arrangement is itself a qualifying asset (such as a derivative);
   
3. carries on in Ireland the business of the holding and/or management of "qualifying assets";
   
4. apart from activities ancillary to that business, carries on no other activities;
   
5. undertakes the first transaction resulting in the holding and/or management of qualifying assets for a value of not less than €10m ($13.366 million);
   
6. notifies the Irish tax authorities that it is a company to which points (a) to (e) apply; and
   
7. carries on no transaction other than by way of a bargain made at arm's length (the legislation specifically excludes profit participating loans from satisfying this requirement - this is a favoured method of profit extraction for SPVs).
   

A "qualifying asset" means an asset which consists of, or of an interest in, a "financial asset". "Financial asset" is widely defined and includes:

 

• shares, bonds and other securities;
  
• futures, options, swaps, derivatives and similar instruments;
  
• invoices and all types of receivables;
  
• obligations evidencing debt (including loans and deposits);
  
• leases and loan and lease portfolios;
  
• hire purchase contracts;
  
• acceptance credits and all other documents of title relating to the movement of goods, and
  
• bills of exchange, commercial paper, promissory notes, and all other kinds of negotiable or transferable instruments.
  

There are two tests of tax residence in Ireland referred to at (a) above, that is, a central management and control test and an incorporation test. If the SPV is owned by a charitable trust then it is most likely that the SPV would be regarded as tax resident in Ireland under the incorporation rule provided the SPV is incorporated in Ireland. The central management and control test is not defined in Irish legislation and its meaning is taken from UK case law. An SPV will normally be regarded as tax resident in Ireland if meetings of the board of directors are held in Ireland and major policy and strategic decisions of the company are taken at those meetings.

Test © of a qualifying company (that is, that it carries on in Ireland the business of the holding and/or management of qualifying assets) is normally satisfied by the participation of typically two Irish-resident directors in the affairs of the SPV and the appointment of an Irish-based corporate administrator to manage the SPV. The role of the Irish administrator is generally limited (but can be wider if required) to, for example,keeping books and records of the SPV, preparing accounts and providing directors. Typically the SPV will have no employees.

It will be noted from test (d) above that the SPV must not carry on any other activities (apart from those that are ancillary to the business of the holding and/or management of qualifying assets). This is to ensure that the SPV is only used for particular types of activities so as to confine the favourable tax treatment afforded to Irish SPVs only to qualifying assets.

Withholding taxes - outward

Typically, debt is used to finance the SPV by way of a loan or the issue of notes, bonds or commercial paper. Normally, withholding tax at a rate of 20% applies to interest payments by an Irish-resident company. However there are two exemptions from withholding tax that are relevant for securitization vehicles.

First, there is no requirement to deduct withholding tax on interest payments by a qualifying SPV to any person who is resident in the EU or in a country with which Ireland has a double tax agreement (DTA). Ireland has DTAs in place with 44 countries and is in various stages of negotiation to conclude additional DTAs with nine new countries including Argentina, Singapore and Turkey.

Second, there is an exemption from Irish withholding tax on interest payments on quoted eurobonds. A quoted eurobond is defined as a security which is quoted on a recognized stock exchange, carries a right to interest and is in bearer form. Interest on a quoted eurobond can be paid gross if the paying agent is not based in Ireland, or if it is, interest may still be paid gross if the quoted eurobond is held in a recognized clearing system (for example, Clearstream, Euroclear or Crest). The quoted eurobond exemption provides additional protection from withholding tax than the exemption mentioned above as there is no residence test for the recipient of the interest (that is, the recipient may be resident outside the EU in a non-treaty country).

Withholding taxes - inward

Frequently cash flows from assets attract withholding taxes on the income and/or capital gain flows on those assets and can only be avoided by locating the SPV in a jurisdiction which has a DTA with the country of origin of those assets. Ireland's success as a securitization SPV location is partly attributable to the DTA network in avoiding withholding taxes on the cash flows. Irish SPVs have been used in numerous transactions for acquiring a wide range of Korean and Japanese assets because of Ireland's favourable double tax treaties with those countries. For example, with the exceptions of Hungary and Russia, Ireland is the only country to have negotiated a nil rate of withholding tax on interest payments and capital gains from Korea.

Taxation of note holders

Ordinarily any Irish source income (that is, interest) receivable by a non-Irish resident would be liable to Irish income tax at the standard rate (20%). However, there is a specific exemption from Irish income tax in respect of interest payable by a qualifying SPV to any person resident in the EU or in a country with which Ireland has a DTA. Where the recipient of the interest is resident elsewhere, a technical charge to Irish income tax arises, but in practice the Revenue Commissioners have not sought collection of the tax where the recipient has no Irish presence.

Value-added tax

In general the activities of a qualifying SPV are exempt activities for VAT purposes and therefore there is no obligation on the SPV to charge Irish VAT on its activities.

Before 2004 there was some uncertainty in Ireland with regard to the VAT treatment of management fees incurred by qualifying securitization SPVs. Thankfully, an amendment to the Irish VAT legislation in 2004 has now put the issue beyond doubt. Management services provided to all qualifying SPVs are exempt from VAT. The definition of management may comprise any of the three functions listed in annex II to Directive 2001/107/EC of the European Parliament and Council (being the functions included in the activity of collective portfolio management). The three functions are:

 

• investment management; and
  
• administration,
  
• marketing.
  

This brings certainty to the VAT treatment of management fees payable by qualifying securitization vehicles and should cover, among other things, corporate administration services and collateral management services supplied to a qualifying SPV.

Stamp duty

No charge to Irish stamp duty should arise on the issue of bonds or notes by a qualifying SPV. In addition there should be no Irish stamp duty on the transfer of any such bonds or notes.

Accounting implications - impact of introduction of IAS 32 and IAS 39

The cash flows over the life of a typical SPV are flat or neutral so that little or no tax liability arises. Under the existing historical cost accounting rules - Irish generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) - it is possible to achieve a flat profit and loss from an accounting perspective. This accounting profit is followed for tax purposes so that little or no Irish tax is payable by the SPV.

Under the proposed new IAS rules there is likely to be more profit and loss volatility from an accounting perspective due to, among other things, changes in hedge accounting, assets being accounted for at fair value (previously amortized cost) and derivatives being accounted for at fair value (previously neither recognized or measured). Over the term of the transaction the profit in the SPV should be flat from an accounting perspective. However there could be mismatches from a tax perspective due to the restriction on the use of losses in a qualifying SPV.

Following representations and discussions with the Irish authorities on this matter, the Irish Revenue have indicated that legislation will be introduced to enable qualifying SPVs elect to continue to be taxed in accordance with profits computed using the old Irish GAAP rules. This should enable Irish SPVs to continue to be taxed on flat accounting profits. This legislation change is expected before the passing of the 2005 Finance Bill (likely to be mid-March 2005).

Irish legal and regulatory issues

Irish SPVs may be established either as limited or unlimited companies under the Companies Acts, 1963-2001. Private limited companies are the most common form of business entity used in Ireland. The essential feature of a private limited company is that the liability of members is limited to the amount of share capital subscribed. If there is a public offer of securities (such as for the bonds or notes) then a public limited company (PLC) is likely to be required.

An Irish SPV, as well as having to file annual tax returns, will also have to prepare and file annual audited accounts with the Companies Registration Office. In addition an Irish SPV must have a registered office located in Ireland, typically it must have a minimum of one Irish resident director although in practice there are normally two Irish-resident directors to ensure that the SPV is tax resident in Ireland under the central management and control test and that it meets the requirement in test © of the definition of 'qualifying company' in tax legislation.

There are no minimum capital requirements for an Irish private limited company but for an Irish PLC the minimum capitalization is €38,092 ($51,000) (although only 25% of this must be paid up).

The SPV will generally not be regulated by the Irish authorities but if the SPV is making a public offer of securities, it must issue an offering document complying with Irish public offer rules and that document must be filed at the Companies Registration Office.

An SPV may be incorporated within 10 days of the relevant documentation being lodged with the Registrar of Companies.

The Asset Covered Securities Act, 2001 introduced a statutory framework for the issue of covered bonds. Covered bonds are debt instruments that are backed up or "covered" by a pool of assets, generally taking the form of public debt or mortgage credit. If structured correctly, the bonds issued under the Act may achieve a high credit rating, facilitating access by the issuing group to funds at competitive rates. Since the introduction of this Act, there has been significant growth in the asset covered securities market in Ireland with a number of financial institutions raising large amounts of capital.

Listing

The Irish Stock Exchange has in the last number of years introduced new rules regarding the listing of specialist debt securities. These new rules have provided a relatively inexpensive and timely listing process and have proved very popular for many arrangers since their introduction (not just for Irish-domiciled SPVs but also non-Irish-domiciled SPVs).

Tax changes boost

Since the introduction of favourable tax changes in 2003, the securitization industry in Ireland has expanded rapidly and there are now more than 2000 securitization vehicles listed on the Irish Stock Exchange. Ireland delivers on all of the key tax drivers for securitization vehicles in terms of tax neutrality for the SPV, no withholding tax on outward payments, extensive tax treaty network to minimize/eliminate inward withholding taxes and no Irish tax liability for foreign note holders.

Securitization is a continually changing business and the locations which will ultimately prove most successful will be those with the fiscal and regulatory regime which offers most flexibility, certainty and support to the originators, investors and creditors. Ireland has been able to accommodate those changes and has moved from plain vanilla true sale securitizations to synthetic and credit-linked securitizations. The strong tax, legal and accounting infrastructure in Ireland, the onshore EU location and the efficient stock exchange listing system has also facilitated the development of this market. All in all, the regime Ireland has put in place and the strong track record of the Irish government being prepared to change legislation and practices where market forces demanded it, augurs well for the future of this increasingly important niche market.

Biographies

Harry Gleeson

PricewaterhouseCoopers

Wilton Place

Dublin 2

Tel: +353 1 662 6533

Fax: +353 1 662 6616

Email: harry.gleeson@ie.pwc.com

Website: www.pwc.com/ie

Harry Gleeson joined PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in 1982 and is a director in tax and legal services specializing in banking and capital markets within financial services. He is an associate of the Irish Taxation Institute and has over 15 years experience working with banks and corporates operating in the financial services industry. He has advised many multinationals on inward investment into Ireland in relation to the establishment of banking and treasury operations in Dublin's International Financial Services Centre. He has also advised on many cross-border structured finance transactions.

Gleeson is responsible within PwC's tax and legal services division for marketing and developing securitization structures within Ireland. He is a member of the tax group of PwC's European securitization group and is also PwC's representative on the securitization subgroup of Financial Services Ireland.

Enda Faughnan

PricewaterhouseCoopers

Wilton Place

Dublin 2

Tel: +353 1 662 6359

Fax: +353 1 662 6616

Email: enda.faughnan@ie.pwc.com

Website: www.pwc.com/ie

 

 

Enda Faughnan is head of tax financial services at PricewaterhouseCoopers in Ireland. He is a member of the consultative committee of accountancy bodies in Ireland (CCAB-I). He is also a member of the banking and treasury group, a government-appointed committee responsible for the promotion and development of financial services in Ireland.

Faughnan specializes in providing tax consultancy services to the financial services sector in Ireland and abroad. His clients include domestic and international banks as well as financial services subsidiaries of major multinational corporations.

He joined Price Waterhouse in 1985 and was made a tax partner in 1988. He was appointed head of tax services at Price Waterhouse in 1995 and appointed head of tax and legal services at PricewaterhouseCoopers in 1998 on the merger with Coopers & Lybrand. He stepped down from this position in July 2003 to concentrate on international financial services client work.

Edited November 14, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

ITBG

as you can see this lot are still trying to repo people if you have any surefire evidence they are insolvent or trading whilst insolvent please post as this will stop the **** in their tracks.

[ryde]

cagger80 ITBG

 

Originally Posted by I'm the bad guy?

"I have absolute proof, from written evidence, that SPML is both balance sheet and trading insolvent.

THIS IS THE EVIDENCE WE ALL NEED, ALL THE LITIGATION THEN STOPS HERE, NOW.

[ryde]

AGATHA C

can you break this down

1)house repossessed because of arrears? how much

2)amount owed on property including all fees?

3)property sold for?

4)total balance due to you?

5)other issues,sold at an undervalue have you got evidence of similar properties in your area selling for a much higher price?

6)It sounds as though you have been just really stitched up they have all had their cut and now want to get rid of you asap

7)It also sounds as though the only way you could recover these sums is through a claim through the court with a solicitor,if they were threatened with such they might offer a settlement to avoid court.will google a few possibilities for you but need exact details which you have probably repeated over and over but just brief relevant figures to save time.

perhaps this is not the best time so when you feel ready post details and we can look at possibilities here,we will beat the **** eventually.

[ryde]

ITBG

thanks for info,the true sale to the spv is still hotly debated but if their has been a true sale all the repos done by pml/spml have been invalid,would like to see this tested in court just don't want to be the one dependent upon it! which could well be the case.

[ryde]

excellent useful post wonderman and thanks crapstone for getting me off the hook must admit I am a bit of a eurosceptic but there's good and evil in all things ,what I resent is policy being made by unelected officials but look at what our lot have got up to.Mail said today that lenders were angry that fsa proposed reforms were going too far!! also read that council of mortgage lenders had downgraded their repo estimates from 75000 to 48000 also read that all the subprime repos and suspended repos are not included in these figures.

[ryde]

A quick query re.all our pals spml and the like.

If they sell the equitable title to the spv eurosail and receive the consideration as stated in the prospectus of £x

1)would sdlt arise in this transaction,if so who pays it and has it been paid

2)In a transfer of equity tax(stamp duty land tax)is usually charged on the consideration and paid by the transferee ie eurosail by locating in Ireland are they exempt from this?

3)Is this one huge tax avoidance scheme amongst other things?

 

I just see this as another angle worth exploration and if applicable a complaint to HMRC who do not mess around.

[ryde]

thanks eie makes very interesting reading about spv intersest rates,securitization,registration at land registry etc will post the link

Edited November 15, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

:grin:Sorry have edited out rubbish!still a beginner

Edited November 15, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

Sunday Express | UK News :: Exclusive: Bid to stop home loan sharks

saw this too little but too late for many, are the press at last starting to take an interest this is an exclusive ? mentions gmac and you can have your say ,would love to send these 131 pages.Will definetely think of something maybe if enough of us posted a comment they would run a story,it would be the best ever platform we could get and an almighty kick in the teeth for capstone and the evil empire being mentioned in a national paper.

LETS DO IT!!!THE MORE THE BETTER.

Edited November 15, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

Sunday Express | UK News :: Exclusive: Bid to stop home loan sharks

Have just gone through the rigmarole of signing up to"have your say" on the sunday express and posted a summary on their site,thanks to Mr Fulcher for his well put words.

please take a look and post comments and please comment on their site yourselves every little helps and the more that comment the more likely they will investigate instead of running stories like lost budgie returns home after being lost for 10 years etc etc!

Edited November 15, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

please look and post on the Sunday Express link above,please don't waste this opportunity,it just could be a Godsend.

NAME AND SHAME THEM like friend matey has done,wish I'd thought of that one.

 

EIE

can now see where you're coming from with contract between investor and spv after reading report to select committee,obviously this would be dynamite,transfer of legal title concealed from hm land registry.

Edited November 16, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

crapstone have sent you a pm

[ryde]

EIE

did you ever manage to get the sale contract between spv and investor?

[ryde]

[quote name=enoughisenough)

Just some thoughts. Something needs doing and a year of this stuff has not yielded visible results.[/quote]

 

EIE

It probaly has yielded many small victories on an individual scale by giving people the know how and the strength of not being alone to make a valid complaint,stop repos and the like.

To be brutally honest in my opinion few who post here either have the resources in finance or time to get involved in a class action unless it is made extremely easy for them.Most are trying to survive day to day and keep the roof over their head and most are waiting for a miracle or some radical change where this lot go bottoms up the activity on here increases 10 fold when news breaks which may offer a glimmer of hope,but it just ain't going to happen is it? a year after the parent goes under and they're still going,they've got access to the best legal brains in the business and are holding the trump card don't forget and we are fragmented and impoverished.

The only way to defeat them wholesale is by someone winning a high profile court case which then acts as a precedent for others.

ITBG has the right idea report the b......s every way you can and to anyone who will listen,make it constantly difficult for them and there might just be a result.

If people are waiting for the govt or legislation its going to be a long long wait and for many too long as repos are being stepped up.

When you look at the learned people and the submissions made eg mr fulcher,carmel butler and how long ago ,you despair at how long this has been allowed to continue,but at least the fsa seems to have excluded them from the friendly banker brotherhood club and is set to cane them.

From my point of view I need them to go bust in 2 months or find an investor contract (the possible diamond that unravels it all) that shows they do not have title to sue otherwise could be sunk.

I thought mistakenly that everyone wanted a national platform to air their grievances thats why I posted the Sunday Express link but this was met with apathy and only 3 replies(one ignorant b...d even blamed us for getting in this position, implying sub primers were white trailer type trash!!!! probably a b?anker.)

Anyway its late and I'm frustrated and in despair so will pray for a bloody miracle to happen very very soon.

Edited November 17, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

GR

Thanks for encouragement,sounds like you are working through the night! if you need any help it's here , it's always diverting and easier dealing with someone else's problems than your own especially if you can help them get a result.

[ryde]

Sounds like the powers that be are all looking for a scapegoat to make an example of and serve as a warning to all others , can you think of a better candidate than the failed evil empire? as far as the authorities are concerned they are and will be non players now in any event ,so nothing to lose.

[ryde]

I,m going to see if I can make contact with the investor group eie posted who were sold dodgy investments by the same seller who sold us the dodgy mortgage (investment product! ) see if i can establish a common link(everything was missold on false promises),thanks for encouragement all,head was down but now bloods up and ready to kill!!no stone wii be left unturned.

http://www.missoldinvestments.co.uk/

This is the link to the uk investor action group, may not be directly linked to our mortgages but still have an axe to grind on misselling.

Nicely put together website ,wonder if they could incorporate us as well?

Edited November 17, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

Am posting these submissions from carmel butler to treasury select committee I know this is similar to that posted by supersleuth all those months ago.I know it is the old equitable/legal title transfer cookie again but reading this for the first time especially paragraphs 18 and 22 supports the arguments of ITBG and the reasons why EIE wants to see a copy of the sale contract between the Spv eurosail and the investor,because if there is concealment that the legal title has been transferred to the spv eurosail and this has been concealed from everyone else in direct contradiction to what is stated in the eurosail prospectus Pender is dead and not applicable and this lot are truly sunk.

 

We also need to get hold of the form 395 filing by eurosail at companies house,this should be in the public domain.

 

I will use this as part of my defence and put them to the full proof if need be by demanding that they produce the sale contract.

 

 

THE LEGAL RUSE

16. First, the legal ruse. The law provides mortgagees with a statutory power to transfer a legal charge.[112] It is under these statutory provisions that the banks exercise their right to assign the mortgages to the SPVs. In a contract of sale that provides for a disposition[113] of an interest in land, the legal title will be conveyed immediately from the seller to the buyer[114] on the completion date. There can be no doubt that on completion, the buyer has acquired the legal title, but there will inevitably be a "registration gap" between the conveyance date on which the buyer acquired the legal title and the date on which his legal title is registered at H.M. Land Registry. During this registration gap, the law provides that the buyer's title: "does not operate at law until the relevant registration requirements are met".[115]

 

17. This is where the legal ruse comes into play. It is this "registration gap" that the SPV unlawfully exploits in order to conceal its ownership and control of the mortgages. Under the Land Registration Act 2002 ("LRA 2002"), the transferee[116] of a registered charge is required to register at H.M. Land Registry, its ownership of the mortgage that it purchased.[117] Therefore, it is a legal requirement that the SPV register its proprietorship of the mortgage at H.M. Land Registry. Whilst the law implicitly permits the registration gap as a matter of pragmatism, the law also implicitly mandates that the registration requirements are to be observed expeditiously. Nonetheless, in contumacious disregard for its legal duty to comply with the registration requirements of the LRA 2002, the contract of sale expressly provides that the SPV will not register the transfer at H.M. Land Registry indeed, the contract provides that notice of the transfer is to be concealed from the borrowers and H.M. Land Registry and a fortiori concealed from the world[118].

 

18. The suppression and concealment of this information from H.M. Land Registry is a criminal offence[119], and in furtherance of this offence[120], the SPV's legal title to the mortgages is also concealed from the county courts and the Government. The Banks remain registered as the proprietor of the mortgages and accordingly all interested parties are deceived by this concealment with one exception. The SPV does inform its investors that the bank sold its legal title to the SPV (to whom, the right to register the legal title to the mortgages is important). Consequently, the bank appears to be the legal owner, but it is not.

 

19. For example, in the case of Northern Rock as the seller of mortgages, the prospectus states: "under the mortgage sale agreement dated March 26, 2001 entered into between the seller, the mortgages trustee, the security trustee and Funding, the seller assigned the initial mortgage portfolio together with all related security to the mortgages trustee|"[121]. Additionally, under the terms of Northern Rock's mortgage sale agreement, it is, "entitled under the terms of the mortgage sale agreement to assign new mortgage loans and their related security to the mortgages trustee". [122] (bold emphasis added).

 

20. Northern Rock may remain falsely registered as the putative `legal owner' but in truth, Northern Rock is merely the administrator of the mortgage loans. Again the Prospectus states: "The seller acts as administrator of the mortgage portfolio under the terms of the administration agreement, pursuant to which it has agreed to continue to perform administrative functions in respect of the mortgage loans on behalf of the mortgages trustee and the beneficiaries, including collecting payments under the mortgage loans and taking steps to recover arrears."[123] (Bold emphasis added).

 

21. The legal reality is that: (i) Northern Rock sold its legal title to the SPV, in this case, to Granite Finance Trustees Limited[124] and therefore, Granite is the legal owner; (ii) Northern Rock is the administrator of the mortgages and falsely holds itself out as the legal owner of the mortgages; (iii) Granite Finance Trustees Limited should be, but is not, registered as the owner of the mortgage; and (iv) all these facts remain concealed because Granite and Northern Rock have unlawfully contracted to suppress this information from H.M. Land Registry.

 

22. Notwithstanding that the SPV conceals its legal title from H.M. Land Registry, the SPV will, nonetheless, avail itself of, and exercise, all the statutory and contractual legal powers that the legal owner enjoys. For example, the SPV will exercise the legal owner's statutory power to create a legal charge [125] on the borrower's mortgages.

The SPV will file at Companies House a Form 395 "Particulars of a Mortgage or Charge" within the statutory 21 days, to register the Legal Charge that the SPV created against the mortgage loans in favour of the SPV's trustee, as security for the payment of money due to its investors and creditors.[126]

 

23. The SPV's exercise of the legal owner's contractual and statutory legal powers leaves no doubt that SPV is: the legal owner of the mortgages. Nonetheless, the banks and the SPV unlawfully exploit the "registration gap" in a smoke and mirrors tactic to cause confusion and conceal the SPV's legal title. The SPV is the legal owner. The banks are the administrators.

Edited November 17, 2009 by ryde

[ryde]

GR

legal v equitable just want to tie up the 2 loose ends to make it absolutely and conclusively certain.The debate is well over on this issue apart from this but I have to put it to bed fully once and for all.

Am also looking and hoping I suppose for the

"George Carman moment " having recently read his biography. The missing and vital piece of evidence usually retrieved out of someone's bin and being produced and turning the big libel cases of the eighties at the last moment when all seemed lost, in the high court.Made front page news at the time.It was said "Gorgeous George" as his clients knew him wouldn't clear his throat for less than a grand!

Any caggers live near High Wycombe?