Found It So Both Spml And Pml Are Now Both Operating Without Any Director. WELL FOUND BRASSED!!!!!

WOW, WHICH COMPANIES? SCEDMINC I AM USING A NEW PC, AS I SEE YOU PRESENT COULD YOU POST A LINK TO CH? THANKS IN ADVANCE,I THOUGHT THIS THREAD HAD BURNT OUT BUT THE FUSE MAY WELL HAVE BEEN RELIT!! LITTLEDOTTY PLEASE ROUSE YOUR TROOPS BACK INTO ACTION!!

Pat, have been following your thread and the excellent advice given. MM IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT IN THAT YOU SHOULD TRY AND RESIST A SUSPENDED REPOSSESSION ORDER AT ALL COSTS. EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN THAT CAPSTONE REGULARLY AS PART OF THEIR TACTICS ATTEMPT TO ENGINEER A BREACH FORCING YOU INTO EVICTION BY FEIGNING NON RECEIPT OF PAYMENTS ONCE THEY HAVE THE SUSPENSION. Stress to the court that you have made a very reasonable and valid offer in compliance and observance of the protocols and that a suspended order is unecessary and indeed bringing these matters to the courts attention and the associated extra burdens of costs to your account were totally uneccessary if your offer had been simply processed and agreed ,there was in fact no earthly reason for them not to agree it had they observed the protocols and used possession as a means of last resort and further saved the courts time. It is extremely wasteful when you have made an offer to have it endorsed by a court,this is the very thing the protocols seek to avoid ie. a waste of court time.Had you made the offer and they had agreed it,the time to enforce it with a suspended order was if you had actually breached it. May I add my very best wishes for tomorrow,luck should not come in to it,it will soon be over,try and stay calm and patient and lets hope you get a sympathetic judge ,come out with a better deal and they get their tails burnt.. To you its your life to them its just a job and youre an account number. That's what makes me so angry about this shower,half of these cases should never even get to court,yours being a prime example.

I am not aware whether this information has ever been posted here but it has been discovered on the "other site" that all those with London Mortgage Company are not with the one that is about to be struck off by Companies House ie the one that is LMC limited. They are in fact with plain LMC (THE NOT LIMITED ONE) which apparently deliberately confusingly is a trading name of SPML. Littledotty It occurs to me have any of the documents you have relating to this company /trading name ever bore the words Limited after them ?.ie Land Registry or anything else?

angnnig Please read the spml thread.(Crapstone's latest post) Experienced Caggers have stated you only need to issue a SAR then claim back all the charges that are not mortgage repayments,if the expected no response or denial comes then refer the matter to the FOS who will work out what you are entitled to. Why do you need a mortgage calculator?

Thankyou for your comprehensive reply Crapstone. In a nutshell everything that is not a mortgage repayment should be reclaimed,this can be discovered by issuing a SAR. brassed-off-2 It would be interesting indeed if anyone had ever at their request had their loan modified by the team,especially the conversion of a repayment loan to interest only. Has anyone been ever offered such facilities or asked for such and been refused? I wonder looking at all the other related threads whether amongst their multi layered and structured organisation Capstone have a "Try it on Team" as well.

Unfortunately most District Judges derive from the solicitor business most of whom cynically fudge their way through their career and most have an ingrained hatred of any L.I.P. depriving their shoddy profession of the exorbitant fees it is able to charge. I was initially apalled when first using the internet which to me is the greatest tool since the printing press,that the Law in which I was trained many years ago bore little resemblance to the Law practised in County Courts which appeared in many cases to be discretionary and dependent on whether the Judge liked the look of you or not.I do fortunately have more confidence in the High Court but few cases go this far. Crapstone Being an old experienced campaigner in obtaining refunds of charges could you kindly post definitively the charges and any interest added to accounts that are reclaimable. I have been asked constantly this question but having never made such a claim and am embarassed by being unable to give a definitive answer. Perhaps with your long term experiences you could help both me and many others who are unsure and consequently unsure of exactly what their true arrears if any really are , thus weakening any defence they may have in Court.

Excellent news SD, There is no doubt that these threads are read through by our adversaries ask anyone on the spml thread. Its easy to forget especially when you are worried and inexperienced but always remember everything has to be IN WRITING. So many people have fallen into this trap on the spml thread but have fortunately in most cases survived to forget it. But all these lenders are the same and invent new tricks constantly, so be constantly wary.

Smelly dog, this is a penalty charge which has been deemed to be unfair,simply ask them how they can apply a penalty charge each month of £50 when such a charge can only be to cover administration costs and say you want their reply in writing,everything you do with them must be in writing so it can be used as evidence. There are loads of links to these practices ,simply write to them and say that unless they stop this monthly charge immediately and refund the charges you have already paid you will report them for investigation to the F.S.A. by whom they have already been fined. see this link here http://www.moneyhospital.co.uk/blog/post/are-you-due-mortgage-compensation-20279 By the way you do not have an agreement that is binding until it is in writing.You really have to take a hard line with this shower.

This is excellent news diverse,many congratulations a stunning victory. The next stage is you will be discharged from your bankruptcy this month,the receiver will then have 3 years to realise any interest he has in your property if not it reverts automatically back to you. With the amount of arrears you have on the property although there will probably be a lot of charges which you could claim back the property could well stay in negative equity so there will be no interest for the receiver to realise and it will come back to you after the 3 year period. Now you have got over the first hurdle it might be worth contacting the receiver to see exactly where you stand for your own peace of mind and whether it would be possible to purchase his interest as if the equity is negative this could be for a nominal fee. Wait for your discharge from bankruptcy first though!

This is excellent news diverse,many congratulations a stunning victory. The next stage is you will be discharged from your bankruptcy this month,the receiver will then have 3 years to realise any interest he has in your property if not it reverts automatically back to you. With the amount of arrears you have on the property although there will probably be a lot of charges which you could claim back the property could well stay in negative equity so there will be no interest for the receiver to realise and it will come back to you after the 3 year period. Now you have got over the first hurdle it might be worth contacting the receiver to see exactly where you stand for your own peace of mind and whether it would be possible to purchase his interest as if the equity is negative this could be for a nominal fee. Wait for your discharge from bankruptcy first though!

This is excellent news diverse,many congratulations a stunning victory. The next stage is you will be discharged from your bankruptcy this month,the receiver will then have 3 years to realise any interest he has in your property if not it reverts automatically back to you. With the amount of arrears you have on the property although there will probably be a lot of charges which you could claim back the property could well stay in negative equity so there will be no interest for the receiver to realise and it will come back to you after the 3 year period. Now you have got over the first hurdle it might be worth contacting the receiver to see exactly where you stand for your own peace of mind and whether it would be possible to purchase his interest as if the equity is negative this could be for a nominal fee. Wait for your discharge from bankruptcy first though!

You are perfectly correct here, is it me? Well pointed out,the protocols were actually drawn up after any of the prospectuses so were never countered or envisaged by the spv's "legal eagles" who certainly attempted to close many other loopholes or reason for dispute. I am certain this is fertile ground and could be written as standard into any defence once the appropriate legislation in support is applied as evidence.

An excellent idea. If a challenge to these lenders could be mounted on this basis,the pitfalls of securitization properly exposed to the detriment of the consumer,change may be forced at the very least,this would also not be seen as an attempted liability escape which is how the courts appear to view most defences of this nature. If only people who have got into arrears could restructure their repayments to actually reduce outgoings their position might be more easily recoverable. Arrears would not have occurred originally,deliberate manufacture by this shower excepted , had it not been for unforseen hardship and consequent reduction in income,to actually maintain the current rate of repayment plus a large premium on top usually stretches people past breaking point. If these lenders were forced into accepting these protocols as an alternative to an unenforceable agreement this would be a great victory.

Supesleuth I think we are still waiting the latest appeal on the Walker case which is taking some time so we can only pray,however as you say if the applecart of general practices is upset the courts err in the favour of the lender if they can find enough excuse.A borrower windfall or liability escape is to be avoided at all costs as the floodgates will open and the comfortable set up will be rocked with consequences to the economy.(the courts viewpoint) Look at the recent decision with the banks,outrageous.