fibing to the court

[lee6370]

I'll try and keep this short.

 

Got a judgement against future mortgages.

 

Sent in Data Protection Act, got statements back.

Sent both letters got 2 back both saying sod off.

 

After getting the judgement i phoned future to ask when they would be paying since i wasn't about to wait, and they said give us a couple of days and the legal department will phone you.

 

Legal department did phone and informed me they would not be paying since they intended to apply to have the judgement set aside, i ask why and they said because they hadn't received the claim.

 

Today (or yesterday just noticed the time) i got a letter from the court saying a date had been set for the appeal hearing, and they also sent me a copy of futures appeal.

 

The appeal is on the basis that they didn't receive the claim, blah, blah, and they then say, and this is the fib "we do not and have never traded from (the address i used)."

 

However i have a letter from them on their letter headed paper, and in the top right hand corner under their name is the address that they claim to have never traded from.

 

So not only did i write to Future at this address 3 times and each time get a reply but i have letters from them with this address on it.

 

Now i'm going to object to having the judgement set aside but any suggestions on the wording and is it better to go in person or just write.

[Movingon]

First you need to do some research... is the "Futures" company that you have claimed against, at the address you have given the same legal entity who provided your mortgage and levied the charges? Is the address the same one which you have on all of your correspondence from them?

 

If that is so, then at the set-aside hearing the Judge will have a few stern words to say to them; by the way you really must take a lot of mortgage paperwork with you, with the address etc. on it. If not, i.e. if they are not the same company, then how was it that they got the information about the judgement? Was it purely from your 'phone call? These are all the questions you need to research. Phone them anonymously and ask their address "because you need to write to them".

 

Lastly, you absolutely MUST go to court; because they probably won't. This will be A Good Move™ as far as the Judge is concerned, and also you'll get the chance to show him the paperwork etc that you have. If it does turn out that their contention that they do not and never have traded from that address is a complete fabrication, or even a slippery attempt to avoid litigation, then someone could end up either in contempt of court, or worse charged with purjury (which amounts to lying before a court and is punishable by ritual beheadings, much wailing and gnashing of teeth etc).

[Movingon]

p.s. What IS the address you have for them? Maybe we could do some digging for you here and post our results in the forum...

[Seminole]

I can access lists of trading addresses for any UK company so please let me have as many details about this company as possible and I will then let you have a list.

[goldiea]

No need to look for addresses Seminole...

 

Future Mortgages (massive in america apparently)... addresses I have are as follows:

 

PO Box 49944

London

SE5 7YG

 

Registered Office

 

87 Castle Street

Reading

RG1 7DX

 

Complaints Dept (for service related to mortgages)

 

6 Admiral Way

doxford International Business Park

Sunderland

SR3 3XW

UK

 

Hope this helps - I have more info on them if needed.

 

xx

[BankFodder]

Contact Wizzkid101 or neilp about your setaside.

 

They both have very good experience and materials which I am sure that they will share with you

[lee6370]

Thanks for the advise, much appreciated.

 

I'll do some digging and let you know what i've got.

[monkey_uk]

Complaints Dept (for service related to mortgages)

 

6 Admiral Way

doxford International Business Park

Sunderland

SR3 3XW

UK

 

Hmmm, this comes up as being Citi Financial Europe Plc on my computer...

 

interesting...

[lee6370]

Ok done some digging and this is what I've found.

 

The address i had for Future was in Skipton, this turns out to be the address of a third party management company called HML.

 

HML managed Futures loans, and sent out letter in Futures name with their address, to all intends and purposes anyone having a loan with them had no reason not to know that the address in Skipton was not that of Future Mortgages.

 

I paid up the loan in January and HML where still managing the loan then, I've been able to find out that Future signed a 3 year deal with HML back in 2003, so the administration of loan may now have moved in house.

 

So this is now my position.

 

I have always used the address in Skipton to communication about my loan with Future.

 

I have always believed that the address was for Future.

 

All letters from that address have been on Futures letterheads.

 

My Data Protection Act request and 2 lba letters were sent to this address and i got a reply (at no time did they say this is the wrong address, administration of this account is now dealt with by.....which leads me to believe that they still administer loans for Future)

 

Letters from their complaints/investigation department have a different address, the Sunderland one, however i was not told to write to this address and not the Skipton one i was using, so i assumed this was just the address of their complaints department.

 

So whilst they statement they sent to the court that the Skipton address "is not and never has been a trading address of future" may be true it is very misleading and gives the impression that the address has nothing to do with future.

 

I still intend to go to the hearing but do i tell the court what i have found out or just give them the letters i have from future with the Skipton address on and say this is the address i've always used and as far i always knew was the address for future mortgages. (I've also got the letters from them acknowledging my complaint.)

[goldiea]

Hi Monkey,

 

Interestingly I have looked through all my paperwork and as per lee no mention anywhere of Citi?! only Future..

 

x

[Movingon]

Tell the court everything you said here in your response to their defence; at no point during the lead-up to you issuing your claim did they fail to respond and/or correct the address you used; therefore in your view they ARE actually trading from that address, regardless of the name of the company managing their affairs there.

 

Let's face it, all you can lose is your court fee... if you lose, just sue again with the correct address...?

[pmhread]

erm...if it helps at all HML are a trading company of Skipton Building Society. HML have quite a large base in my town but I believe the HQ address is :

 

Homeloan Management Ltd

1 Providence Place

Skipton

North Yorkshire

BD23 2HL

[lee6370]

Yes thats the address i've got for Future and the only address i was ever given for them, what i'd like to find out is if they still manage loans on behalf of Future.

[lee6370]

Just a quick update.

 

Went to court yesterday to fight their stay application.

 

Judge took one look at my letters with the address on that they claimed "is not and never has been an address they have used" and refused their application.

 

They did suggest they would appeal but about an hour later told me they would be paying up.

 

Hearing was in the judges chambers very relaxed and nothing to worry about.

 

Thank you to everyone that offered advice, once i get the cheque and it's cleared i'll make a donation.

[reload]

Excellent stuff :D

[NitrousOxide]

Good stuff. Can't believe they had the nerve to turn up though.

Well done.

[blueskies]

Congratulations, another one bites the dust

[Seminole]

Did they provide any evidence to support their assertion about the address? Was it a straight lie?

[Tigs33]

Excellent stuff!!!! good on you...

[lee6370]

Did they provide any evidence to support their assertion about the address? Was it a straight lie?

 

No they didn't, I had some letters from them with the address on, so either a lie or someone made a big mistake.

 

The judge turned to their solicitor said "these blow your application out of the water some what"

 

The solicitor just said "I can't explain why they have said they have no contection with that address"

 

They also said they had a defence but didn't tell the judge what it was, which seemed to annoy him.

[NitrousOxide]

I bet they thought you wouldn't turn up. That's they only thing I can think of for such a poor defence (actually no defence by the sounds of it).

[Movingon]

No they didn't, I had some letters from them with the address on, so either a lie or someone made a big mistake.

 

The judge turned to their solicitor said "these blow your application out of the water some what"

 

The solicitor just said "I can't explain why they have said they have no contection with that address"

 

They also said they had a defence but didn't tell the judge what it was, which seemed to annoy him.

 

Brilliant; simply priceless. Yet another attempt at intimidatory litigation tactics blown out of the water. And their LAWYER can't understand why they said that?!?! HE WROTE THE DEFENCE!!! If they had suggested that he write that, SURELY he would have advised them against it based upon his professional credibility?!

[Tigs33]

The judge turned to their solicitor said "these blow your application out of the water some what"

 

hahahaha that has made my day!!!!

[JonCris]

Brilliant; simply priceless. Yet another attempt at intimidatory litigation tactics blown out of the water. And their LAWYER can't understand why they said that?!?! HE WROTE THE DEFENCE!!! If they had suggested that he write that, SURELY he would have advised them against it based upon his professional credibility?!

 

I doubt he wrote it & if he did he can only advise on the matters, true or not, addmitted. If he's told they didn't or are not the company involved then that will be the defence.

 

I very much doubt that he had made available to him the copy letters in the possession of the claimant. It's not uncommon that the otherside's legal rep finds out at the door of the court there is evidence that blows their argument out of the water. No sensible lawyer want's to invite the wrath of the judge as they may have to deal with them on a daily basis

 

Had he known I suspect that he would have asked for the claimants agreement to ask for a short adjornment whilst he consulted (bollocked) his instructors.

 

The defendents where relying, as so often happens, on you being a no-show

 

I also suspect his comment about having a defence referred to himself being misled by his client.

[Seminole]

If I remember correctly, mortgage providers are regulated by the Financial Services Authority (I will check this). I would be inclined to make a formal complaint about they way this company conducted itself.

 

Unlike almost all other regulators, the FSA has teeth and will use them. Companies that abuse the fiduciary responsibilities in this way deserve to be crushed.