Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim

[overdone]

Thank you Sparkie.

 

Which of the following can I claim a refund on?

 

Original Loan .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £47,125.00

Interest charged .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £14,990.58

Less payments received .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £14,164.15

 

Sub total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £47,951.43

 

Arrears Letters & call charges .. .. .. .. .. ..£ 598.00

Bounced payment charges .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£ 33.00

Redemption request charges .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£130.00

Other Letter Charges .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £175.00

Default Charge .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£250.00

Post default collection costs .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£490.00

 

Sub total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£49,627.43

 

Sealing /discharge fee .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .£250.00

Early settlement interest charged .. .. .. ..£2,772.32

 

Redemption figure .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .£52,649.75

 

 

Edited August 2, 2008 by overdone
insert leader dots

[Sparkie1723]

Thank you Sparkie.

 

Which of the following can I claim a refund on?

 

Original Loan .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £47,125.00

Interest charged .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £14,990.58

Less payments received .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £14,164.15

 

Sub total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £47,951.43

 

Arrears Letters & call charges .. .. .. .. .. ..£ 598.00 ..............Claim these

Bounced payment charges .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£ 33.00 .............. """"""""

Redemption request charges .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£130.00 .............. """"""""

Other Letter Charges .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £175.00.............. """"""""

Default Charge .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£250.00 ............. """"""""

Post default collection costs .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£490.00............. """""""""

 

They will have to justify these charges in that they are true costs and not penalties

 

Sub total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..£49,627.43

 

Sealing /discharge fee .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .£250.00

Early settlement interest charged .. .. .. ..£2,772.32

 

Redemption figure .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .£52,649.75

 

sparkie

 

 

 

[overdone]

I thought as much but I have only claimed four of those you say I can claim on. Out of court, I would be quite happy with £1371.00 I put in for. Novice that I am. Is it likely they will not bother to turn up for court as the amount is still low?

Can I claim my own costs too?

Edited August 3, 2008 by overdone
more info

[Sparkie1723]

I thought as much but I have only claimed four of those you say I can claim on. Out of court, I would be quite happy with £1371.00 I put in for. Novice that I am. Is it likely they will not bother to turn up for court as the amount is still low?

Can I claim my own costs too?

 

In small claims you can only claim personal expenses for the day which is I think £50 maximum.

 

One other thing matey we are ALL novices.

 

sparkie

[overdone]

One other thing matey we are ALL novices.

 

sparkie

 

Well I think you are a Lit in Person of sheer genius.

[Sparkie1723]

Well I think you are a Lit in Person of sheer genius.

 

 

Thanks for that compliment mate ....sheer .....I might be ................genius ....no chance.

Thanks again

 

sparkie

[overdone]

4 August 2008

 

Dear Overdone,

 

Your complaint

Former agreement Number PAxxxxxxxx

 

I am sorry to hear of the details of your complaint as set out in your letter dated 30 July 2008 which I received on 1 Aug 2008.

 

My understanding is that you are unhappy with the fees and charges applied to your account.

 

I am currently investigating the issue under our complaints process (see attached leaflet) and will reply more fully by August 2008 at the latest.

 

In the meantime, if you have any further questions or concerns, please contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Tom Strickley

Compliance officer.

[42man]

This is excellent work....by all...watching with interest !!!

[Sparkie1723]

4 August 2008

 

Dear Overdone,

 

Your complaint

Former agreement Number PAxxxxxxxx

 

I am sorry to hear of the details of your complaint as set out in your letter dated 30 July 2008 which I received on 1 Aug 2008.

 

My understanding is that you are unhappy with the fees and charges applied to your account.

 

I am currently investigating the issue under our complaints process (see attached leaflet) and will reply more fully by August 2008 at the latest.

 

In the meantime, if you have any further questions or concerns, please contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Tom Strickley

Compliance officer.

 

 

Send a complaint in to the OFT

the more tha do this will make the OFT do something about them. Make sure you tell Swift you are making a complaint, they've already been tld they are being watched by my friends, it might help you get them to pay you out quicker to stop the OFT file on them getting bigger.

 

sparkie

[overdone]

Send a complaint in to the OFT

the more tha do this will make the OFT do something about them. Make sure you tell Swift you are making a complaint, they've already been tld they are being watched by my friends, it might help you get them to pay you out quicker to stop the OFT file on them getting bigger.

 

sparkie

How do I word an OFT complaint about these charges if they ignore my being a hardship case? I understand the OFT can get you your charges back too.

[overdone]

Is there such a thing as a template letter for going via the OFT to reclaim illegal charges? Some people on CAG appear to have used that approach.

[In a Mess!]

Hi everyone

Have just got my statement of charges from Swift but could someone please tell me what template they sent to swift to reclaim the charges

(sorry still trying to find my way around)

[overdone]

I decided to complain to OFT as follows and let Swift know I had.

 

22 August 2008

 

The Office of Fair Trading,

Fleetbank House

2 – 6 Salisbury Square,

LONDON CO9 2LP

EC4Y 8JX

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Re Complaint, Former Agreement Number Px xxxx/xxxx. SWIFT ADAVCES. Brentwood. Re xxxxxxxx Road, xxxxxxx, Essex xxx xxxx

 

I wrote to Swift Advances of Brentwood Essex, letter enclosed and have since had an unsatisfactory response considering this to be a Hardship Case. I wonder if you would be good enough to investigate the matter of illegal charges made on my account.

 

My Understanding of the situation is this;

 

When the OFT makes a ruling then creditors are expected, and indeed required, to comply. All banks and credit card companies, in general, hold licences to lend money under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (and hold licences to collect consumer debts too).

 

Thus if a bank or creditor fails to take on board the OFT's ruling surely, we can use the 1974 Act to the advantage of ordinary people.

 

Most banks and the BBA have in light of the OFT's statement indicated that they think it is wrong, unfair, or only related to credit cards and so on and so forth. But the fact is the OFT has stated it is subject to all consumer contracts - including bank accounts, overdrafts and mortgages.

 

Thus what I need to do is to say to banks and creditors is that unless they implement the OFT's ruling (which means please refund all unfair bank charges within the last 6 years for England/Wales, or 5 years for Scotland) then they will be 'an unfit person to hold a consumer credit licence'.

 

Under the 1974 Act, customers can lodge a complaint to the OFT if they think a company is an 'unfit person'.

 

The point is this - if UK banks want to fight the OFT, then fine (and that will take time) but meantime the OFT could revoke their licence under the 1974 Act.

 

I await your response.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Overdone

[overdone]

22 August 2008

 

TonyStrickley

TheSwiftGroup

ArcadiaHouse

Warley Hill BusinessPark

The Drive

Brentwood

Essex

CM13 3BE

 

Dear Mr Strickley,

 

Former Agreement Number Px xxx/xxxx. 20 xxxxx Road, xxxxx, Essex.

 

In view of your response to my recent complaint concerning charges to my account I have written to The Office of Fair Trading. I trust this enclosure will draw attention to the matter in a more conscientious manner and that I will receive a more favourable response soon.

 

Yours Sincerely

Overdone

[overdone]

Hi everyone

Have just got my statement of charges from Swift but could someone please tell me what template they sent to swift to reclaim the charges

(sorry still trying to find my way around)

Just go to reclaim your bank charges section and use the same letter template but adjust to fit Swift account number etc.

[overdone]

I have never dug this deep before, but I did get my swift loan via a broker. I wonder what they got paid and did I help the broker more than they did me.

 

 

Wilson & Another v Hurstanger Ltd

 

• [2007] EWCA Civ 299
  

Help with citations

Facts

 

The borrowers had fallen behind with their mortgage payments and with the help of a broker sought a second loan of £8000 to pay off the arrears.

The lender, Hurstanger Ltd, sent the borrowers various documents to sign, including one that authorised payment of the broker's arrangement fee of £1000 out of the loan. Another stated that the broker was acting as the borrowers' agent and that "in certain circumstances [the lender] does pay commission to brokers/agents…We will pay monies to your broker strictly in accordance with your signed authority by the deduction from this advance". The borrowers signed and the lender paid the broker commission of £240.

The court heard evidence that the non-status lending market had become so competitive that it had become necessary for small companies like Hurstanger to pay this sort of commission to brokers to attract business. This was in addition to the arrangement fee the broker would negotiate with the borrower.

A dispute arose over the terms of the loan. One of the issues was whether the payment of £240 was a secret profit, in breach of the broker's fiduciary duty to his clients.

Judgment

 

Under common law principles of agency, a broker owes fiduciary duties to act in the client's best interests and not to put himself in a position of conflict or make a secret profit. In this case, the broker had an incentive to look for a lender who paid the best commission, rather than getting the best deal for his clients. The only way he could act without breaching his fiduciary duty would be if the borrowers had consented.

The borrowers knew that the commission would be paid, but, without knowing the amount, could they give their informed consent?

The Court of Appeal noted that there is no clear authority to say that an agent's duty requires him to disclose the actual amount of this sort of commission. Taking into account that borrowers in this market were likely to be vulnerable and unsophisticated, however, it concluded that disclosure of the amount was necessary "to bring home to such borrowers the potential conflict of interest".

The broker had not made a secret profit because the borrowers knew about the commission. But, in failing to disclose the amount, he had, nevertheless, acted in breach of his fiduciary duty because he had not obtained his clients' informed consent to the potential conflict of interest.

Significantly, the lender, who had paid the commission knowing that the broker was acting as the agent of the borrowers, was found liable as an accessory to that breach. This meant that the borrowers were entitled to claim equitable compensation directly against Hurstanger.

Where there has been a breach of fiduciary duty, the court has a discretion whether or not to grant rescission. In this case, it could have ordered rescission of the whole loan agreement. The court, however, decided it would be sufficient to require the lender to pay the borrowers the amount of the commission, plus interest from the date it was paid.

[Sparkie1723]

My Friends have engaged a Counsel to act in their defence and have given me permission to post their defence looks like Swift may be in a bit of bother trying to gain possession of their house.

sparkie

____________________________

DEFENCE

____________________________

1. Paragraphs 2, 4, 8 and 9 of the Claimant’s particulars of claim are admitted.

2. Paragraph 3 and 10 of the Claimant’s particulars of claim make no express assertions and the Defendants therefore make no response.

3. Paragraphs 1, 5 and 11 of the Claimant’s particulars of claim are disputed. Please see paragraph 10 below.

4. Paragraph 6a of the Claimant’s particulars of claim is denied. The amount they believed they had borrowed was £43,000.00, as detailed in the “total” box on the signed agreement form. (please see exhibit WG1).

5. Paragraph 6b of the Claimant’s particulars of claim is admitted save that the current APR is disputed and the Claimant is put to strict proof.

6. Paragraph 6c of the Claimant’s particulars of claim is neither admitted or denied and the Claimant in put to strict proof of the figures alleged including fully explained calculations, schedules of costs and outstanding balances.

7. Paragraph 6g is denied. The interest figure at the start of the mortgage was believed to be 9.84% as stated in the signed agreement form in the box titled “rate of interest” (please see exhibit WG1).

8. No interest rate is included in the ‘key facts’ box of the agreement.

9. The Defendants have been informed by letter of one change to the interest rate, increasing the rate by 0.35%.

10. The Claimant’s right of possession in relation to xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx (The Property) is only actionable if the Defendants are in breach of the agreement dated 4th April 2007. The Defendants deny they are in breach of the agreement. They have withheld the four most recent loan/mortgage repayments, totalling £2,528.04 for the following reasons

i. They believe the contract is void through misrepresentation.

ii. Further or in the alternative the Claimants are in breach of contract.

iii. Further or in the alternative the Defendants will say the relationship between the Claimant and themselves was unfair and the terms of the agreement were unfair and wish to rely on Sections 140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act 2006.

iv. No adequate response or explanation to the questions and concerns raised in correspondence has been received from the Claimant.

_____________________

COUNTER CLAIM

_______________________

11. Paragraph 2 of the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim are repeated.

The Part 20 Defendant’s misrepresentations:

12. In negotiating the above loan/mortgage the Part 20 Claimants were specifically led to believe by the Part 20 Defendant’s agents that all costs in relation to the loan would be deducted from the £43,000.00 they asked to borrow.

13. The Part 20 Claimants had initially been led to believe by their broker that the interest rate was to be 7.8%. When they signed the agreement dated 4th April 2007 they believed that the increase in interest rate was to cover the costs involved in the loan.

14. The Part 20 Claimants discovered they had actually been lent £46,955.00 when they checked their credit file with CRA’s on line (please see exhibit WG2) under their normal check of their files, this was confirmed only when they received notification of the arrears exhibited as WG3 The costs of the loan had been added on to the £43,000.00 rather than deducted from it.

15. When the Part 20 Claimants received the loan agreement document and based on that document, they were led to believe the rate of interest applicable to the loan was 9.84%. This figure is the only interest figure detailed on the signed agreement form. They were led to believe this figure applied to the total loan. No other interest figures were disclosed.

16. However, contrary to the signed agreement the Part 20 Defendant has pleaded that the applicable rate of interest is 10.3% from the beginning of the agreement.

17. As a result of the Part 20 Defendants and or their agents misrepresentations the Part 20 Claimants have been misled into borrowing more money and at a higher rate of interest than they believed they were borrowing.

The Part 20 Defendant’s breach of contract:

18. The Part 20 Claimant believed they were borrowing a total amount of £43,000.00. In breach of the signed agreement they were in fact lent £46,955.00.

19. Within the first two months of the agreement the Part 20 Defendant informed the Part 20 Claimant of an increase of 0.35% to the interest rate.

20. The Part 20 Claimants wrote to the Part 20 Defendant asking them to explain the reason for the increase and pointing out that the Bank of England rate had only increased by 0.25%. Please see letter exhibited as WG 4.

21. It was at this point that the Part 20 Claimants checked the calculation on the payments they had been making, on average £632.01 per month. Please see attached schedule marked WG5. As the Part 20 Claimants understood the loan/mortgage agreement, £43,000 on an interest rate of 9.84% over 120 months they calculated the monthly repayments should be £564.45.

22. No satisfactory response has been received explaining the reason for the interest rate increase and how monthly repayments were calculated.

23. By lending the Part 20 Claimants more money than was agreed the Part 20 Defendant is in breach of the agreement dated 4th April 2007.

24. By charging monthly repayments greater than what had been agreed and at a different rate of interest than had been agreed the Part 20 Defendant is in breach of contract.

The Claimant’s breaches under the Consumer Credit Act 2006:

25. The Part 20 Claimants assert that leading up to and from the formation of the agreement dated 4th April 2007 the relationship between the parties was ‘unfair’, as defined under sections 140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act 2006.

26. The Part 20 Defendant’s misrepresentations in relation to the amount of money lent and the interest rates applicable to the loan were unclear and not properly explained.

27. The Part 20 Defendants documentation and correspondence are unclear, ambiguous and fail to comply with industry standards. Consequently this has put the Part 20 Claimants at a marked disadvantage in trying to resolve this dispute.

28. Further, the manner in which the Part 20 Defendant has attempted to enforce the agreement is unfair and heavy handed.

29. The Part 20 Claimants requests the agreement be rescinded.

30. Further the Part 20 Claimants seek damages in relation to the above, and also in relation to false information supplied to credit reference agencies as a result of this dispute.

31. The Part 20 Claimants claim interest on any amount found to be owed to them pursuant to section 69 the County Courts Act 1984.

WHEREFORE the Part 20 Claimants claim

1) The contract rescinded

2) Damages

3) Interest

[emmaf01]

subscribing

[overdone]

well done sparkie. I cannot find other threads about these sub prime lenders but I am glad I started this one. I hope others will come forward soon.

[Sparkie1723]

Considering the Barrister went off my notes he has got the picture well I think ...just have to and see how things go fingers crossed for them anyway.

 

sparkie

[overdone]

Considering the Barrister went off my notes he has got the picture well I think ...just have to and see how things go fingers crossed for them anyway.

 

sparkie

Yes, you have done extremely well.

[42man]

Swift are getting up my nose !!! they have written to me saying they may begin legal proceedings against me unless we agree a repayment plan....

 

Despite the last .25 x 3 interest rate reductions, they have passed none of those on to me (not surprised) !!

 

My arrears are just over one month....

 

They owe me over 2 months in excessive charges....

 

they say their next steps are to instruct solicitors to write to you.

 

If you do not reply to that letter within 10 days we will instruct the solicitors to issue a summons for possession in your local county court, unless you repay the arrears before the hearing date issued by the court this is likely to lead to the court making a possession order against you....

 

time for a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and start reclaiming the charges....

[42man]

Swift have apologised for sending me the letter saying they wouldn't consider repossession unless the arrears were at least 3 months !!

[overdone]

On 22 August I wrote to the OFT. No reply. Are they still at Fleetbank house?

[Sparkie1723]

On 22 August I wrote to the OFT. No reply. Are they still at Fleetbank house?

Hi mate

My friends did'nt get a reply for over a month from the OFT.

 

Another thing in their case Swift issued a possession order on them for two months arrears......if you can post their apology .... removing all your identification it would assist them a lot in fighting the possession case

sparkie