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

[ryde]

If this course of action is to be pursued we simply need the gmac scale of charges as a direct comparison with capstones scale of charges.There is more than sufficient hard evidence of their techniques.

The fsa cannot fine gmac and let capstone off their findings are precedental.

The only other criteria required is a template letter and the email addresses of the relevant mps,should be easy.

Edited March 7, 2010 by ryde

[enoughisenough]

John McFall is the chair of the TSC. He would be a good one to start with. Bear in mind that the FSA already had a public lambasting from him in August. He won't be a happy bunny.

[ryde]

Here comes another cop out.

 

"I appreciate your concerns that a company may be on the Register for a little time without any recorded directors, before action to dissolve the company is begun. But, the fact that a company has failed to notify the registrar of an appointment does not necessarily mean a director has not been appointed as forms are sometimes filed late. I can confirm however, that where a public complaint is received we immediately make enquiries and start the dissolution process, if appropriate.

 

The Companies Act 2006, Part 11, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1000 outlines the process that the registrar may use to dissolve a company which he has reasonable cause to believe it is not trading. The first part of that process, as outlined in The Act, is to send a letter by post inquiring whether the company is trading or not. We must follow the statutory process and give the company and the public the chance to consider the implications of dissolution. It would not be in the public interest to remove a company from the register if it is trading, has outstanding issues or creditors who may wish to apply for a liquidator to be appointed or take court action against the company. "

 

Sced

 

Sced

This is just simply not good enough and in breach of the companies act 2006.

5 months + is not a little time these people are simply not doing their jobs or upholding the law which cannot be interpreted as offering some undefined holiday for appointments,the director should already be in place before the final director resigns.

I'm sick of taking this whitewash and am going to move it to the complaint stage until someone does their feckin' job properly.

 

I'M FED UP TO THE TEETH OF THIS PASS THE BUCK ,EXCUSE BULLSH.T WE ARE CONSTANTLY PALMED OFF WITH, WHICH IS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF WHO WE ARE AND OUR STATUS AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

Edited March 7, 2010 by ryde

[midge61]

Hi

It seems my posts go un-noticed I have contacted the FSA and e-mailed Vince Cable about the FSA not completing their investigations as promised. Am awaiting replies.

[ryde]

Hi

It seems my posts go un-noticed I have contacted the FSA and e-mailed Vince Cable about the FSA not completing their investigations as promised. Am awaiting replies.

 

midge

be assured they do not go unnoticed,discussed this with eie and vince cable is on the list and will be getting an ear bashing in the near future.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS THE GMAC/CAPSTONE COMPARISON AS THIS IS HARD EVIDENCE AND HARD GROUNDS FOR COMPLAINT,WHY SHOULD CAPSTONE RECEIVE EXEMPTION ESPECIALLY IF THEIR CHARGES ARE HIGHER.

[ryde]

martdj has your red card been lifted?

[enoughisenough]

midge

be assured they do not go unnoticed,discussed this with eie and vince cable is on the list and will be getting an ear bashing in the near future.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS THE GMAC/CAPSTONE COMPARISON AS THIS IS HARD EVIDENCE AND HARD GROUNDS FOR COMPLAINT,WHY SHOULD CAPSTONE RECEIVE EXEMPTION ESPECIALLY IF THEIR CHARGES ARE HIGHER.

 

Roger that Ryde.

 

Midge. Your contributions are INVALUABLE and very much appreciated. Please don't ever think otherwise.

 

This is the biggest stonewalling whitewash in history. After having a taste of accountability themselves you would think the MPs would be saying why just us? Plenty of others on the make and take. Let them have it instead.

 

Who do these feckers think they are? The sheer hypocrisy of utilising the law of the land and serially abusing it to get what they want allied with their failure to observe the laws of the land that they don't like? Let them be put on notice that this is not a la carte, some pick and mix fecking menu.

 

And put the FSA on notice that a Francovich case is coming their way very soon.

 

Like Ryde I'm sick of this BS. CH can be on the list for the same as well. In fact ANY public authority including the MPs can. If they won't play ball it's all they deserve...fecking seething now...

Edited March 7, 2010 by enoughisenough

[enoughisenough]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/209359-eu-law-consumer-protections.html

 

All you need to know...trouble is has anyone got the balls to take this on...It would need a fighting fund. GET IN TOUCH WITH YOUR MEP. They have access and Brussels has CLOUT.

[enoughisenough]

I'm on the GMAC Stuff...

 

It's in my sig don't forget so everybody chip in with what they have...

 

Can get an open letter to the times etc organised i.e that which has been put together and sent to the FSA and companies House. Should,nt be too difficult. BUT GET THE CH LAW right for gods sake or we'll end up with egg on our faces and it will set us back months....

[ryde]

Companies act 2006

 

NOTE THERE AREN'T ANY LEGAL EXCEPTIONS TO THIS SUCH AS A 5 MONTH HOLIDAY PERIOD WHILST YOUR CARRYING OUT REPOS AND DELEGATING TO A THIRD PARTY ISN'T ACCEPTABLE EITHER IF THERES NO DIRECTOR TO DELEGATE.

 

Expand All Explanatory Notes (ENs)

Part 10 A company’s directors

 

Chapter 1 Appointment and removal of directors

 

Requirement to have directors

 

154 Companies required to have directors

 

(1) A private company must have at least one director.

(2) A public company must have at least two directors.

155 Companies required to have at least one director who is a natural person

 

(1) A company must have at least one director who is a natural person.

(2) This requirement is met if the office of director is held by a natural person as a corporation sole or otherwise by virtue of an office.

156 Direction requiring company to make appointment

 

(1) If it appears to the Secretary of State that a company is in breach of—

 

• section 154 (requirements as to number of directors), or
  
• section 155 (requirement to have at least one director who is a natural person),
  

the Secretary of State may give the company a direction under this section.

(2) The direction must specify—

(a) the statutory requirement the company appears to be in breach of,

(b) what the company must do in order to comply with the direction, and

© the period within which it must do so.

That period must be not less than one month or more than three months after the date on which the direction is given.

(3) The direction must also inform the company of the consequences of failing to comply.

(4) Where the company is in breach of section 154 or 155 it must comply with the direction by—

(a) making the necessary appointment or appointments, and

(b) giving notice of them under section 167,

before the end of the period specified in the direction.

(5) If the company has already made the necessary appointment or appointments (or so far as it has done so), it must comply with the direction by giving notice of them under section 167 before the end of the period specified in the direction.

(6) If a company fails to comply with a direction under this section, an offence is committed by—

(a) the company, and

(b) every officer of the company who is in default.

For this purpose a shadow director is treated as an officer of the company.

(7) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale and, for continued contravention, a daily default fine not exceeding one-tenth of level 5 on the standard scale.

Appointment

 

157 Minimum age for appointment as director

 

(1) A person may not be appointed a director of a company unless he has attained the age of 16 years.

(2) This does not affect the validity of an appointment that is not to take effect until the person appointed attains that age.

(3) Where the office of director of a company is held by a corporation sole, or otherwise by virtue of another office, the appointment to that other office of a person who has not attained the age of 16 years is not effective also to make him a director of the company until he attains the age of 16 years.

(4) An appointment made in contravention of this section is void.

(5) Nothing in this section affects any liability of a person under any provision of the Companies Acts if he—

(a) purports to act as director, or

(b) acts as a shadow director,

although he could not, by virtue of this section, be validly appointed as a director.

(6) This section has effect subject to section 158 (power to provide for exceptions from minimum age requirement).

Edited March 7, 2010 by ryde

[enoughisenough]

Ryde

 

Did you contact the Site team re what we discussed?

 

Just caught that Ryde...your post I mean...excellent work...back later.

[ryde]

What really gets me is that resetfan in their accounts say there's no directors in sppl, even though they are 100% shareholders, to call in the 55million they owe sppl so the prospect of having to pay this amount in the forseeable future is basically remote,so resetfan can carry on happily as a going concern.

Yet SURPRISE SURPRISE SPPL are still able to repossess your feckin' home but not call in the 55million owed. Probably the equivalent to about 400 repos.

YET THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.

[jetli]

What really gets me is that resetfan in their accounts say there's no directors in sppl, even though they are 100% shareholders, to call in the 55million they owe sppl so the prospect of having to pay this amount in the forseeable future is basically remote,so resetfan can carry on happily as a going concern.

Yet SURPRISE SURPRISE SPPL are still able to repossess your feckin' home but not call in the 55million owed. Probably the equivalent to about 400 repos.

YET THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.

THIS IS CRAP where are our laws??? cant believe all this and know its fradulant. Any Company would of been investigated Properly and on Income Tax because of no accounts gone under. WHAT IS HAPPENING AND WHERE IS THE LAW AND ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS (Jo public)

[ryde]

JETLI

Its like walking into a sledgehammer,the establishment is terrified of big lawsuits ,money is power and we ain't got none so they just brush us aside unless we're politically of use to them.

eie

pm is supposed to be open 2 way but nothing incoming despite several outgoing.

[ryde]

So if you look at the companies act above.

(1) A private company must have at least one director.

1) If it appears to the Secretary of State that a company is in breach of—

 

• section 154 (requirements as to number of directors), or
  

the Secretary of State may give the company a direction under this section.(2) The direction must specify—

(a) the statutory requirement the company appears to be in breach of,

(b) what the company must do in order to comply with the direction, and

© the period within which it must do so.

That period must be not less than one month or more than three months after the date on which the direction is given.

AS Dotty complained about lmc 5 months ago and there were similar complaints about sppl

CH have simply not complied with implementing the Law and should be reported for this to their superiors.

[littledotty27]

Ryde

 

Thanks for you pm,iv forwarded it on.

 

With re to the above,has anyone contacted HMRC? maybe if all these details were passed onto them,they might look into it.

[ryde]

CIB should have a list of all the linked companies in the ownership structure sent to them and copies of all the relevant accounts with the links put under their nose,no small task but just the above violation of the companies act, the debt write off by resetfan to sppl and the ultimate parent Mable's payment of 25million 3 weeks before going into admin must ask huge questions.

Look at the obligations a company director is supposed to have by law.Due diligence etc they are all in the Act and many have simply been ignored.

[ryde]

Rocket

how are you doing with your case,you've got definite grounds for misselling its got to be worth a shot theres nothing to lose, so please please do it for yourself and us all.

[enoughisenough]

JETLI

Its like walking into a sledgehammer,the establishment is terrified of big lawsuits ,money is power and we ain't got none so they just brush us aside unless we're politically of use to them.

eie

pm is supposed to be open 2 way but nothing incoming despite several outgoing.

 

try Dotty's wp. I have but got NOWT back...Curious. PS Can you find your email notification of my break down of B-O-2s standard and poors post and email it to me. I have tried cutting and pasting from here and it won't let me...odd. Thanks.

 

Much appreciated. I feel a big push on this is going to be very necessary. GMAC was a sop to allow the criminal cabal to get on with their repo strategy whilst we stood still waiting on the USELESS FSA. That's all...I bet GMAC haven't paid a bean.

[martdj]

As its coming up to election time perhaps we could e mail every MP and potential candidate to canvas their opinions. Surely one of them might try and do something. They are our elected representatives and cannot ignore the matter if there are enough complainants. What anout o petition on the No 10 Downing St site?

[rocket1]

Hi Ryde,

 

Thanks for the concern. I've been trying to run around like a blue bottle, so to speak, doing the million & one things I need to de re repo. But two weeks ago I caught flu ( the real thing, not just a sniffle - had difficulty even turning over in bed. Forget about getting up at all, bedbound for seven days. - nightmare) temperature 103, Doc visiting me at home for first time in my life. He wanted to get me to hospital. kidney on point of 'failure' ie begining to malfunction owing to flu.

 

As no-one else to look after my 11 yr old boy I thought I could get away with staying at home. But, although, obviously, I started getting better, I got the usual secondary lung infection which completely knackers you - again !

 

So am v weak and feeble & can only actually do a fraction of what is normal. I'm told this is typical for flu and it takes weeks and weeks to recover.

 

AAAAAARRRRRRG ! I need to get on with things. Plus my little 11yr old bugger has just gone down with v sore throat and looks as though he will be off school for next few days.

 

I can only hope he hasn't actually got flu - that could be really dangerous for him as younger people die more easily than older people who have more 'experienced' immune system.

 

Wouldn't it make a great headline. 'Vicious mortgage lender evicts sick father & 11 yr child with flu from home. Father & child get pneumonia. Child dies of Swine Flu" or some such. All this IS a worry as I have an eviction date in 7 days, no-where to go and N44 not filed yet.

 

local council told me last year they wouldn't consider re-housing me and my son as they were of the opinion I 'should never have used the £80 000 left over from my first repo in 2000 to buy a house and in the council's opinion this means I have

made myself 'intentionally' homeless. They said instead of buying, I should have rented until the £80 000 ran out then claimed housing benefit. Are they insane or what ?.

 

I tell you, I have a real corker of tale to tell about the last ten years experiences It's worth a book. I need a publisher - quick !

 

I saw the CAB last week. Am scheduled to see them 10 a.m tomorrow to organise N44, but they have been totally negative and advise me I have a 'thin case' as they described it to stay eviction.

 

But, the CAB should be able to re-suscitate last year's mortgage rescue scheme I applied for. It foundered on completely mad bureaucracy, but might be sortable.

 

I am going to file complaint with ombudsman and OFT tomorrow and try and draw up a synopsis of what I think the mis-selling etc is ( using my one brain cell that knows anything about law) and try and persuade judge to stay/suspend repo on grounds of counter case for mis-selling and things like lack of fiduciary duty etc

 

I will quote the contents of that Observer article about that successfull mis-selling case.

 

If I had access to a lawyer, I know I could stitch this loan shark up and not be evicted. BUT, I do NOT have access to a lawyer at all. Two previous attempts to get legal aid lawyer were both a farce. No lawyers taking on legal aid work then shyster lawyer pretending to take my case and only doing 'green form' advice - which I really, really don't need and is totally useless for me.

 

The whole system is a joke - thanks to this lousy government which makes it that way.

Edited March 7, 2010 by rocket1

[brassed-off-2]

Excellent post B-O-2.

 

Particularly revealing are the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHART 3 (Organisational flow chart) shows that the have a TCF (Treating Customers Fairly) Manager. Yes I bet they do since the FSA started sticking their noses in. Get their name and apply the pressure because they need real help doing their job properly. What a joke.

 

 

 

That's twice as many staff dealing with repos compared to customer services...

 

 

 

That's where we've been going wrong...they're philanthropists not the abusive loan sharks we had them marked up as. All caggers should consider a serious attitude adjustment. They're nice people really.

 

.

 

Well at least their training takes note of regulatory and statutory requirements.

 

 

 

You wouldn't know it would you...?

 

 

 

Can we ask for a copy of the mission statement?

 

 

 

There we go. Clear as day. The great equity cash grab [problem]. Relieving people of the burden of looking after their own equity.

 

 

 

Obviously we can't know how many of these were people who managed to remortgage away from Capstone/SPPL/SPML/Preferred etc (probably only a small fraction) but on this figure extrapolated across all 4 quarters that in my estimate makes Capstone responsible for about one-qarter of all possessions in the UK. THIS IS AN ASTONISHING FIGURE.

 

 

 

April 2009: 412 Repossessions

January 2009: 347 Repossessions

October 2008: 494 Repossessions

 

That's 1200 families chewed up and spat out in the space of six months. Nice work Capstone. Hope you sleep at night.

 

 

 

Anyone out there with any experience of such? I certainly can't recall ever being treated fairly, despite raising numerous issues with them.

 

 

 

We should write to the loan modifications team and ask what the criteria are of the structured mandate matrix and specifically ask if they can modify 50 loans a month what can you do for me...

 

On Repossession:

 

 

 

There we have it. Absolute proof that repossession is the beginning of the horror not the end. They will pursue you for years after they have stolen your home.

 

 

 

Unbelievable...when they have pushed you to the wall they then going after all of the other people in the machine that helped in this criminal enterprise. Even the solicitors, estate agents and valuers who assisted capstone in robbing you of your home have strong reason to be very wary indeed of the blood sucking ****.

 

NICE WORK B-O-2. A big rep click coming your way...

 

Thanks EIE, thought you would like this, and glad to see it is of some use!!

Im just looking at the 'charitable trust' issues at the moment...found a good link the other day, and lost it!! will keep googling... not sure if it has any bearing on things, but a couple of things caught my attention...will post the links when i find them again, may have some use, or none at all.

 

keep the faith

[enoughisenough]

Doing my best brother/sister...

 

PS Any idea why the quotes are missing from the document...? I tried copying them for my own nefarious purposes and couldn't...

[ryde]

DOTTY (from the other thread)

I don't have a mortgage with this lot so have little idea of the charging structure.

I THOUGHT IF YOU HAD AN ARRANGEMENT IN PLACE YOU DIDN'T PAY ANY FEES ON TOP OF THAT,OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

how does it work?

Edited March 8, 2010 by ryde

[enoughisenough]

Whatever they think they can get away with...they'll just apply them willy nilly with no rhyme or reason and see if anyone notices. What the eye doesn't see the barstewards get away with. Thoroughly disreputable **** preying on the vulnerable.