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

[ryde]

ALAN

thanks for straightening that one out,we all live in hope after so much and so long.I suppose this was the inevitable result of the pressure that was applied to CH lets hope the accounts show their insolvency .Perhaps you would know the reasons why a company posts a statement of capital in these circumstances? up for sale ?

ANYONE?

Edited February 26, 2010 by ryde

[uneverdid]

Hi no sorry not got my own thread.

 

I have today received a letter from TLT Solicitors re: court date. All it says is this is a witness statement and has the figures for the total amount due then a total arrears figures and the monthly payment due.

It has no breakdown on it, i received 2 separate ones an original one and a photo copy one. It also doesnt make reference to the fact that the contractual amount due changed a few months ago to £200 less a month so that is when i missed most of my payments. I have worked out my actual arrears equate to 5 and half months. I thought the new protocol says you have to have 6 months arrears before court action can be actioned.

[enoughisenough]

Go to the top of the page. Go back one link and click mortgage or mortgage forums. Scroll to the bottom. Click start new thread. You'll go straight to the top and the help will be dedicated direct to you. This thread is far too long now to help individual cases properly and pms are no good because the information can't be checked or verified by anyone and if it is good info no-one else benefits. Well be right along. Well soonish. Got to do stuff at the mo. In the words of itbg we don't leave our kaggaz behind.

[mrsiphone]

.Perhaps you would know the reasons why a company posts a statement of capital in these circumstances? up for sale ?

ANYONE?

 

 

 

Rather than something hopeful, it just looks like a new requirement for all limited companies

 

 

 

Statement of Capital | Davenports

 

The statement of capital is a “snapshot” of a limited company’s issued share capital at a given time.

 

 

Companies incorporating as limited by shares (whether private or public) on or after 1st October 2009 must complete a statement of capital and initial shareholdings as part of the application to incorporate.

 

 

All companies limited by shares must complete a statement of capital as part of any annual return filing made up on or after 1st October 2009.

[ryde]

Bad news on most fronts then.

We need a strategy and I dread saying it but some of it is coming right back to disclosure again.

It was far too optimistic to hope that they wouldn't bring their accounts up to date when pressed by CH.We'll have to wait to see what the latest accounts show and if CIB comes up with anything but these companies are leading a charmed existence.

Still optimism for sppl and lmc still.

Get that journalist who exposed the mp expense scandal who was on BBC4 last night.

Where's LC playing with his kittens no doubt.

[Rooster-UK]

 

 

What a cracking litter. Are they siblings or from more than one litter?

I really think that it would be a shame if they were saddled with names that reflect some of the users on this site, so choose carefully and with consideration for the feelings of the kits.

[supersleuth]

Debt advice....a la the USA

 

This Wall Street Journal article is great. It just goes to show the difference between our "Repossession" procedure and their "foreclosure" procedure. Lenders could foreclose over here too, but then they wouldn't be able to chase and harrass you for the rest of your life!

 

Anyway, wouldn't you just love to get debt advice in the UK like this in the main stream press.....

 

ROI: When It's OK to Walk Away From Your Home - WSJ.com

 

By the way, all those Lehman mortgages over there: doesn't seem like the Americans will be as shafted as we are over here!!...happy days for them eh...good old corrupt and rip off Britain!...they must think our authorities are morons for letting them get away with it.

Edited February 26, 2010 by supersleuth

[ryde]

Rooster-uk

You would have to ask itbg/lc don't expect a straight answer though, probably a bit of fowl language which you can edit out.Now the secrets out that he's a kitty lover which he'll no doubt vehemently try and deny (don't believe a word) he'll be worried about his image as he likes to be top of the pecking order.The man's badly misjudged he's not the bad egg people think he is hes got a heart of gold really under that cocky and abrasive exterior.Perhaps you could suggest a few suitable names.? "buckwheat" perhaps? for the wee beige number.

I am sure he would be secretly very grateful.

Confidentially I think he's a bit henpecked at home and releases all his tensions and frustrations on this site,so please try and make a few allowances for him and cut him a little slack.We all try our hardest not to ruffle his feathers too much..He's been carrying far too heavy a yolk for us all lately. :D

Edited February 27, 2010 by ryde

[caro]

I've moved several off topic posts to the Bear Garden to keep the thread on track.

[enoughisenough]

The journalist in question is called Heather Brooke.

 

Unsung hero | Politics | The Guardian

 

She has an extremely high profile following the break on MPs expenses. I posted about this before and got ... nada, zilch and nowt. I may have well had saved the gloss on my keyboard buttons.

 

However. That is a negative take on things and I don't 'do negative'.

 

So I propose to raise a list of questions to entice Ms Brooke with.

 

Please feel free to add.

 

1. Why has the FSA applied a fine and compensation order on GMAC-RFC when it is common knowledge that myriad other firms are conducting themselves in the same manner (if not worse) with seeming impunity?

 

2. Why are thousands of repos being processed weekly by the County Courts who decline their own jurisdiction under 12.3 of the UTCCRs, when they can throw the charges out?

 

3. Why is almost every possession an unlawful possession by virtue of the court's failure to assess as they are mandated by virtue of an ECJ ruling to do the potential unfairness of the consumer contract in EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL CASE?

 

4. Why do the lenders claim to have followed MCOB FSMA CJC etc when they singularly have failed to do so and why does the court allow these falsehoods to stand?

 

5. Why are Deputy District Judges (Part time Judges Full time legal eagles working in practices processing repo claims on behalf of their clients) allowed to go ANY WHERE NEAR adjudicating on such cases?

 

There are a million more questions worthy of investigation here. It's a stinking rotten barrel and Ms Brooke has more than proved her credentials in spilling the barrel over when it stinks.

 

That's my take. Add your questions and if this takes off I'll start a new thread and get in touch with her. My guess is she'll be up for this one after what she did for our esteemed elected representatives.

 

Nighty night....

[enoughisenough]

see you are striking up quite a rapport with the site team there Ryde. Hope you are not being incorporated into the establishment by stealth.

[ryde]

The journalist in question is called Heather Brooke.

 

Unsung hero | Politics | The Guardian

 

She has an extremely high profile following the break on MPs expenses. I posted about this before and got ... nada, zilch and nowt. I may have well had saved the gloss on my keyboard buttons.

 

However. That is a negative take on things and I don't 'do negative'.

 

So I propose to raise a list of questions to entice Ms Brooke with.

 

Please feel free to add.

 

1. Why has the FSA applied a fine and compensation order on GMAC-RFC when it is common knowledge that myriad other firms are conducting themselves in the same manner (if not worse) with seeming impunity?

Capstone being well known as having the highest charges in the industry.

 

2. Why are thousands of repos being processed weekly by the County Courts who decline their own jurisdiction under 12.3 of the UTCCRs, when they can throw the charges out?

 

3. Why is almost every possession an unlawful possession by virtue of the court's failure to assess as they are mandated by virtue of an ECJ ruling to do the potential unfairness of the consumer contract in EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL CASE?

 

4. Why do the lenders claim to have followed MCOB FSMA CJC etc when they singularly have failed to do so and why does the court allow these falsehoods to stand?

 

5. Why are Deputy District Judges (Part time Judges Full time legal eagles working in practices processing repo claims on behalf of their clients) allowed to go ANY WHERE NEAR adjudicating on such cases?

 

There are a million more questions worthy of investigation here. It's a stinking rotten barrel and Ms Brooke has more than proved her credentials in spilling the barrel over when it stinks.

 

That's my take. Add your questions and if this takes off I'll start a new thread and get in touch with her. My guess is she'll be up for this one after what she did for our esteemed elected representatives.

 

Nighty night....

 

great idea we need something now with the latest setback. I think personally a great opener and an overall illustration of how the whole rotten system works is MR Fulcher's report to the Treasury select committee.That alone has to invite investigation and sums up everything perfectly and succintly without being too technical to start with, which could be off putting,suggest we send her that and see if she shows any interest or knows anyone who will.

There'.s also Carmel Butlers wonderful in depth report.

So 2 big guns already firing full barrel.and ready to fire another broadside again.

Edited February 27, 2010 by ryde

[Crapstone]

If you are facing a repo. try Community Legal Services. If you are eligible they will pass you on to solicitors that will give you so many hours for free. It's not 1-1 in person but they can write up a defence and give advice over the phone. They can also negotiate on your behalf with the other party to have court action dropped. In my opinion they are far better than the CAB, it not only looks better using a solicitor but it is more tailored advice from specialists.

[ryde]

see you are striking up quite a rapport with the site team there Ryde. Hope you are not being incorporated into the establishment by stealth.

 

:DITS A CRACKER!!

think I've made a new friend

itbg's kits are winners though .

Good news is he'll have something in common at last with someone on the site team.

Edited February 27, 2010 by ryde

[Crapstone]

The journalist in question is called Heather Brooke.

 

Unsung hero | Politics | The Guardian

 

She has an extremely high profile following the break on MPs expenses. I posted about this before and got ... nada, zilch and nowt. I may have well had saved the gloss on my keyboard buttons.

 

However. That is a negative take on things and I don't 'do negative'.

 

So I propose to raise a list of questions to entice Ms Brooke with.

 

Please feel free to add.

 

1. Why has the FSA applied a fine and compensation order on GMAC-RFC when it is common knowledge that myriad other firms are conducting themselves in the same manner (if not worse) with seeming impunity?

 

2. Why are thousands of repos being processed weekly by the County Courts who decline their own jurisdiction under 12.3 of the UTCCRs, when they can throw the charges out?

 

3. Why is almost every possession an unlawful possession by virtue of the court's failure to assess as they are mandated by virtue of an ECJ ruling to do the potential unfairness of the consumer contract in EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL CASE?

 

4. Why do the lenders claim to have followed MCOB FSMA CJC etc when they singularly have failed to do so and why does the court allow these falsehoods to stand?

 

5. Why are Deputy District Judges (Part time Judges Full time legal eagles working in practices processing repo claims on behalf of their clients) allowed to go ANY WHERE NEAR adjudicating on such cases?

 

There are a million more questions worthy of investigation here. It's a stinking rotten barrel and Ms Brooke has more than proved her credentials in spilling the barrel over when it stinks.

 

That's my take. Add your questions and if this takes off I'll start a new thread and get in touch with her. My guess is she'll be up for this one after what she did for our esteemed elected representatives.

 

Nighty night....

 

Good one EIE.

 

Ask why so many financial advisors are being investigated but only where they have been making their own fraudulant mortgage applications. What about the rest that have made false applications to gain payment?

 

Ask why so many records are 'lost' or 'missing' and nothing is being done.

 

Ask why insurance is so profitable for the companies when they habitually refuse or deny receipt of any that is taken out by the client

 

..nite x

[enoughisenough]

Time to kick the rotten stinking barrel over... Cinematic reference

 

"let's go to work..."

[actionnotwords]

Enoughisenough

With your many personal problems your dedication and input to this site is admirable and appreciated by all.Rydes news that accounts have been submitted by the criminal firms cannot be seen as bad news.This was an invetitable result of your continuing lobby of companies house and has cost this group of companies many many thousands of pounds in auditor fees,future taxation which must be well overdue and attracting penalties and interest and penalties for late submissions to companies house.

The tax issue is in fact a good issue to pursue in that the deliberate non submission of accounts by the prescribed date amounts to delberately trying to avoid and evade tax.

Logic suggests that the more irons that are kept in the fire the better and the latest ideas to involve an investigative journalist in the media spotlight and possibly seeking to enhance an already glowing career is a marvellous idea and worthy of carefully aimed effort.

Would someone please post the link to Mr Fulcher's and Carmel Butler's reports to the Treasury as I have yet to read these.

I have been studying the accounts with a colleague of Preferred Mortgages Limited.It would appear that the securitisation process is not quite as clearcut as portrayed.There is a much stronger link between originator and special purpose vehicle.In this instance the repayments all appear to travel through the originators account then to the spv.The originator pays tax on these amounts and receives income back from the spv for this operation.We have not concluded our investigation but will post our findings when we have finished.

I am so pleased that others have found pleasure in the bad persons little bundles of joy ,perhaps he would consent to a small diversion or rather an aside on this site in our assistance in helping him name his charges.

 

I would wish to offer a further rather rude and slightly more embarassing but more emphatic cinematic reference to the work to be done which I believe is apt.

 

Come on ! let's kick ass!

[supersleuth]

Hi ANW

 

Re your investigation on accounts and tax

 

A good line of enquiry would be the tax laws about receipts of interest income earned. You see, if your income is earned "interest" as the SPVs is, then you have to pay income tax on that interest. When that interest is paid abroad (which the SPVs income ultimately is), then the person paying it is liable to "with hold" the tax payable and pay that withheld tax to the tax man to the credit of the tax payer. However, when these interest payments are paid via a "bank" then the bank do not have to "withhold" the tax and they wash it around until it ends up abroad without having paid any tax.

 

I admit I'm a bit fuzzy on all this because I haven't fully reasearch the tax structure. But I do know that the withholding tax rules, and the bank's exemption thereof, is a major element of the structure. Imagine the sums involved. Say for each £1,000 you pay to the SPV, £300 of that should go to the tax man as withholding tax, but for the fact that it's washed through the pretence that the "bank" lender is the receiving party who has special exemptions from withholding tax.

 

This is another reason why the SPV won't admit to the Land Registry that they are the real legal owner of the mortgage. Can't give specific details, but that is a clue and potential pointer to the base structure of tax evasion fraud.

 

Supersleuth

[supersleuth]

ANW,

 

...and another reason for keeping the criminal companies alive is because of the value of their deferred tax ASSETS. You see, when a company makes a huge loss (say billions) like the lehman entities, the loss can be offset against profits - that has real value. So say a profitable company buys a company with huge deferred tax assets then, when they've merged the loss making company into their profit making company, then the acquiring company can off-set the losses against all its profits. The cost of buying the loss making company will be much less than the tax they would have had to pay on their profits. Can you see the rub here - tax avoidance, but the point is, that the public purse is deprived of the tax receipt that it should have got from the profitable company...again this results in billions lost from the public purse. These people do not pay tax...only the little guy on PAYE pays tax.

 

So when you see that the accounts say e.g. SPML's loans are written off by their creditors, that helps to create the tax loss, a credit for which will be received from the tax man from the acquiring company. Sorry if this sounds all fuzzy, but hopefully you will get the conceptual idea. Just another clue for your consideration.

 

So when you hear e.g. that RBS have announced a £24 billion loss (or whatever it was), just remember that next year, they can make a £24 billion profit next year without paying any tax!...and, remember, the accounts will always be manipulated so that the losses are way overstated and the profits are way understated.

 

Rule of thumb...the lending institutions do not pay tax, even when they say they do, they just get double back from the tax man the next time round.

Edited February 27, 2010 by supersleuth

[actionnotwords]

Thankyou for your information supersleuth this helps to explain how this group of companies have all assisted each other by passing debt around the various entities,failing to pursue debts etc one huge tax evasion scheme.

The scandal being as the bad person and others have indicated that the two major creditors of this group storm funding and mable commercial funding both in administration and both Lehman entities have no intention in the forseeable future of calling in their loans(as reported by the auditors in the accounts),so there will be few if any assets to distribute to their own creditors who will undoubtedly include the tax authorities.

Perhaps it would be prudent to report this matter to the tax authorities who may only assess on a company by company basis and may be unaware of the whole structure,do you believe this is a possibility?

Edited February 27, 2010 by actionnotwords

[midge61]

In june at the Treasury select investigation the FSA stated that they were investigating 4 firms and that it would take 3-6months (at the most) to conclude and take action.

 

That means that all investigations should have been concluded by December ut to date only GMAC have been fined.

 

Perhaps an e-mail to the FSA enquiring why they have taken a further 3 months with no results is in order.

 

Also Vince Cable (Lib Dem) has been very vocal about this issue and may be worth contacting.

[mrsiphone]

Also Vince Cable (Lib Dem) has been very vocal about this issue and may be worth contacting.

 

Especially with elections coming up

[actionnotwords]

Supersleuth to put my previous post as an analogy.

I am a money lender I have various creditors from whom I derive my source of funds.I have an associate,you.When my creditors collapse and file for bankruptcy their trustee wants what I owe them.Instead of paying him I go bankrupt having given you the funds that I owe,I then say you can keep them.The creditors at the top of the chain are therefore deprived of the assets I should have demanded off you.Such creditors of my bankrupt creditor would undoubtedly be the tax authorities who would receive nothing as I have no assets having passed them to you,I would also escape my creditor and tax liability as I am bankrupt and having got rid of my assets.So it travels all along the many tentacles whilst the end users enrich themselves with probable paybacks to their benefactors.ie bankrupt to bankrupt to solvent entity.Assets passed all along the line then the debt written off.For an individual that would mean prison.

It is notable that the resurrection of the banks has come at the expense of the taxpayers and the Lehmans creditors.

Edited February 27, 2010 by actionnotwords

[uneverdid]

Hi,

I have started my own thread now titled Capstone/Preferred/SPML

I would be grateful for any advice you may have.

I have been told to get hold of Ellen but not sure how?

[enoughisenough]

here we go ANW

 

Carmel Butler

 

House of Commons - Treasury - Written Evidence

 

Mr. Fulcher

 

House of Commons - Treasury - Written Evidence

 

PS I wouldn't say I have many personal problems. No more than the average customer of the ****, leastways.

 

What they are particularly good is extracting so much cash from us they are actually distorting the real economy to the extent that they are having a toxic and deleterious effect on more than those of us just directly concerned. Think how many local businesses and how much the economy in general would benefit from a good old fashioned circular flow of income.

Edited February 27, 2010 by enoughisenough