Gooner73 v Swift Advances

[Peter Arbuary]

I had a £60,000 secured loan over 25 years with Swift Advances that I was in arrears with. I managed to negotiate a re-mortgage with another company just in time to settle the loan a week before my house was due to be re-posessed. The settlement figure was just under £80,000

 

This was roughly broken down as..

 

Original Loan - £60,000

Interest - £18,000

Payments Received - (£10,000)

Legal Fees - £1000

Default/Litigation Charges - £6500

ERC - £4500

 

Redempton Figure - £80,000

 

I have been through the whole claim process. They offered to reduce one of the default charges from £1050 to £250 and sent me a cheque for £800. I filed an online claim for £6800 (Charges + Interest & Costs) at the end of October. They acknowledged on day 14 and filed a defence on day 28.

 

I received my allocation questionaire in the post this morning. As my sister is a solicitor, I have excellent legal advice! I thought I would post here as it seems that this one might go all the way!

 

The outline of their defence is..

 

1. That they admit they deductied charges in accordance with the terms & conditions and in accordance with normal industry practice.

2. They deny that the charges are punitive and that they represent an estimate of the likely costs.

3. They deny that the provisions of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 apply. If the UCTA 1997 does apply then the charges satisfy the requirement of reasonableness.

5. Thay deny that section 15 of the Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982 apply. If the SGSA 1982 does apply then the charges satisfy the requirement of reasonableness.

6. If the charges are not enforcible, the defendant is still entitled to damages for breach of contract.

7. As a result of the breaches of contract, they are intitled to recover the costs of postage, stationary, telephone calls, employing staff, management of staff, premises, heating, electricity. IT equipment, IT Support, IT systems, HR costs.

 

To me, this defence is a joke and I would be interested to hear any comments. Obviously it goes into a bit more detail, but this is the jist of it. I will run it past the expert eye of my sister and see how we can nail them!

 

In addition to the charges, they added an extra 1% interest on late payments, which I am not claiming. I think that 1% is a fair reflection of their costs and I will let them know this!

Has any one had any success in court v Swift Advances? I am pursuing another similar company (Lancashire Mortgage Co) and they have quoted back to me a case of Paul v Swift Advances on 29 Jan 07 in Southend County Court, where the judge allegedly denied a claim by Mr Paul for reimbursement of "penalty charges". Does anyone know the details of the case or know where the details can be obtained.

[zootscoot]

Its here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgage-companies/59031-barry-swift-court-date.html

[gooner73]

Sorry for taking so long to update! I received the Witness statement a few days before the case management conference as they forgot to include the actual statement in their witness bundle!

 

I asked for disclosure of further information on Monday which gave us a good oppotunity to discuss this request in the case management conference.

 

The Case management conference went well. I spoke to the solicitor before hand and we agreeed that the best course of action would be to wait and see what happens in the case of Mrs. Foot due in court on 25/4.

 

I was a bit worried about the telephone conference as it is the first time I have actaully spoken to the judge or the Solicitor personally. However, Judge Taylor from Horsham County Court was very good. He opened by asking "What's all this about then?" the solicitor expalined the detials of the case.. "So it's a bank charges claim is it? These are all being settled out of court aren't they? So what's the problem in this case then?" I took an instant liking to him!

 

The solicitor then asked for the case to be heared by a circuit judge as Mrs Foot's case has been referred to Michael Chambers QC who is apparently the most senior judge in Wales. Judge Taylor then argued with the solicitor for a while as he couldn't see why this case needed to be referred to a senior judge. He asked me if I was happy for this to be referred as it would abviously increase costs to myself even further if I lost. So I said that I didn't understand why this was required as this was a simple case of whether or not they made a profit from charges.

 

I explained that I had made a part 18 request for among other things disclosure of their audit report where they claim parity between the costs and charges of their credit control function. I also told the judge that I has asked for true copies of the Solicitors bills regarding the litigation charges of £1968.00. I said that if I received that information then I would be willing to reduce my claim accordingly.

 

Judge Taylor then said "So if you receive this information then you are willing to reduce your claim which will take you below the £5000 small claims limit, then you can have the case re-allocated to the Small Claims track thus reducing the cost risk to yourself?" I agreed that I would be happy to do this if they provided actual proof of their solicitors costs.

 

I was surprised that the Solicitor hadn't tried to force the case into Multi track as in Mrs. Foot's case. Mine has always been in fast track due to the amount of my claim. Perhaps it was on his agenda but decided against it as Judge Taylor seemed mildly irritaded with the defence from the outset and after the judge started talking about re-allocating to Small Claims, he probably thought better of it!

 

The solicitor then argued about the request being disproportionate etc. However he had only received it the day before due to the delay with the witness statements. He then started to mention Barry Paul's case where the judge didn't order disclosure, however he failed to mention the circumstances or the fact that the judge in Mrs Foots case had ordered disclosure ;-)

 

In summary, the judge adjourned the case for 2 weeks to give the defendants time to respond to the Part 18 Request. He also requested a copy of the Part 18 and the transcript from Barry Paul's and details of Mrs. Foot's cases. There will be another telephone conference on the first available date after the end of April.

 

All in all I think it went very well. I feel I am in a better position. By then Mrs Foot's case will have been heard. I will be keeping my fingers crossed for her! So there are a few things that can happen now. If they come up with proof of the litigation bills, I can reduce my claim and have it re-allocated to small claims (Which will make me feel a lot better about everything!) If they don't comply with the part 18 I can try to get the judge to order disclosure.

[mochamoo]

Well done gooner! Fingers crossed;)

[Guest beedydad]

Gooner

 

read with interest todays posting sounds like decent progress.

 

I am wanting to progress with case against Swift myself and have been watching both your's and Mrs Foots case with great interest.

 

Horsham county court - I live near by and, should you be revisiting, in the next 2 weeks, if tele conference goes ok - I would dearly wish to offer support and attend a fellow Swifty sufferer!

 

Please keep us up to date

Beedydad

[Guest beedydad]

Hi Gooner

 

any news?

 

your last post said you had a 2 week adjournement??

 

Are you able to let us know whether anything transpired

 

cheers

 

Beedydad

[mitchell1212]

please can you contact me i would like to use your sister as a solicitor if possible we had a 30,000 loan from swift and they are asking for redemtion of 61,000 and we have been filed for reposession thanks

 

email address mitchell2109@googlemail.com

 

Thanks

 

Mr Mitchell

[42man]

Any more news on this ??

[Vain]

Not sure if this is the right place to thread this am in a similar position have loan with swift advances loan was for £38,868.30 Over 300 months we got into bad arrears and have currently been to court in relation to repossesion the judge was great said we could pay £200 a months off arrears and the monthly payment,

so we have decided to sell we have buyer and i had requested a redemption figure. I have to pay back £54,367.98 which seem very excessive i know that we have £5,189.73 in arrears so i have akesd for a break down of this figure to redeem the loan So why charge £10.309.32 to redeem and other cost i assume this will be solicitors, letters admin it seems very excessive can i get this figure reduced in anyway

We are really stuck as we will be left with a shortfall of about £2.500 and i fear they will not release the house unless this is paid which we do not have any suggestions really need help with this matter

 

i did take out ppi and it was single cover am trying to see if i can claim refund as i feel this policy was unsuitable for our needs really need help.

 

Vain xxx

[pkelly]

be carefull eveyone there most likely is someone from swift reading all this? keep a few cards under the table.

put yourself in their shoes. If I were them all this would be useful to know whats aout to hit them,

[42man]

Vain....you should definitely ask for the PPI back.....Swift have been paying out for this.....

[landy_alert]

42man - do you know if Swift are paying out on PPI claims before it gets to court please?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

[Guest blackie]

hi, ONLY JUST FOUND YOUR THREAD WITH REGARD TO SWIFT, I AM CURRENTLY IN COURT WITH THEM ON 7TH MAY, HOWEVER I AM TRYING TO RAISE SOME MEDIA INTEREST AND ARRANGE A MEETING FOR AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE AT THE SWIFT OFFICES IN BRENTWOOD, ESSEX. REALLY INTEND TO GET AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE THERE.

[bramy2k]

I'd be interested in coming to that meeting. When?

[pkelly]

I'd be interested in coming to that meeting. When?

yep the media can be contacted and a protest organised

[Dougal16T]

yep the media can be contacted and a protest organised

 

Hi all,

I've just seen this.....did anything happen????

 

Regards

 

Dougal

[pkelly]

no it was the last I heard from them

[gooner73]

Hi Everyone. So after all this time I get a letter form the court with intention to strike out my claim due to the Supreme Courts ruling on bank charges.

 

I personally feel that in my case, Swift acted particularly unfairly as at the time I tried to pay the loan off by re-mortgaging they added charges on top of the settlement figure so on the day of completion, I had a shortfall and even though we begged them to reduce the charges, they refused.

 

I believe they acted like this as I was 7 days from them re-possessing my property and they were trying to force me out of my home. I had 48hrs to find £3.5k which I managed to find and save my property.

 

These spurious charges have never been fully broken down despite me asking them to do so on many occasions. My intention was always to get them to explain to me exactly what these charges were for and how they could be justified.

 

I am now in the position of my claim being struck out in the next few days. I am unsure of what to do next. I am also worried about costs as Swift estimated their costs to be £10k.

 

If anyone could give me some advice, it would be apreciated.

[Guest blackie]

Find the other feed on this site, there are hundreds of people in your position.

[lesterlass]

Gooner there is a thread just for SWIFT - there is alot of useful information.... DONT GIVE UP. Sparkie and the rest will help.

 

LL

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/swift-advances/153362-swift-advances-secured-loan-144.html

 

Swift Advances - The Consumer Forums

[caro]

Thread moved to Swift forum.

[Sparkie1723]

HI Gooner,

I disgaree ........... the supreme Court rluing on Bank charges does not apply to Swift Advances Plc nor Swift 1st Ltd as they are not deposit taking banks ..their charges are not bank charges they are all penalty charges and fees

 

I would like you ask your sister about the Bill of Rights Act 1689 ...the Act MPs are claiming protection under with expenses.........This has been declared a constitutional law that can never be repealed.

 

And in one of its clause it says as much as

" No man shall be Fined or Penalised/imprisoned, nor any of his Goods or Chattells confiscated unless deemed so by his Peers"

 

Peers as in Lords of the land and therefore Law Lords and that means more than one in deciding the above...it has been used before as shown below it was used as a defence in a Council Tax Claim which the man in question won.

 

Just trying to find more ways to hit Swift Adnaces Plc and their "associates"????

 

Untitled Document

 

WIRRAL COUNCIL – Admits that Council Tax is Unlawful and Sets a Legal Precedent.

 

Untitled Document

 

Sussex Man Lays Perjury Charges Against Horsham District Council & 2 Magistrates in Council Tax Fiasco

 

 

sparkie:)

[gooner73]

Objection to Strikeout sent!!

 

I will be in touch!

[chippyleigh]

Anything else happened on this ??

[gooner73]

I have a court date next week where they will hear my arguments on why my case should not be struck out.

 

I sent a letter outlining my reasons why I feel the case should be continued as I feel the Supreme Court judgement does not apply to this case. However, I am not sure where to go next with legal arguments to continue my action against swift.

 

I also don't know whether I need to form a basic legal argument when the judge hears my objections to the strikeout or whether he will just listen to reasons I stated in the letter to the court.

 

I am currently trawling the forums to catch up on the latest developments!