SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS

Southern Pacific Mortgage Limited is a subsidiary of the devious, rather nasty bunch of bankers who were called Lehmans until they went bust recently owing vast sums of money and wrecking the World economy in the process.

Southern Pacific Mortgage Limited, SPML, to all those unfortunate enough to be its victims, is one of those rip-off subprime mortgage lenders that specialise in fleecing borrowers and generally employing trickery to convert other people’s money into their own by any immoral, dishonest and devious means they can get away with.

SPML are still trading here in the UK, apparently. They have two principle activities at present. One seems to be repossessing as many of its borrowers as possible to evict them from their houses and destroy their lives.

The purpose of this is so SPML can get their greedy little hands on as much of those unfortunate householders property as quickly as possible so that SPML can sell it off quick and cheap grab the money and run before someone realises they are part of a bankrupt bunch of thieves and stops them stealing any more money and ruining more people’s lives.

The other main activity of this charmless bunch of financial confidence tricksters is to put all that money they are forcing homeowners to give them by selling their homes and charging extortionate ‘penalty’ fees of one sort or another, into an intricate web of other companies and, wait for it, charitable trusts, to make sure it will be as safe as possible from all those people owed billions by this dishonest bunch of loan sharks.

So, creditors owed money by Lehmans and Lehmans ‘ subsidiary companies will be fresh out – they will not get money that Lehmans subsidiaries have carefully squirreled away beyond the reach of bankruptcy administrators. People owed money by Lehmans will go away empty handed.

Meanwhile, let’s get this right, SPML announce in their annual report ending November 30th 2008 that the company intends to ‘enter into an orderly wind down of its assets and operations and/or seek a disposal of its assets and business’.

Elsewhere in the SPML annual report the company makes clear that mortgages arranged by SPML for its unsuspecting homeowner victims are bundled together, securitised into a ‘derivative’ financial instrument as they laughingly name it, and sold on into a ‘Special Purpose Vehicle’ as SPML describe it ( it just means another separate company that simply holds all those bundled together mortgages as an asset to be further manipulated into a fantasy world of breathtaking deviousness).

Then, guess what ? The SPML annual report proudly announces these Special Purpose Vehicle companies, SPV’s for short in the childish jargon of these idiot ‘Masters of the Universe’, are all ‘legally and beneficially owned’ by charitable trusts and are included in the financial statements of the company (SPML) on a ‘linked presentation basis’. That is more jargon designed to confuse people into not quite realising SPML have hidden all their money in charitable trusts so it is protected from all the people owned money by Lehmans and its subsidiaries.

Clever stuff, or what ? But is it moral ? Is it honest ? It may (possibly) be legal, but it doesn’t look remotely honest to me.

A Charity Commission spokesperson said: “A body is a charity if it is established for exclusively charitable purposes only. To qualify as a charity, an organisation must also demonstrate that its purposes are for the public benefit.

“The 1993 Act requires trustees to register charities in England and Wales with the Charity Commission. Any charity which has a gross income exceeding £5,000 a year is required to register. However, some special classes of charity are free from the requirement to register”.

I do wonder what on earth the ‘public benefit’ of the SPML arranged charitable trusts can be. Does it mean they have had a change of heart and decided to atone for their previously ruthless behaviour which led to Lehmans bankruptcy and global financial meltdown ? Do they now plan to rescue distressed homeowners being repossessed and thrown out onto the street by other mortgage lenders ?

Somehow I think not. There will be no ‘public benefit’ from these charitable trusts. But I rather think there might be a significant benefit to bankers and other investors perhaps. One does wonder. Let’s wait and see.

Actually, I took one look at the weasel like face of Dick Fuld, ex boss of Lehamns and the man that manipulated truth and honestly right out of Lehmans New York Headquarters windows as he steered the World into financial meltdown, and thought he looked completely devious, dishonest, immoral and almost certainly a rotten, nasty person.

Just the sort of person to preside over the setting up of loan shark mortgage lending in the UK and ensuring the fat profits of conversion and theft are carefully placed beyond the reach of honest people into ‘charitable trusts’ for God’s sake.

How can this happen. Where are our UK financial regulators and what the hell do they think they are doing while people like these sub-prime loan shark mortgage lenders like SPML fleece UK homeowners, leaving them destitute and homeless in their thousands.

What is the Financial Service Authority doing about these loan sharks ? What about the the Office of Fair Trading – what are they doing ? What is Parliament doing ?

Why, nothing at all of course. Even the Parliamentary Select Committee that recently produced an excoriating report on sub-prime mortgage loan sharking practices in which they roundly condemn those mortgage lenders such as SPML as social evils, does not seem to have registered on anyone’s radar, anywhere. Nothing is being done.

Something could be done about it. A number of American Federal Governments were so fed up in 2006 with one lender in the USA repossessing so many homes and blighting so many inner cities as the properties were left to become derelict; just rotting away while the homeowners evicted from them camped homeless under plastic in the streets of American cities, that a legal action was brought against that lender by those Federal, governments.

That particular loan sharking mortgage lender was called Ameriquest. Rather than risk going to court this evil lending business caved in and coughed up about $300 million dollars, or some such fantastic sum. Small change to them to buy off the Town Halls with. So, loan sharking Americquest bought off any possibility of proper justice for all those people whose lives it ruined by evicting them from their homes and then letting those homes become derelict and uninhabitable and even unsalable.

What a rotten World we are now living in.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

45 Responses to “SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS”

  1. will feneley Says:

    Yes these fucking bastards in the guise of preferred mortgages aka ascenden screwed me over right royally. I attempted to rent out my home to cover the deficit on my mortgage. Not a huge amount maybe £1200. I went to a reputable lettings agency in my home town. I provided all documentation requested and the staff phoned ascenden whilst i was in the lettings office. She faxed it to them when i signed it in front of me whils still on th phone to them. The muppet at ascenden confirmed that they had it in there hand and it was good to proceed with the let. A couple of weeks later my tenant phoned me asking what was going on as she had a letter telling her to vacate(not from me). I phoned these cretins and was advised that their legal team had decided the deficit was too large and they were proceeding with repo. They are the most evil set of bastards. They are a trading arm of lehmans bros the investment bank that went spectacularly bust causing the global meltdown.

  2. m.flynn Says:

    In ref to how to claim back ppi on smpl south pacific.
    Hear is a no on whom deal with said company,;-08005335499,
    they charge 25%+vat on successful claims.If no win no fee.

  3. m.flynn Says:

    Hi again all, hope this may help,just found an address to write and complain to ref ppi its;-22-55 Finsbury Square,London,EC2A.
    Off now to start my complaint letter good luck all.

  4. m.flynn Says:

    Hope we all get to the bottom of this scandal.
    Could someone assist and also tell me how to claim back my ppi from this company.(Thanks in advance)

  5. julie quinn Says:

    i took a mortgage out with southern pascific mortgage limited and im trying to claim back ppi insurance as after my home was repossessed then sold at a great loss i cleared the mortgage in full and early too but im finding it tough trying to claim back what me and my ex are due as it was in joint names we bought the house in 2001 for 54000 ex kirklees repossession took place on january 2006 and it sold at 76000.00rosling king solicitors then sent what wos left to pay back a 10.000 loan secured on our home in fdull at 9’560.69 despite paying them off early aswel welcome finance chacing me for 6000 in arrears that we did not owe as we had been paying off that loan at 185.35 a month.over 180 months from taking it out on04.06.04 yet despite recieving 9.560.69 ontop they began chacing us for more 6’000 intrest they told me over the phone in 2006 just 2 weeks after rosling king sending 9.560,69 and its still up there that i owe it despite me going to the citisans advice over the years .so yes nobody’s honest in the world of money.greed seems to be the only religion to them .im a single mother and i realy could do with ppi that im entitled to from both these corupt companies

  6. Andrew Walker Says:

    A friend is fighting thes Finnancial Terrorists an I have emailed this subject to him, he may respond?
    Personal Protection Insurance? with a Co’ that was a sub…sidiary, of Lehman Bro’ is like …….. Fishing in a DRY RIVERBED. How can these SUICIDE BANKERS FINNANCIAL TERRORISTS, live Southern pacific need to start paying Lehmans DEBT not terrorising and DIS-POSSESSING peple of their HOMES

  7. Anonymous Says:

    as any one got ppi from them as i cart find them at all

  8. maggiecapon Says:

    So Steve, we the borrowers are responsible if we go to a company like SPML? Why’s that then? They were regulated by the FSA, the Office for Fair Trading and the FSO, floated their MBS’s on the stock exchange and claim to be a responsible and legitimate company. We were supposed to know, were we, all about securitisation and sub-prime years before Lehmans went down? Don’t forget High St lenders like Alliance and Leicester sold prime loans to SPML in 2006. Are A and L customers with prime or sub-prime loans also responsible for the toxic product that A and L brokered for them? Loans like those with SPML can be the only product sold with a consumer credit agreement where the borrower is blamed for the deficiencies of the product and people like you Steve come on line blaming the consumer. Shame on you.

  9. paul Says:

    trying to get ppi back from these jokers,have i got any hope,payed ppi of 2500.

  10. swindledbythebanks Says:

    Hello Smith,

    It is important to write a letter of complaint to the Financial Services Authority,

    And also to the Financial Ombudsman

    The ombudsman will compensate if a complaint is valid & upheld. But it is also important to complain to the FSA who will not compensate, but they collect all complaints together and if they receive enough they start investigations into financial organisations who misbehave.

    The FSA has the power to fine & shut down mis-behaving organisations but they do need people to complain to them to make the system work.

    The trouble is, not enough people complain properly to either the FSA or the Ombudsman. So get to it – write that letter now !

  11. Smith Says:

    OK would love to but will it achieve anything they will most probably carry on fleecing people and I am getting extremely angry about it will it really achieve anything… Disgusting my son and daughter in law are caught up with these nasty people who also use Acenden debt collectors to come in very heavy handedly and menaceingly but they get away with it.. my daughter in law is being charged £95 a month for a late payment each time.. which occurs because the date they want it does not coincide with the wage payment she receives each month she has presented all the necessary paperwork to prove this to no avail they still continue to charge her and on the phone say yhey never received any paperwork from her so PLEASE WHO can sort these people are you really a light in the tunnel or do you just want to hear of these poor peoples situation disgusting and I am going to try to do something this cannot be right and should not be allowed the National papers And local asdse beauraeas need to know about these dispicable people…..

  12. Andrew Says:

    These people; oops theives and Financial terrorists need to be shut down . They have no right to the money that they are collecting. They have even less right to repossess a house and turf the owners out. This is blatant rehypothication of a bankrupt companies debts!
    fraudulent claims on houses is abusing the fact thaT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE WINDING DOWN not WINDING UP

  13. margy Says:

    Why is there adverts saying you can claim ppi from SPML when I’ve just been told I’ve got no chance of getting a refund even though I’ve paid mortgage off

  14. first home buyers loans Says:

    first home buyers loans…

    […]SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS « MODERN TIMES IN MUDSHIRES[…]…

  15. margy Says:

    Has anyone actually had any ppi refunded from this company or is it all a waste of time

  16. lesley Says:

    We paid off our mortgage 6 yrs ago and now trying to calim back PPI having difficulty locating info on them

  17. margy Says:

    I paid off mortgage 6 years ago but I’m claiming. Ppi back from them. Am I wasting my time.it has been 7 months and have had no response from
    SPML or from the company I’m clasiming with

  18. example of credit reference request Says:

    example of credit reference request…

    […]SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS « MODERN TIMES IN MUDSHIRES[…]…

  19. sappho Says:

    Interesting thread. Particularly the mention about Alliance and Leicester as I understand their mortgage administration is farmed out to Acenden (formerly Capstone) so the person attending court in the repossession case was probably working for Acenden, not the Alliance and Leicester. Shocking that a former Lehmans subsidiary is fronting for a High St lender.

  20. mortgages explained Says:

    mortgages explained…

    […]SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS « MODERN TIMES IN MUDSHIRES[…]…

  21. Malaysia Property Says:

    Malaysia Property…

    […]SOUTHERN PACIFIC MORTGAGE LIMITED HIDES MONEY FROM LEHMANS CREDITORS IN CHARITABLE TRUSTS « MODERN TIMES IN MUDSHIRES[…]…

  22. susan austin Says:

    Ive been with spml now acenden,, ive had a bad time few years ago,, but goe some money back,, when i contacted ombusman,, ive now got 1,200 in arears they cost me alot in penalties,,, at one point i had my arears up to date and wanted to get plans changed as i gave i little peace of land away,,they controled this and said no,,,that stoped me selling my home,,,iwant to get up to date then sell,, can they control this?.

    Thank you for your consideration. S. Austin

  23. Fathersday Says:

    Hi All
    hope you don;t mind me jumping in on the discussion
    Just been on Acenda site and they say that if you had a SPML mortgage (now capstone) one may be able to claim some money back on the mortgage. Has anybody done this. Started mortgage in April 2004

  24. Boz Says:

    In what way are you being persecuted – repossession proceedings or what ?

    Capstone/Ascenden was a subsidiary of Lehmans and escaped bankruptcy itself by being sold, I think to it’s management. So it is a fully functioning entity still rampaging around people’s lives like a robber baron and causing huge amounts of harm. They are a truly nasty bunch of thieves.

    If there is anything I can do to help, let me know.

  25. johnlascelles@btinternet.com Says:

    I am being persecuted by capstone/acenden.I really do need to know the status of SPML as of today the 6th Feb 2011

  26. Alan Says:

    Also, Steve totally owned you. You got owned Sukka!

    BOOOOOM!!!!!

  27. Alan Says:

    But you still don’t deny it.

  28. Boz Says:

    A really curious phenomenon of the internet and its ability to allow anonymous rantings of any sort is the incredible number of people who are so inadequate as normal people, that the only way they can express their shrunken and severely damaged personalities is to mouth completely meaningless obscenities and other nonsense at complete strangers in the certain knowledge they are forcing people to listen to them.

    In real life, no normal people want to listen to inadequate people like this because they are such a total waste of space. Watching paint drying is infinitely more worthwhile and interesting than being anywhere near such people.

  29. Alan Says:

    So you don’t deny being a dickhead?

  30. Boz Says:

    Alan sweetie,

    You must really be a person of very little brain indeed.

    At least if you need to hurl random insults around could you not attach them to something meaningful.

    There is nothing in any part of my blog which is racist, and you have absolutely no idea whether I am white/black/mixed race/Jewish/Gypsy/Mongol or whatever.

    You’re obviously a little bit sad and mentally diminished – just the right qualifications for being a banker.

  31. Alan Says:

    Boz, you’re a racist and a dickhead.

  32. Steve Says:

    I think you make some valid points Boz, but by resorting to conjecture and exaggeration (I don’t think calling a bank manager a nerd would adversely affect your credit rating) you prevent people from taking you seriously.

    I do agree that being penalised simply for applying for credit is going too far, but credit scoring is carried out scientifically and penalties are incurred on the basis that on average someone with 6 credit cards is statistically more of a risk than someone with 5 etc etc.

    Again though, at the risk of sounding “sanctimonious” the whole credit card thing could have been avoided – credit card companies count on people not keeping track of their transactions, you knew the rules and – however marginally – you broke them. I agree this is what the credit card companies want, and you clearly know that too, but you played into their hands. They DO have the right to penalise you, however unpalatable you (or I) find it, because they warn you at the outset and that’s what you agree to.

    Similarly – people could avoid having to churn their mortgages if they lived within their means in the first place. For example – ignore the fixed rate and work out what you can afford on the reversion rate, then you won’t need to constantly remortgage. And you neglect to mention the benefits of constantly remortgaging – usually (as long as house prices are rising) equity can be released or mortgage payments come down in line with loan-to-value.

    But as you yourself acknowledge – they borrow a “modest” (debatable!) surplus virtually every time they remortgage. They eschew stability and security in favour of milking the system for what THEY can get, for as long as it lasts.

    There’s no doubt that banks and credit card companies are exploitative and ruthless, but they can only be that way as long as the consumer wants more than THEY are entitled to.

  33. Boz Says:

    Steve,

    No, the lender gave no reason. But what happens is that any borrower who really desperately needs some kind of perfectly reasonable variation of their mortgage usually has to cancel their existing mortgage and ‘re-apply’ for a ‘new’ mortgage product. Another identical mortgage with a modest increase in the borrowed amount to pay off a vital debt or an divorcing ex-wife etc.

    The banking industry has organised a carefully crafted system of forcing people to constantly ‘churn’ or change their mortgages on the slightest pretext.

    This involves more fees for the banks and brokers, without which the mortgage industry would shrink by about fifty percent at least, I should imagine. That would put a lot of poisonous brokers and grasping bankers out of business. A good thing, I would say.

    But the other huge advantage of forcing people to endless apply and re-apply for what is often exactly the same mortgage, is the banks have hugely taken advantage of computing in the past two decades or so.

    They were the first to realise the advantage computers could provide them in allowing a Big Brother Surveillance Society to be set up where every financial move you make is tracked and recorded by the banks.

    Then they had a little think, huddled in their lavish boardrooms, discussing how they could squeeze ever increasing amounts of money out of the rest of the population of the country.

    I know, they said. Instead of meeting borrowers face to face and assessing their financial state, reliability and ability to pay their mortgage back etc, we will simply ask them to fill in forms. We don’t need to see them anymore. The forms will do.

    Then when we have those forms we will refer to the ‘credit rating’ agencies such as ‘Experian’ which we have helped set up and have major shareholdings in. These credit rating agencies track and record every possible financial transaction any member of the population makes that the banking system wants to look at.

    So, if you take a dislike to your bank manager because he picks his nose while talking to you and you decide to tell him he is a repulsive little nerd, you may find a bad reference appears on your centralised credit record held by those unpleasant credit rating agencies.

    These credit reference agencies are not really interested in building up a positive profile on individuals, as nearly all their records are designed to be about anything negative their imaginations can dream up. they want a bad profile. It is more profitable.

    So, a typical example is my recent experience of owing about £100 on my credit card, but actually being clueless about what the exact amount was as I had no access to any statements etc and no time or ability to spend on the painful bureaucracy of it. So I deliberately overpaid the sum of £150, knowing it would leave a surplus.

    Then, I made a small purchase which exceeded that surplus by about £5. But now I had one of those periods we all have of domestic chaos, combined with significant illness on my part, which made it pretty much impossible to spend my life ( as you normally do) embroiled in the mindlessly stupid bureaucracy of life in Modern Times. Banking rubbish, for instance – with its insane proliferation of paperwork which has been inflicted on us all.

    So, I imagined that it didn’t matter if I have missed a payment as I had overpaid, there was surplus, and this would more than constitute the ‘minimum payment’, credit cards cunningly require.

    Wrong. They got me. I was penalised for being a financially feckless person and charged a penalty fee of £12 or so, then on a remaining balance of about 12 pence another penalty fee of £12 for just 12 pence or so in the red.

    This is the beauty of ‘rules’. Bureaucrats like making ‘rules’. Then, when you ‘break the rules’ they delude themselves they have some right to ‘penalise’ you for ‘breaking the rules’. Government bureaucracies are experts at this.

    And so, I got my naughty points on my credit reference agency report – available to all lenders. My ‘credit’ score was reduced and I would be pushed further and further by this process into the ‘sub-prime’ lending arena, which is really just a whole package of excuses for banks to dream up the idea you should pay them more money as they fantasise you are a ‘greater lending risk’ to them and therefore more expensive to lend to.

    Of course, all this is utter nonsense. Actually it just means you become infinitely more profitable to them. There is no meaningful increase in risk to their loans at all.

    The banks have creatively dreamt up a number of scams to diminish your credit score, no matter how decent and financially organised and upright and honest you are in all your financial dealings.

    One of these is the clever idea that if you are looking for a loan or mortgage, then every time you make a serious enquiry about a source of a loan and try and find out if it would be suitable, its terms etc, then this is recorded on the centralised Big Brother watching credit scoring site that monitors everyone’s financial life for the banks.

    Every time you make a credit enquiry, your credit rating diminishes. This then gives the banks the ability to say to borrowers ‘your credit rating is low. We won’t tell you why, but it means we will charge you more for a loan and place more onerous restrictions on you or even not give a you loan at all’.

    If you are asking for a mortgage to put a roof over the head of your family, it means you may have to take out a sub-prime mortgage at an extortionate interest rate and so structured that the mortgage is more than likely to become almost impossible to maintain.

    This will result in us (the banks) behaving like savages and bleeding you dry for every penny we can extort from you before throwing you and your family out of your home onto the streets, to join the army of homeless people we have already created by our voracious greed.

    Now just sign here and you can have your loan and we’re done for the moment. But we’ll be seeing soon, no doubt, when you get into the difficulties we confidently expect you to get into, because that is how we have deliberately set up the whole financial system to screw as much money as possible out of people.

    You understand, of course, this is essential for us to be able to increase the supply of money in the country exponentially, so we bankers can take a cut every time all that money passes through our banks, as it inevitable must.

    Our end of year bonuses of billions and billions of pounds for the banking community as whole are a very important part of out sense of Christmas cheer and well-being as bankers as we smugly get richer and richer at the expense of everyone else.

    We really do feel quite entitled to those bonuses for all this hard work we do. Goodness me, it really is such hard work skipping around the law all the time to keep one step ahead of financial, regulators and criminal law and all that.

    What with all the stress us bankers also have to endure with the health threatening amounts of expensive vintage alcohol we have to consume all the time, it is only the bonuses that keep us in the job of this institutionalised theft. We really deserve them, we think.

    ******

    Yes Steve, the family did rent the house.

  34. Steve Says:

    To be fair to you Boz that does sound like an awful situation and I do feel bad for you. It doesn’t sound like there was anything you could have done to avoid becoming “high risk” and I don’t blame you for harbouring resentment against the mortgage industry if that was your experience.

    For all that though, I would also say that for every case like this there are plenty where the borrower has acted irresponsibly, building up credit card debts and even lying about their income to take out mortgages they know they won’t be able to afford. I know you will argue that the lenders shouldn’t take on loans where they suspect they are being fed the wrong information and you would have a point, but it takes two to tango.

    I guess each case has to be judged individually.

  35. Boz Says:

    Thanks for the vote of confidence Blake Parsifal.

    I ‘used to be’ a journalist & am planning to get back to it. A problem divorce with a seriously problematical wife fourteen years ago, triggered my descent from middle class London life into a spiral of poverty. This trigger was compounded by the woman I met and lived with shortly after my wife deserted her family – me and two teenage daughters – for ‘greener’ pastures.

    This woman, with two fatherless children aged six and seven, was a wonderful person. Unfortunately she became suddenly seriously and permanently mentally ill when our son was born eleven years ago.

    This resulted in me spending the last eleven years looking after this very seriously ill woman, frequently hospitalised, and the last five years looking after my infant son as a lone parent. It was pretty much as a lone parent from his birth really as his mother was hopelessly ‘off the wall’ and unable to even look after herself, let alone a child. So I was looking after both.

    Of course this catapulted me into increasingly extreme poverty, vastly accelerated by the sub-prime mortgage lenders with their vice-like stranglehold over me and endless milking of my home equity. Endless ‘early redemption’ penalties of about £20 000 a pop became the routine in my desperate attempt at survival and keeping a roof over our heads.

    The mortgage lenders were viciously predatory and never once made the slightest attempt to be helpful in any way whatever. It is an utter disgrace the law allows them to behave this way. It is the official approval of loan sharking by virtue of ‘The Law’ being obsessed with outdated laws of contract and property rights etc and the sheer terror the government has of standing up to the people who really completely control the economy – the bankers.

    One little cameo that stands out in mind of the typical behaviour of these disgusting mortgage lenders is the Alliance and Leicester. My ‘high street lender’ who brought re-possession proceedings when with any effort and reasonableness on their part, the mortgage could have continued to be promptly paid up to date. With a mortgage of only £100 000 against equity of over £400 000 when the house was sold two years later and still rapidly rising to approach the million pound mark, their behaviour was ridiculous.

    But the real clincher of their disgusting, criminally destructive loan sharking and violent behaviour was when I went to court at the re-possession hearing they brought (entirely unnecessary, just steamrolling on regardless).

    The Alliance & Leicester legal representative spat venomously at me when I approached her outside the court to discuss the case before we went in (as you do). I wanted to inform them that I already had another mortgage in place and approved with the money actually arriving in my account to pay off the Alliance & Leicester mortgage within just a week. I had in my possession to show them, all the paperwork showing this to be the case.

    The Alliance & Leicester didn’t even want to look at it or discuss anything at all with me, which is a breach of normal legal protocol.

    The Alliance & Leicester legal person just spat nastily at me ‘We will get you thrown out of your house in court today’, and then pointedly turned her back on me to display her contempt for me.

    Those were the exact and precise words of the Alliance & Leicester legal representantive at court. It says it all. This is what they are all like. Vindictive, nasty, brutish and evil.

    They didn’t get me thrown out, of course, as my evidence of the replacement mortgage was compelling and it duly took it’s course and replaced the horrible Alliance & Leicester mortgage on the order of the Judge.

    But without that replacement mortgage I would have been scuppered. I was quite ignorant of how to deal with the legal issues and mechanisms to survive this vicious re-possession industry driven by the whole banking system.

    I would have been thrown and I would almost certainly have lost all or most of my equity as the Alliance & Leicester would make sure the house was sold at a low price, probably to one of their property investing cronies who would snap it up at auction at a laughably low price.

    It is the bankers who create virtually the entire stock of money our whole economy uses. It is the banks that have an iron grip on every single financial transaction that takes place. It is the banks that have to approve the financial activities of the government. Without that tacit approval the government quickly loses support of the banking cartel which immediately makes life difficult for the government if the banks disapprove of what any government is doing.

    By choice, I would still be in my London house. An identical house two doors up sold at the bottom of the house price slump for about £900 000. The most conservative value today for my ex-house would be about £700 000 to £800 000.

    My original mortgage of £100 000 would never have needed to rise more than about £25 000 to pay off the ex-wife and the Alliance & Leics could have been paid the monthly mortgage payment in full every month, once the chaos was sorted out.

    But it was the Alliance & Leicester that created most of the chaos – deliberately, unpleasantly, dishonestly and in a frenzy of a money grabbing vendetta against me – just like they would do to any other borrower too.

  36. Steve Says:

    Blake, if you lost your house having paid your dues I would definitely get some legal advice. I don’t think they can legally take your house if you have kept your mortgage paid up. You have my sympathy.

    Boz – did your high street lender give a reason for pushing you into sub-prime?

    Out of interest, did the family you know agree to rent the house with the “no kids” rule?

  37. Blake Parsifal Says:

    Dear Boz,
    I was just having a sleepless night when I stumbled across all this. I am just a simple guy who lost his house one day, having always paid his dues for forty years. All this sanctimonious bleating comes from folk who are obviously bankers of some description, with preferrential mortgages, and safeguarded bonuses. It smacks of the high mindedness of Robespierre, who gladly sent folk to the guillotine just because they were on a list, and he had the power.

    For eaxamle a banker is someone who will lend you an umbrella when it isn’t raining, then want it back when it is. Maybe your critics have never slept under the stars on a cold night. It is good for the soul, and gives a certain fellowship, but in reality it is not the romantic adventure of poets.

    Your writings have an astounding insight into the problems of halflings which your opponents sarcastically dismiss. It does little to their credit rating. May you long continue the good work. There are so many anecdotes of people who have suffered from the power of some dark lord for al the reasons you outline. The amazing thing is not a single official enforcement agency is taking any effective action

    It is as if they are bedazzled by the language of some creatue with worm like tongue. There are reports of CAB concern, but who is listening? Why do there appear to be few journalists who have taken up this story. There is plenty of information on Blogs such as that of Shaun Parker, Consumer Action Group, and a host of credible people willing to give testimony to their treatment.

  38. Boz Says:

    OK Sunshine,

    That’s you Steve, and all those other people with similar blinkered views.

    My apologies to you for sounding as though I am trying to be insulting just for the sake of it, but I can assure you I’m not. I’m responding with language absolutely perfectly appropriate to your wrong headed and dangerous views, rather than you as an individual.

    You may actually be the nicest, most considerate person going, or the exact opposite and more like that unpleasant little Dick Fuld, recent ex of Lehman, I just don’t know.

    But I do know your views are dangerously blinkered.

    let me explain what I mean.

    Your first sentence rather self righteously suggests that I fail to hold homeowners accountable for ‘for getting into a situation where they had to turn to lenders such as SPML’.

    It is a fact that ALL the lenders have mysteriously set up the same ‘rules’ or criteria that are carefully designed to use every possible tool at the disposal of the lenders to push a potential borrower into a sub-prime credit score. This means the only lenders who will lend to them are no longer the ‘high street’ lenders but the more shady operators like SPML who are basically legalised loan sharks.

    So, for the most minor infringement of a credit score, utterly irrelevant in the real world, the banks use it as an excuse to extort extra money from borrowers. It has absolutely nothing to do with real, meaningful extra risk to the lenders. In actual fact the lenders deliberately set up the borrower to ‘fail’ on purpose by means of their deliberately and carefully designed loan contracts.

    Surprise surprise, all these loan shark lenders are owned by the handful of big high street banks. So this tiny handful of high street banks actually effectively control the entire mortgage lending market.

    So, if the same organisation with all that dosh to lend for mortgages is refusing to lend for mortgages which are more fair and reasonable and less extortionate, what on earth could their motive be for pushing as many mortgage borrowers as possible into the hands of own their loan shark subsidiary, wholly owned, lending business’ ?

    Could it be all that extra profit, I wonder ?

    Of course you make it plain the borrowers are still not obliged in anyway to borrow from such devious lenders. That is quite true; but it requires people to forego the possibility of buying their own home, which in turn means greater expense to them as well as all sorts of other restrictions.

    One such bizarre restriction I personally came across recently was the private landlord letting his perfectly bog standard, rather boringly ordinary little house to a middle class family I know with two kids aged 11 and fourteen. He was happy to rent to them, but there was a clause in the lease which forbade that family from allowing any other children to be invited to the house.

    Presumably, this was some half baked idea of the Landlord to assume that all kids automatically destroy houses, and he thought he could abuse his powers of control by forbidding his tenants to invite children to the house. It’s a bit like the much more common no pets rule which these prattish landlords commonly inflict on people.

    People want to buy their own houses to avoid these sorts of problems.

    Anyway. Back to the rapacious mortgage lenders. I, personally have experienced being pushed from my high street lender when I was reluctantly forced (by divorce and related issues) to re-mortgage. This high street lender pushed me onto one of it’s own sub-prime subsidiaries. Surprise, surprise !

    In my efforts to escape this onerous situation I ended up just being pushed by dishonest brokers from one sub-prime mortgage to another, losing at least £500 000 over a period of time.

    I have also been involved in four re-possession actions, but have not yet experienced the dubious benefits of eviction.

    Yes, some demented people actually do say it is a benefit to be evicted “it is the best thing that can happen’ to someone over burdened with a sub-prime mortgage, according to a spokesman from one well known financial institution – probably the Council of Mortgage Lenders or some such similar bunch of complete idiots, I forget exactly who right now.

    As to your comments ‘just don’t get into debt if you don’t want to face the consequences’.

    Probably like most other people, I cannot really say, even with hindsight, that I should have made any other decisions other than the ones I took at the time. They were the correct decisions at the time – to reluctantly get into debt of the loan shark variety, because it was the lesser of two evils at the time.

    The problem is all about the handful of big banks that not only control the entire mortgage lending market, but also the entire wider economy as well. It is their manipulation of the borrowers that leaves people with no other choice.

    Either have an onerous, dishonest, deviously set up sub-prime mortgage specifically designed to rip you off, or pay rent through the nose and haemorrhage money in rent for a lifetime, effectively paying for ten houses instead of one.

    So I am not misunderstanding plain English at all. People are forced into sub-prime mortgages against their will because they are left with no choice by virtue of the evil, manipulative bankers (that’s people like you Frodo).

    It is also a fact that many of those people who fail at controlling their sub-prime mortgages (specifically designed to be almost impossible to control, remember) would be perfectly able to keep on top of re-paying an ordinary, old fashioned type “fair’ mortgage instead of one of these rip-off mortgage products dreamt up by the high street banks – the financial vermin of Modern Times.

    Are you getting the idea yet ?

  39. Steve Says:

    It’s more simple minded to misinterpret plain English.

    I’m not saying it’s ALL their fault, just that they are under no obligation whatsoever to borrow the money, and if they do choose to there are consequences that go along with failing to honour the agreement.

    It goes both ways. The penalty fees may be high or subjectively unfair, but the borrower knows there are penalties associated with not paying. If they aren’t prepared to pay the fees if they do get into difficulty they shouldn’t make the contract. The penalty fees are there to offset the risk the lender takes on by lending to people who have a history of neglecting their financial obligations.

    I agree the fees and penalties are high and lenders do employ excessive tactics – but not always – but these can be easily avoided by not taking out a mortgage with them.

  40. Boz Says:

    Steve,

    It’s quite simple minded to suggest that it is all the homeowners fault for daring to have a mortgage in the first place.

    It is a legitimate activity to obtain a mortgage to buy a home. That does not make it a legitimate activity for lenders to use deviousness of all sorts to milk borrowers in an unreasonable way.

    Borrowers get into difficulties. They get ill, They can’t work suddenly,They lose their jobs. They get divorced and so on and so forth.

    They then have difficulty keeping up with their mortgages. Most of them would be able to eventually repay their mortgages and certainly there is little or no possibility the lenders would ever be at risk. But lenders rarely give them a chance.

    But these situations of mortgage difficulty are just used by lenders as an excuse to be pathologically aggressive and greedy for more and more, very unfair and pointless ‘penalty’ fees.

    lenders are greedy, unreasonable and nasty. They design mortgage products deliberately designed to be difficult to maintain and they force the borrowers to ‘churn’ mortgages endlessly, losing more money each time.

    Poster PSM seems to delude themselves into thinking they are clever by carefully crafted insults which must have taken some time to dream up.

    What can I say ? Except it is people like this that diminish the World by their unpleasantness.

    They are not really worth giving the time of day to.

    But I suppose that’s what gives them their kick. Without finding someone to be gratuitously nasty to they feel a bit deprived of a reason for existing.

  41. psm Says:

    Seems to me that Frodo is making a a good response to your inital article Boz. I notice from your response that you exhibit classic “passive/aggressive” behaviour and you remind me of a former colleague of mine who used to say “If all you are going to do is open your mouth and let your belly rumble then you can do it elsewhere”. Perhaps this blog is the “elsewhere”.

    So Frodo – thank you for your measured comments – they make sense to me.

    Boz – keep being what you are – after all you seem to be perfect in your world.

  42. Dick F Says:

    You tell him Steve!

  43. Steve Says:

    Boz, just out of interest do you hold the affected homeowners at all responsible for getting into a situation where they had to turn to lenders such as SPML?

    Just don’t get into debt if you don’t want to face the consequences. Lenders make it clear that if you don’t pay you morgage you could get repossessed. If you don’t want to get repossessed, pay the mortgage.

  44. Boz Says:

    Frodo, my dear,

    You’re a banker. You’re completely blinkered because you live in the fantasy world of arcane banking and have lost touch with the real world and real economics.

    This is why there has been a credit crisis throughout the World. You bankers have clearly mismanaged money/debt on a massive scale.

    So do stop trying to wriggle out of taking responsibility for it, there’s a dear.

    The bankers who have deluded themselves into thinking they have the right to manipulate markets, even whole economies, are rather nasty and they have certainly produced a rather nasty result for everyone else.

    Dick Fuld , ex-boss of Lehman, even looks like a thoroughly nasty person. No doubt that is because he is a thoroughly nasty person and it is written all over his face.

    Loan sharking is a a nasty, immoral business, Mr Frodo.

    Loan sharking is quite different from honest and moral borrowing and lending.

    We are not talking about honest lending; we are talking about fraud, dishonesty and conversion on a massive scale.

    Bankers as a body of people have become disgusting vermin in Modern Times.

    You just have to look at the damage they have, and are still, causing.

    Get back in your miserable, wretched little banker’s box, and stop telling non bankers how ignorant they are.

    It seems to me it the bankers who are ignorant, very ignorant people indeed.

    I understand quite enough of the securitisation process thank you. I know it funds lending. And no, it never stopped me getting a mortgage in the past.

    So go and find some other person to insult. Insulting people and being contemptuous of non financial people seems to be a stock in trade of nasty bankers.

    Oh, and I’d just like to point out how you display your own massive ignorance when you say what a bad thing it would be if house prices collapsed.

    House prices have been driven higher and higher, remorselessly, for decades – by the bankers who have been desperate to find a means of lending more and more money.

    In property prices they discovered they could manipulate the markets to constantly push prices up way beyond any kind of ‘normal’ inflation in the rest of the economy.

    This enabled the bankers to lend ever increasing amounts of money in a dizzying spiral of debt as whole populations of both business and private property buyers were forced to sell their souls to the devils in the banking industry by taking out impossibly larger and larger mortgages to satisfy the poisonous feeding frenzy of banker loan sharks.

    While it would be a bad thing for a sudden slump in property prices, the fact is, they are vastly too high and have completely lost touch with the real costs of building and intrinsic land value because the whole market has simply been turned into a casino by the banks conspiring to produce ,that result at every one else’s expense.

    It is a disgusting state of affairs and you should hang your head in shame, Mr Frodo, for being part of the dishonest system of banking that has grown up in Modern Times.

  45. Frodo Says:

    A comment from banker Frodo

    There is a heaping pile of ignorance in this post. Hiding money in charitable trusts???

    I was a banker at a major European bank. What you call hiding money in charitable trusts, is called securitisation. And if it weren’t for securitisation in the first place, many people such as yourself would NEVER have gotten a mortgage. Securitisation is the tool that the financial markets use to provide liquidity for new lending. If there is no liquidity, there is dramatically reduced new lending and the value of homes will drop.

    Why do you think the Bank of England bought over £200 billion in mortgage backed bonds in the past couple of years? Because when the financial collapse happened, the normal buyers of these bonds went away, which is a BAD thing and if they did not support the securitisation market, house prices would probably have collapsed.

    Then you start droning on about hiding money from bankruptcy administrators. I can’t speak with knowledge on the Lehmans bankruptcy, but I guarantee you that any plan to forgive creditor debts has to be approved by the bankruptcy court and it will be approved if it’s in the long term interest of creditors. That’s the way the system works. PwC has Linklaters advising it, so I think the chances of them not knowing what they’re doing is zero because if they screw up, they could be put out of business with lawsuits.

    As for extortionate fees etc., that’s a whole nother issue and issues like that should be brought to the attention of the FOS/FSA if true. But the rest of your post as it relates to securitisation being evil and this conspiracy to hide money is mostly nonsense and shows you don’t have a basic understanding of the wholesale capital markets.

    Frodo
    March 04, 2010
    07:09 AM G

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: