Swift advances plc

[Sparkie1723]

SWIFT ADVANCES PLC

I have some serious bad news for all this lenders borrower/customers with loans over £25,000 that will come of a big shock, the same shock I received yesterday.
Yesterday I attended a hearing in Court.
This hearing was for an order to be made for Swift to comply with a part 18 request for information that I had made in March (2014).Because Swift did not supply any of the information I requested
My application was dismissed, I will not go into the details of that at this time….however what I can now tell every Swift borrower with a secured loan over £25,000 entered into before April 2008 is that I was told by the Judge ( after over 6 years of many Court appearances fighting this totally unscrupulous, deviou, deceptive, moronic institution).
I have finally been told by the Judge.
That these loans are not “mortgages” (although they are treated as such) they are not a consumer credit loan.
They are just a secured loan, and there is no Law, Statute, Regulation or Authority that any of Swifts borrowers can rely on to fight them.


They are not a Bank,......... they are not a mortgage company they just lend money secured on your property that they can repossess anytime they wish and you can’t stop them.


Consumer Credit Act …………..Protection…………..NONE.
UTCCC’s…………………………Protection ………….NONE.
Consumer Protection Act………Protection…………..NONE
MCOB Rules …………………….Protection ………….NONE.
Sale of Goods & Services Act….Protection ………….NONE.


On asking the Judge if he could tell me what type of agreement/ contract we had with Swift . He replied “ Mr XXXXX I honestly can’t, what I can tell you is that Swift are the registered owners of the legal charge on your property and if you do not make the payments on your loan they have the right to sue for repossession.”


This means that Swift can do what they want when they want how they want and you cannot defend yourself because there are no laws that will and can protect you.


He then ended with “I cannot and will not bend the Law to suit you” in any event there are no laws that apply that I could that”.
After 6 years I have been told that.
When I said if I had known all this before I signed the agreement/contract I would not have done so ……..Judge said" but you did sign and that is all there is to it".
He then refused me permission to appeal and stated that any further application to appeal would be devoid of any merit, because he is not wrong in what he has said and ruled.
There you go Swifties read and think about the trap we have all got caught by.
What I can say is if we lived in the USA .Swift would be out of business and the people running it would be behind bars for a long, long time

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations would still apply surely?

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations would still apply surely?

That's the problem Amethyst.
The statute is what it is " The Unfair Terms in Consumer Credit Contracts...Swifts loans aren't classed as "consumer credit contacts" as the judge stated.....so cannot be relied on.
Sparkie


All this has to brought out into a bigger arena so I'm going to try my utmost to make a video about exactly what I have posted .....and post it up on utube...don't know how or when but....... I WILL do it some how......got to save up and get the transcript of the hearing so that I can quote and use exactly what the Judge said

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

It's a secured loan sold to a consumer. It isn't a business loan. Okay it is over £25k mostly so doesn't come under the CCA (pre 2008) but UTCCR doesn't have a value ceiling on it does it?

No questionning you, just what the judge has said.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

I see a certain person reading I'll wait for that persons views if and when posted post....Nothing for me to argue or get wound up about .........as I have deliberately posted this on the open thread for all to see and post what they want.....won't bother me at all
Sparkie

[Guest]

Re: Swift advances plc

Yes the UTCCs still apply, they apply to all consumer credit agreements irrespective of if they are under the remit of the CCA.

What the judge probably meant was that the agreements are not consumer credit agreement in terms of the CCA which they are not, as said many times before.

[Guest]

Re: Swift advances plc

I see a certain person reading I'll wait for that persons views if and when posted post....Nothing for me to argue or get wound up about .........as I have deliberately posted this on the open thread for all to see and post what they want.....won't bother me at all
Sparkie

I take it you mean me. Sparkie I take no pleasure at all in this. Believe it or not what I told you on here was intended to help you, and prevent this from happening.

[Fred]

Re: Swift advances plc

Is this the very same Swift that have been reprimanded by the OFT under CCA 1974 act or have they crawled out of that with different trade name ?

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

I take it you man me. Sparkie I take no pleasure at all in this. Believe it or not what I told you on here was intended to help you, and prevent this from happening.

No problem andy as I said ...... I just can't see what you mean........prevent what from happening..and all I can say is that you are saying the Judge is wrong when he says NO STATUTE,......NO LAW ....NO REGULATION applies to Swifts loans and that includes The UTCCC's ....that is what he said.........If they did I would imagine I could make a claim under the UTCCC's .....but he said I couldn't......now even if I did...... he ordered a long time ago that any application or claim would have to be before him .....so that's out of the question even if I did make a claim under the UTCCC's ....he would just throw it out.

Sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

This is a question I am interested in how you see it andy..... and ANYone else...this is not a get at you post ...if it it not a mortgage and not a consumer credit agreement ..could it be argued it is a money lenders personal loan ( section 8 (1) CCA 1974 secured by a security instrument/pawn lien or whatever ..Then again the CCA doesn't apply..............so I am in a position now where I have to " Clutch at Straws" so to speak.
Sparkie

[Guest]

Re: Swift advances plc

No problem andy as I said ...... I just can't see what you mean........prevent what from happening..and all I can say is that you are saying the Judge is wrong when he says NO STATUTE,......NO LAW ....NO REGULATION applies to Swifts loans and that includes The UTCCC's ....that is what he said.........If they did I would imagine I could make a claim under the UTCCC's .....but he said I couldn't......now even if I did...... he ordered a long time ago that any application or claim would have to be before him .....so that's out of the question even if I did make a claim under the UTCCC's ....he would just throw it out.

Sparkie

The judge seems to be right in saying that the CCA does not apply, this is what I have been trying to tell you, also that these agreements are a secured loan with a charge on the property acting as security, these can be enforced under the provisions of the LOPA and there is no protection in the form of the agreement, other than that which exists under common contract law.

I was trying to stop you putting yourself in the position where the judge would have to point these things out to you, apologies again for being blunt.

UTCCs do apply to unregulated loans and exempt agreement of course.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

Is this the very same Swift that have been reprimanded by the OFT under CCA 1974 act or have they crawled out of that with different trade name ?

I argued this point as well Fred.........Judge did not want to know he said that just applied to the regulated business of their operations.
I can see that point and reluctantly agree that argument would suceed if Swift argued it.
Sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

I don't take offence except that the judge explained that the UTCCC's are about consumer credit contracts and as it is not a consumer credit contract they do not and will not apply and emphasised..........." I am not wrong" .....meaning he was not wrong...your saying he is ......but then I'm refused permission to appeal and any claim I could think of making would go before him.
You tell me how I can prove you right and him wrong.
Sparkie

[Fred]

Re: Swift advances plc

I argued this point as well Fred.........Judge did not want to know he said that just applied to the regulated business of their operations.
I can see that point and reluctantly agree that argument would suceed if Swift argued it.
Sparkie

There appears little consistency with these opinions as we have a Judge who is interested in what the OFT hold on a repossession case unregulated loan from 2006 as well as UTCCR & CCA unfair relationship material.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

I put everything in front of him manipulation of our joint truly declared income income by Swift upwards by £3,000 and McConnells admittance they did ......Judge just said whats that got to do with it .....that would be considered a mistake ........."that is not your problem Mr G that is Swifts problem". Lending you money without checking you could afford it doesn't mean you do not have to pay it back.
When I get the transcript I'll be able to post exactly what he said and exactly what I said....I am only relying on my memory.....but as it is less than 24 hrs ago I've 99% accurate recollection.
Gave him the OFT guidance on irresponsible lending.........his answer that is only guidance Mr G it is not law and therfore I do not have to accept it.
Sparkie