Worried sick!

[meellis]

Re: Worried sick!

Sorry Fred I was writing a post while you were posting, in all of Swift's paperwork it states they may make a payment to a broker. It doesn't state how much or what types of payment or even how many but it would be one of those areas where a LIP will be outgunned when the authorities want to believe the money men. I don't believe there wording is adequate or detailed enough because it doesn't categorically state they will pay commission or how commission is even calculated but it is there.

[Fred]

Re: Worried sick!

Sorry Fred I was writing a post while you were posting, in all of Swift's paperwork it states they may make a payment to a broker. It doesn't state how much or what types of payment or even how many but it would be one of those areas where a LIP will be outgunned when the authorities want to believe the money men. I don't believe there wording is adequate or detailed enough because it doesn't categorically state they will pay commission or how commission is even calculated but it is there.

They need or needed to state "how much"...........................you can not possibly make an informed decision without that information unless you are an expert & consumers in general should not be treated as such.

[meellis]

Re: Worried sick!

I totally agree Fred but it wasn't a requirement for non CCA regulated paperwork back then so it is one of the many things that would come under un-fairness now hence why some of decisions about commission lately have been going the right way but are still not quite there.

[Fred]

Re: Worried sick!

I totally agree Fred but it wasn't a requirement for non CCA regulated paperwork back then so it is one of the many things that would come under un-fairness now hence why some of decisions about commission lately have been going the right way but are still not quite there.

Indeed.................hence my suggestions this may stand a chance of further investigation from a different slant on "the complaint" or a new one as well as.

[Mic]

Re: Worried sick!

I didn't think any commission payments needed to be stated, unless they directly had an impact upon the agreement made with the client.

If Swift withheld any information that directly impacted upon any contract they have with you, then I would think there would be a case under regulation 5 Unfair terms and conditions.

[Fred]

Re: Worried sick!

I didn't think any commission payments needed to be stated, unless they directly had an impact upon the agreement made with the client.

If Swift withheld any information that directly impacted upon any contract they have with you, then I would think there would be a case under regulation 5 Unfair terms and conditions.

Without wanting to detract from the thread too much........................any commissions paid secretly or not would have been charged to the loan the consumer pays. This would be looked at in my view through the CCA 1974 "unfair relationships" 140a/b. It covers it better.

[Rosie500]

Re: Worried sick!

a Lot of Swift victims seem to have had an interest rise in the first month or two of signing, when was yours. Also if you received a transaction record in any of your paperwork there would have been an interest rate adjustment made around aug 08 (everybody else seems to have) and this never has been explained away. You are completely unaware of this unless you have the transaction record but when I cross referenced this to my statement it made the following months interest payment larger than my monthly payment which is technically a default and affects the overall balance greatly due to the compound interest. I have questioned them on this but still haven't received a satisfactory answer.

Hi my loan started in September 2007 so any interest rate rise would have already been in force. I think Swift have been anything but upfront about things. The FOS was looking at case notes this morning it seems to me they haven't done much at all they dont seem to want to tackle Swift about this or anything for that matter. I have sent an email to the FOS stating that if Swift had sent me a letter about the rise in interest rates the why didn't they forward a copy of the letter with the SAR paperwork. I doubt there ever was a letter because if the interest rates had gone up in August 2007 my loan didn't start until September 2007. The FOS seem to want to sweep this matter under the carpet and hope that I will go away quietly! They have two hopes of that Bob hope and no hope. I am going to send another email tonight to the FOS stating that my loan did not start until September 2007.


rosie

[meellis]

Re: Worried sick!

Rosie my loan was in September 2007 and the rate rise was November 2007 but others had rises at other times. Sometimes I wondered if they increased the rate so soon into the loan term so they could confuse the calculations and make it difficult to work out what they are doing. The agreements generally work out to any online loan calculator but the balance never seems to fall as in line with these calculators. I have never managed to get enough evidence to work out what they are doing but I am sure they are not calculating or applying the interest as per the agreement. As for the FOS they are only there to make it seem like there is someone to listen to our concerns but they do really seem a waste of space, like politicians all spin and no substance.

[Rosie500]

Re: Worried sick!

Rosie my loan was in September 2007 and the rate rise was November 2007 but others had rises at other times. Sometimes I wondered if they increased the rate so soon into the loan term so they could confuse the calculations and make it difficult to work out what they are doing. The agreements generally work out to any online loan calculator but the balance never seems to fall as in line with these calculators. I have never managed to get enough evidence to work out what they are doing but I am sure they are not calculating or applying the interest as per the agreement. As for the FOS they are only there to make it seem like there is someone to listen to our concerns but they do really seem a waste of space, like politicians all spin and no substance.

Hi I wholeheartedly agree that the ombudsman are a waste of space. I don't think for one minute that they do apply the interest as per the agreement, to me their actions are not those of a reputable lender. They are nothing more than Cowboys. I have emailed the FOS tonight stating that if the letter existed about the interest rates then why didn't they send it to me when I sent them the SAR letter. I dont suppose for one minute they even sent it. I am going to email the FOS tonight and state that I am not going to be fobbed off with excuses and that they need to sort the situation out not read from case notes and to start listening to the consumer because we are not all wrong! Everything about Swift that I have seen online has been bad, I told the FOS that this morning. Rosie

[Fred]

Re: Worried sick!

Things to consider;

Your loan increased without sufficient notice/no notice..............what do your fixed terms state.

You were suffering financial hardship (given the repossession) were any increases implemented to your loan during/after.

The charges applied to your account under default were in line with the fixed terms, the default notice had/stated the correct sums.


The FOS will not be at all interested in what the court decided at the time of possession that remains as is...................some legal advice would be in order here me thinks.

[Rosie500]

Re: Worried sick!

Things to consider;

Your loan increased without sufficient notice/no notice..............what do your fixed terms state.

You were suffering financial hardship (given the repossession) were any increases implemented to your loan during/after.

The charges applied to your account under default were in line with the fixed terms, the default notice had/stated the correct sums.


The FOS will not be at all interested in what the court decided at the time of possession that remains as is...................some legal advice would be in order here me thinks.

Hi Fred I was suffering financial hardship prior to repossession, I had been chasing my ex husband to pay the pension sharing under the court order. I started to go down the route of mortgage rescue, I asked Swift to stop proceedings they refused and said "No you do it" No seems like all Swift can say. All they had to do was to freeze my account so interest wouldn't accrue but of course being Swift they didn't so while my property was on the market my account was accruing interest. No increases were implemented to my loan during or after. The only people I know I could go to are the CAB they retain a firm of solicitors I would get twenty minutes of free advice. The pension sharing won't be sorted out until the end of October I have a hearing on the 30th october. This is why I lost my home in the first place.

Rosie

[Mic]

Re: Worried sick!

Without wanting to detract from the thread too much........................any commissions paid secretly or not would have been charged to the loan the consumer pays. This would be looked at in my view through the CCA 1974 "unfair relationships" 140a/b. It covers it better.

Quite possibly, my apologies, but as Swift are not a bank, but, from what I understand, more of a brokerage company, they could actually be paid a commission from whoever they do business with to obtain the mortgage amount, therefore commission is earned by the company and is not a factor. To differentiate I take it that you mean commission paid by the client, which indeed does need to be listed.
Clearly a case for unfair terms if the latter has not been stated.

In the case of a rate hike, I did think banks had to give at least 45 days notification of the increase, which is usually the case, however as the loan was taken out in September, how could they possibly have sent out a letter within the time frame, from loan acceptance to the rate hike, and still allow the 45 days ?

[meellis]

Re: Worried sick!

Mic, Swift are the lender and the brokers get paid commission by Swift for supplying the customers. One of the ways is a direct payment which isn't detailed of how much or how it is calculated. The brokers also receive override payments especially if they hit a target of customers in a time period. Your reply has highlighted though my concerns about the hidden commission though and that is the latest case was concerning commission on PPI ie an insurance product and I would be happier when I see if that would constitute a difference because I am sure that would be an argument put in front of a LIP by a barrister.
As for the rate hike I am unsure of your answer, are you saying that they can still increase the rate if they haven't got enough time to notify or are you saying that they should hold back the hike until they have notified?

[Rosie500]

Re: Worried sick!

Quite possibly, my apologies, but as Swift are not a bank, but, from what I understand, more of a brokerage company, they could actually be paid a commission from whoever they do business with to obtain the mortgage amount, therefore commission is earned by the company and is not a factor. To differentiate I take it that you mean commission paid by the client, which indeed does need to be listed.
Clearly a case for unfair terms if the latter has not been stated.

In the case of a rate hike, I did think banks had to give at least 45 days notification of the increase, which is usually the case, however as the loan was taken out in September, how could they possibly have sent out a letter within the time frame, from loan acceptance to the rate hike, and still allow the 45 days ?

Yes the banks are supposed to give 45 days notice, when I worked for the Abbey (now Santander) I always had plenty of notice about any increase in interest rates I had so much at staff rate and so much at public rate. Mind you the Abbey are reputable lenders. I have just sent another email off to the FOS stating that banks are supposed to give 45 days notice of any change in interest rates. I also stated that if there was such a letter why didn't Swift send me a copy along with the paperwork they sent me under the SAR. Let's see how they "wriggle" out of that one. Rosie

[Mic]

Re: Worried sick!

As for the rate hike I am unsure of your answer, are you saying that they can still increase the rate if they haven't got enough time to notify or are you saying that they should hold back the hike until they have notified?

Thanks for the information. I am sorry if I was unclear with this part.

If the loan was taken out in September, and there is a 45 day minimum notification period, then Swift would have had to give the notification to the client within a narrow time frame. This would be as early as the second week in September to the second week in October (for payment to clear in November. October has 30 days so there is 14 days before October to be within the 45 day time frame, up to say the 25th November for a latest payment date, which would be the 9 October .

Now I must say, would it be reasonable for a company to give a loan at one rate, then immediately, once the contract had been signed, hike the rate ?

Hope this clarifies what I meant before.