Ladidi v Southern Pacific Personal Loans

[Ladidi]

I have a problem with the 2nd charge, We myself and my husband got into arrears with them for £590. I telephoned them in February offering to pay off the arrears by end of March, The gentleman put me hold and issued a letter confirming this. HE also informed we did not have to pay the amount so quickly and could pay over 6 months. He said normal payments plus and £94 for arrears. I said lets talk whole numbers rather than pounds and pence and offered a total of £300 per month. This was agreed beginning 1st March. 1st payment made on 29th Feb next payment due 1st April got payment schedule to show this from the company. By middle of March they were kicking and screaming and said they was taking us to court for arrears. I argued we have an agreement and we have not breached this and filed a complaint we still have no replies to the complaint to this day. In between all of this my husband and I paid off arrears due on 21st April so nothing owed. They and their legal people still kept sending us letters stating they was going to take our home and in May wrote and asked us to allow for an adjournement of todays court date. We declined this. We turn up at court today the other side no where to be seen and the Judge disregards everything we have filed and just asked if there is arrears we said NO he said case dismissed and would not allow costs to be paid for by the other side and said to take it up with FSA and CML. I phoned both of these they said they dont want to know as it is 2nd charge. We dont feel we have won anything as we are now stuck with their shabby outrageous solicitors costs of £590 plus £150 court costs and yet we are supposed to have won. I will be more than willing to send in a copy of all papers filed to the courts. We just dont know what we are supposed to do next?
Can you help or put me onto the right people who can help?

[EXC]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

Ladidi

Welcome.

The site is currently having some technical problems that means some members and team can't access the site at the moment.

I'll ask Scooby Doo to have a look at your post.

BW

[Ladidi]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

Thanks BW, tell scooby doo if he scores a hit I`ll reward him with some scooby snacks

Ladidi

[EXC]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

he he, he's a she!

[Paule]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

Can I just clarify something

Did they take you to court?

I presume that the figures you are refering to, are the costs that the Other Party put on their Particulars of Claim against you, ie solicitors costs, court fee etc

If this is the case then you arent liable for these costs as the case has been dismissed, the other party is liable. Unless Ive missed something

Do you have the facility to be able to scan the Particulars of Claim and post it on the forum?
remove your personal details first though.

Others will be along shortly and will help you as well

Can you also state who the other party is and i will set up a thread for you

PKea

[Ladidi]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

Haha soz scooby doo but you'll still get scooby snacks

Yes we was at court today, I have copies of paperwork here on the computer, When the Judge said dismissed we asked for all costs to be paid for by the other side, he said he has no power to do this and that all costs are still to be met by us eg solicitors costs, court costs as this is in the small print of your agreements and he could not go into that as he has NO powers. He said you will have to take it up with the FSA and CML, who both said cant do nothing as it is a 2nd charge and not main mortgage..

I am hoping I have added the files to this message.

Ladidi

[Paule]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

Ok

Due to server problems I cant open your docs at present

But it seems to me that the Judge may have been refering the fact he will not award you your costs meaning that the other party doesnt have to pay your costs, not that you will be liable for their costs.

Obviously once we can see your docs it may make the matter clearer

PKea

[Ladidi]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

No he deffinatley said we would be liable to pay their costs and teh courts costs as this is in the small print of your mortgage papers that if you miss payments they have the right to take you to court and you will then incurr their costs which will be added to balance of the loan outstanding!!

Doesn't matter if you win or lose!! if thats the case.

[Paule]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

OK then, sound like they have an indemnity clause.

I will have to wait for those better informed in this area to come and have a look at your info.

Personally i think this will be challengable as the fact they they have brought a case to get monies which have already been paid by yourselves, on the other hand they did offer to postpone the case.

Anyway it will probably be tomorrow that someone like Scooby will be able to have a better look, so hopefully you can bear with us till then.

But dont worry and we will get you sorted.

I will move the thread to the mortgage forum and post the link onto your welcome thread for you

PKea

[Ladidi]

Re: Welcome Ladidi

All I know is, we went into court and I gave the judge a batch of papers which would have shown the intollerable pressure they have been placing on ourselves even after the arrears were paid in full. He took one look at the front page and put them down and said, is there any arrears outstanding? We said NO. He said case dismissed! I said Your honour with no disrespect we feel that the other side should pay our costs considering they brought this case and it was filed on a lot of inaccuracies! HE said he cannot get involved as he has no powers to do that, he said in the small print of your mortgage there is clause that states if you miss payments and they have to take you to court you will be liable for those costs incurred and with that he said the only option you can do is take it up with CML or the FSA. I took it up with both of them and they both point blank refused to acknowledge it because it is a 2nd charge and not a main mortgage.
So although we have come away from court with a dismissal, we have also come away with costs which will be added to our mortgage balance and all becuase the company and their hired solicitors screwed up we now have nearly £700 more debt!!! Not to mention the fact that both my husband and myself have lost income due to time off work and the stress of dealing with this case and delivering and turning up at court only to be looked at like...so what you will still pay!!!!

[Paule]

Re: Ladidi v TBA

All I can say is that you are bound to be upset, you feel that you have won but lost.

Lets just wait till the morning when others have had a chance to look at your info, and hopefully the server problems here are sorted

For tonight try and relax, and lets sort this in the morning with clear heads.

Can I just ask did you get any advice prior to the court hearing as it seems you did a good job getting all your info together for the case

PKea

[Ladidi]

Re: Ladidi v Capstone

Funny you should say that, my hubby thought it would be a good idea to be safe than sorry and speak with the duty solicitor, and he said the same thing, you will still have to pay their costs!! I`m like this should not be allowed to happen, they screwed up carried on regardless had the nerve to write and ask us for agreement in adjournment which was denied never bothered to even contact them as they were a waste of time. We turn up and know full well they are not going to get any kind of order full stop and Judge doesn't grasp what a total f**k up the whole case or even state that he wanted answers as to why were there in first place or why the company has wasted his time and ours in forcing this issue when it should have been closed!!!

As the duty solcitor put it we are on conveyor belt and we are in and out and thats it no time for anything..I felt we was totally disregarded..Judge just asks 1 question and then case dismissed!! end of..no matter what you want to say he aint gonna listen cos he states he cant and has no powers take it with the FSA and CML who in turn state the same thing..If you ask me, I reckon they all must be on a damn good screw if cases are in and out and costs still have to be paid by winning/losing party AS LONG AS IT IS NOT THEM.

[scoobydoo]

Re: Ladidi v Southern Pacific Personal Loans

Hi

Scooby here!

Sorry I can not see the documents either!

I am just wondering whether there is anything in their terms and conditions as to whether they claim to act under the banking code at all.

Did you have all of the agreement to pay the arrears in writing ?

Also did they offer to postpone in writing or verbally?

When they then threatened to take your home in May was this verbal or in writing.

Personally I can understand why you wanted to go to court as if they had changed their mind and threatened you - then you probably had no trust left in them - in your position I would have done the same.

I think it is important to know who we are dealing with as I have been reading about some companies - who are not who they appear to be when you start to delve further. So I wil do a bit of research on Southern Pacific Loans and see if they are actually owned by someone else.

Not sure if I can help but we will have a good try

Also do you have copies of all the original paper work you signed?


scooby

[scoobydoo]

Re: Ladidi v Southern Pacific Personal Loans

1. The Government announced on 26 January 2000 its intention to introduce statutory regulation of mortgage lending, but not mortgage advice. HMT are currently consulting on the secondary legislation needed to implement this decision. Their proposals (most notably on the definition of a regulated mortgage contract) were published in a consultation document entitled Regulating Mortgages on 26 October 2000.
2. As the result of the earlier Government decision, the FSA will for the first time be responsible for regulation of loans to consumers where these are secured on their home. Under the current regulatory regime such loans are covered by certain provisions in the Consumer Credit Act quite separately, the sale of investment products bought as repayment vehicles for mortgages is regulated by the Personal Investment Authority.
3. Key dates in the timetable:
   12 January 2001 Deadline for response to FSA high-level consultation;
   March 2001 Publication of feed-back of first consultation exercise, and draft rules and guidance for consultation;
   July 2001 Making and publication of final rules. Applications for authorisation /change of permission can be made;
   January 2002 Full implementation of mortgage regime (or six months after the implementation of the FSMA, whichever is the later).
4. During the design of the high level proposals the FSA consulted with the Practitioners Forum, the Small Business Practitioners Panel and the Consumer Panel. Given the wider regulatory context it has also established a forum for those with some responsibility for mortgage market issues (including government departments, the OFT, CML and MCCB).
5. The Mortgage Code, developed by the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML), is a voluntary Code setting out standards of mortgage lending practice. The Code is expected to be revised once the details of the FSA regime are finalised, and thereafter to have a particular role with respect to mortgage advice (including general business standards for intermediaries). The Mortgage Code Compliance Board (MCCB) was established by the industry to perform a dual function it maintains a register of mortgage lenders and intermediaries who fulfil the registration requirements (including a stated commitment to comply with the Code); and it also monitors the compliance of both lenders and intermediaries with the Mortgage Code. The MCCB has an independent Board with a majority of public interest members.
6. The FSA regulates the financial services industry and has four objectives under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000: maintaining market confidence; promoting public understanding of the financial system; the protection of consumers; and fighting financial crime.
7. The FSA aims to maintain efficient, orderly and clean financial markets and help retail consumers achieve a fair deal.

Not sure if this is still the case - but I am still checking

[scoobydoo]

Re: Ladidi v Southern Pacific Personal Loans

They are a subsidary of Lehman Brothers investment bank - Who claim to adhere to the banking code. I am afraid you are battling against the big boys.

The banking code /mortgage code is voluntary - but I think the ony thing we can try is to show they did not act in accordance with the code and therefore you felt that you had no choice but to go to court . And that it was never explained to you about the costs involved


Was this arranged through a broker ?




Jan