Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Also I was thinking that if the FSA can clobber Cheshire Mortgages with a fine....for using in house debt collectors under false pretences......they maybe Blemain are soon to receive a similar fine? as they too have/were using Monarch Recoveries?

Only time will tell I guess.....so my next port of call is going to ask Blemain for a full breakdown of their costs and charges. The last list they sent me was dated October 2011...so over year overdue I think.

The last breakdown of costs they sent me included letters from Monarch Recoveries charging me £35 a letter and a charge of £100 for them instructing them.

I wonder what the court would have to say about that? as this creates an unfair relationship as Blemain have used Monarch Recoveries to add charges to the loan to inflate it.......something to bargain with I hope. I am sure that Blemain would never want a judgment against them on their charges and how they apply them...and according to the OFT Debt Guidance all charges must be clear in the loan agreement/document....and we all know that there is no mention of these charges in ANY BLEMAIN AGREEMENT!!!!!!! regulated or unregulated....unless I am wrong?

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Also forgot to mention that for the past 3 or 4 years Blemain have been adding their own insurance to my loan....inflating it much more than it should be. I know I did not note them on my insurance but having two policies on one house is not allowed as far as I know....another way to inflate the loan...unfair relationship point number to to barter on with them.

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Charging for debt recovery

3.10 Charges should not be levied inappropriately or unfairly

b. claiming recovery costs from a debtor in the absence of express contractual provision to be able to do so

For example, where there is no provision in the credit agreement that expressly allows for such charges to be levied (no provision in Blemain loan agreements express any charge of £35 for arrears, late payments...or instructing agents)

c. not giving a clear indication in credit agreements of the amount of any charges payable on defaults
applying unreasonable charges.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/bus.../OFT664Rev.pdf

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

This is my very first letter I received from Blemain. I was ONLY IN ONE MONTHS arrears and this is the letter they sent me from Monarch....I did not notice then that it was the same address as Blemain's.

Such a harsh and severe letter for being in just one month arrears...and the threat of legal proceedings too......when Blemain did issue proceedings against me I was in 18 months arrears....but they never sent me any more letters from Monarch after 2010 and I wonder why that was? no guesses I think I already know. Round about the time their licence was up for renewal.

[gallahad]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Sounds like you are building a good defence and I wish you the very best of luck
G

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Thanks G lets hope so.

Yesterday I think I now know exactly what I am going to want to defend on. I think that will hopefully be enough for Blemain to sit up and think...if not I am sure the court will. Either way I will have my say...especially about how I believe Blemain have inflated the loan deliberately...and am certain that the courts will not take too kindly to that especially where people are already struggling and have to deal with these demonic lenders on top.

Over the next few days I am going to write out my points of defence...which will be short...sharp and to the point...and no way for Blemain to wriggle out....and am sure the court will also see that these issues I am highlighting have to be addressed. They can either reply to me or to the court. Both ways is ok with me.

Thanks for your continued support.

[figaro123]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

wishing u all the very best. I am also have problems with Blemain

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

I wander if anyone could give a little help with the costs that I have attached below. You will see in the loan account summary Blemain have added their legal costs to the loan....but in their breakdown of their legal costs which I asked for separately there have entered £275 for attendance at hearing on 5 Sept 11.....and £350 attendance at a hearing on 4 Nov 11....but these two sums at not included in the loan account summary.

I believe that Blemain have added costs and charges to the loan creating an unfair relationship by inflating the loan. At my hearing in Feb 13.....either way looks like I may get an suspended possession order...either by consent or by the court. I have evidence to show that I am able to afford payments...and have been paying regularly since Jan 2012....and will continue to do so. So that part I am alright on.

What I am not alright on is the excessive charges...buildings insurance...and extra costs that Blemain have added and made such a large sum. I am in approx £7,500.00 arrears according to them...and if I use that Norgan case where I can spread the payments out throughout the remainder of the loan then I will only have to pay an extra £30.00'ish on top which I already am. My contractual payments are £335.76 and I am paying £365.76 each month.

If I am to get an SPO I want the court to know about Blemain excessive charges to the loan....and like I said before Cheshire mortgages have got fined by the FSA by using Monarch recoveries to scare people...despite being in house solicitors.....and that is exactly what Blemain have done.

That is what I am going to fight on...and see how this goes...

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

FSA fines mortgage lender £1.2m as 2,000 customers compensated 10 December 2012


The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined mortgage lender Cheshire Mortgage Corporation £1.2m for failing to treat customers fairly when collecting arrears.

The Cheadle-based company was forced to pay up £1.225m for failures across its mortgage sales and arrears processes and two directors have been banned.

Cheshire’s chief executive Henry Moser has been fined £70,000 and has agreed to step down from his role within three to six months. Andrew Lawton, the firm’s compliance director, has been fined £13,500 and banned from holding a significant influence function

The FSA has also forced Cheshire to pay out around £2m to nearly 2,000 customers in compensation.

An investigation into the mortgage lender, which provided loans to customers with poor credit histories, found that when Cheshire transferred customers in arrears to Monarch Recoveries for debt recovery, they were charged £150. (defence point number 1)

This charge was made despite the fact that Monarch Recoveries was despite an in-house company.(defence point number 2)

The FSA also found that Cheshire did not always make a reasonable effort to reach an agreement with customers in arrears over methods of payment. (defence point number 3)

The regulator also said that Cheshire did not always properly assess the affordability of mortgages by, for example, challenging a customer’s declared income. (defence point number 4)

These failures occurred in the sale of mortgages and arrears handling from October 2004 to the end of 2009.

The FSA said the company failed to treat some of its customers fairly when they fell into arrears; was unable to always demonstrate that mortgages it sold were affordable; and did not always communicate properly with customers. Chief executive Moser has been “disciplined” for failing to spot these problems and put them right.

The lender overcharged some customers in arrears and applied arrears charges inconsistently and unfairly. Customers were also sometimes notified of charges after they had been incurred.
Moser, as chief executive, was ultimately responsible for the actions and compliance of the company, but he failed to ensure the firm was being properly managed so that problems would be identified and remedied.

Lawton was aware of certain poor practices taking place at the firm but failed to put them right and demonstrated a lack of competence and capability in his role as a compliance director.
Tracey McDermott, director of enforcement at the FSA, said: “The company’s lacklustre approach to regulation, combined with very poor practices in collecting arrears, meant that some customers already worried about being able to pay back their mortgages were put under undue pressure, and sometimes ended up paying more than they should.

“The failings of Moser, Lawton and Cheshire Mortgage Corporation were serious and let down a vulnerable group of consumers. Where firms and individuals fail to comply with our rules and treat customers fairly they should expect to be held to account.”

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article...rs-compensated

[TUTTSI]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

A good point to put in your defence if you have not already done so is the Cheltenham and Gloucester v Norgan case = http://www.mortgagefinancegazette.co...g-controversy/ this case allows you to pay over the remaining term of the mortgage or a period which you can comfortably afford. The quicker you can pay them off once on a suspended possession order the better because one missed payment they can go straight for repo and it would possibly be granted.

Also, I would do a spreadsheet of all the charges + 8% interest (allowed by the courts) you can go back up to 12 years on mortgages and then I would write to Blemain advising them that the charges are unfair and unjust and request a refund. If they write back saying no - final decision you can then put this to the FOS and they will negotiate on your behalf. If you have not sent an SAR to obatin all the information which they hold on you and your mortgage again I would send this off with £10 ASAP because they have 40 + 2 days to respond. I have a great SAR for mortgages if you do not have one. Also, if this is in place you can put this also in your defence about the extortionate charges to your account. Unfortunately you cannot get back legal fees no matter how high they are but charges for letter, being late etc etc.... you can have a jolly good go. As sure as eggs are eggs I bet they have included the charges in your arrears - this again is not acceptable. If youi are sending a SAR the courts may have to adjourn your case until you have the documentary evidence that you requested and then if it is at the FOS for adjudication again this could ddelay matters. These are just a few bits that I thought of and again you may have already taken this on board but I did not want you to miss some inportant factors to your case as you want it as strong as you can. I think Bill K may have spready to deal with the charges aspect.

Let me know if you need the SAR and the spready?

[andrew1]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

FSA fines mortgage lender £1.2m as 2,000 customers compensated 10 December 2012


The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined mortgage lender Cheshire Mortgage Corporation £1.2m for failing to treat customers fairly when collecting arrears.

The Cheadle-based company was forced to pay up £1.225m for failures across its mortgage sales and arrears processes and two directors have been banned.

Cheshire’s chief executive Henry Moser has been fined £70,000 and has agreed to step down from his role within three to six months. Andrew Lawton, the firm’s compliance director, has been fined £13,500 and banned from holding a significant influence function

The FSA has also forced Cheshire to pay out around £2m to nearly 2,000 customers in compensation.

An investigation into the mortgage lender, which provided loans to customers with poor credit histories, found that when Cheshire transferred customers in arrears to Monarch Recoveries for debt recovery, they were charged £150. (defence point number 1)

This charge was made despite the fact that Monarch Recoveries was despite an in-house company.(defence point number 2)

The FSA also found that Cheshire did not always make a reasonable effort to reach an agreement with customers in arrears over methods of payment. (defence point number 3)

The regulator also said that Cheshire did not always properly assess the affordability of mortgages by, for example, challenging a customer’s declared income. (defence point number 4)

These failures occurred in the sale of mortgages and arrears handling from October 2004 to the end of 2009.

The FSA said the company failed to treat some of its customers fairly when they fell into arrears; was unable to always demonstrate that mortgages it sold were affordable; and did not always communicate properly with customers. Chief executive Moser has been “disciplined” for failing to spot these problems and put them right.

The lender overcharged some customers in arrears and applied arrears charges inconsistently and unfairly. Customers were also sometimes notified of charges after they had been incurred.
Moser, as chief executive, was ultimately responsible for the actions and compliance of the company, but he failed to ensure the firm was being properly managed so that problems would be identified and remedied.

Lawton was aware of certain poor practices taking place at the firm but failed to put them right and demonstrated a lack of competence and capability in his role as a compliance director.
Tracey McDermott, director of enforcement at the FSA, said: “The company’s lacklustre approach to regulation, combined with very poor practices in collecting arrears, meant that some customers already worried about being able to pay back their mortgages were put under undue pressure, and sometimes ended up paying more than they should.

“The failings of Moser, Lawton and Cheshire Mortgage Corporation were serious and let down a vulnerable group of consumers. Where firms and individuals fail to comply with our rules and treat customers fairly they should expect to be held to account.”

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article...rs-compensated

We could do with a Tracey McDermott at the OFT to kick ar*se there and fine a few second charge lenders.

[TUTTSI]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

I 100% agree Andrew, Rooftops have definately overcharged us on charges I recon they will probably now exceed £6k+ and this is an account which I have to deal with in 2013 when I have recovered from my my recent hospital stay and extensive treatment. Rooftops also take money when they are not allowed by the FSA and I think a letter to this Tracey Mc Dermott might also be a sgreat start especially when I have evidence that Rooftop have actually sold out mortgage on to Farringdon PLC number 1 account and have records showing when they purchased our mortgage yet Rooftop still hold the land registry title. I am sure Blemain and other companies like Swift as well do not play nicely in any shape or form. I have on insider knowledge about Rooftop/Farringdon that their aim is to repo as many properties as they can.

We could do with a Tracey McDermott at the OFT to kick ar*se there and fine a few second charge lenders.

[andrew1]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

I have on insider knowledge about Rooftop/Farringdon that their aim is to repo as many properties as they can.

It's the sub-prime business model. That's what we need to expose, their business models, if you can get your insider to draft out that you'll find a whole swathe of ethical and legal issues to take them to task on.

What we've done with Swift is go into their agreements with their funders and their debentures and accounts and directors reports to find out who owns and who is responsible for what. Once you find that and put them together with their practices you can soon see exactly what their business model is. Present that rather than the after effects of just the charges and it all begins to mean something.

Then you have to find the right people who are being taken to court and feed this information to their legal teams. You can't penetrate their arrogance, but you can do it via the right court. It takes time, just as it is with us and sadly I have had to sell my home to prove it, but it's coming and the bstds will pay for what they've done believe me, then they'll be laughing on the other side of their faces when their own personal assets get stripped. I will take no prisoners when I have my day and I will shortly have all the time in the world and the money to do it.

That's what's needed with these sub-prime lenders who are all a chip off Lehmans block - rotten to the core.

A1

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

Thanks andrew1 & tuttsi for your valued input.

I have done an SAR to Blemain along time ago and have all the info to carry on.

What my plan is or should I say what I am hoping to do is:

Yes I accept that there was a long time that I did not pay Blemain...but I have a valid reason/reasons why I did this....

Fast forward to May 2011 when Blemain issued possession proceedings:

I have been in regular contact with them...my 1st solicitor who represented me at the first hearing did such a crap job that I thought if I continued with him everything I had done will go down the loo...plus he was not prepared to do what I asked...so had to let him go.

I then instructed another solicitor on a private basis who is not on the court file to try and reach a settlement/agreement with Blemain.

In Jan 12 I called Blemain and told them that I was going to re-start my normal contractual payments and plus £30 on top towards the arrears. They agreed...sent me DD form....and to date I have kept to this agreement.

I wanted to file an amended defence....as I was also going through divorce proceedings....which have now been put on hold. Blemain agreed that I could file an amended defence....so much has gone on since Jan....then on the advice of my solicitor who said that I should agree to all of their terms and sign the consent order for a suspended possession order.

Fine I thought....bit peed off as it was him who advised the opposite when I initially met him....but my head was empty as my bank account and could not take any more hassle...and agreed to do this.

Then my sol said that Cobbetts (Blemain's sols) are suggesting on a without prejudice basis I pay an extra £180 on top of the contractual payments plus agree to pay all their legal costs. They said they would not capatalise the arrears but would add their legal costs to the loan.

I then thought...hang on a minute....this can't be fair or right. There is me...yes I did not pay for a long time....but what they are asking from me I cannot accept. So I told my sol whom I have paid £1,850 to date....I know it may not be a lot but it is when you have not got any money. I have told my sol I will handle my case on my own.

To date no defence has been filled from my part....as my sol and Cobbetts have been adjourning this case whilst both sides are trying to reach a settlemet/agreement. Now that the hearing is so close hanging over my head I cannot afford to rely on my sol or Cobbetts so have chosen to handle this myself.

Worse case scenario I get a SPO...plus have the legal costs added to the loan. So my defence will be focusing on Blemains costs and charges which they have added to the loan to inflate it. I am going to do a complete breakdown of their figures and costs that they have added...I have written to both Blemain & Cobbetts for a breakdown of costs and a latest loan summary. Then I will be able to see if there is anything in there that should not be.

As Blemain were using Monarch Recoveries just like Cheshire Mortgages were....I think will help my defence as I will want to bring this to the courts attention.

I have approx 21 letters from Monarch Recoveries which Blemain sent me....plus quite a lot of other charges on top. I also will be bringing up the home insurance that Blemain have been adding to my loan..to inflate it...plus the interest rate...which I still have no clue despite asking them what it is linked to.

[jumper999]

Re: Blemain & Cheshire Regulations

I know that welshperson done a very good history and gathered a lot of info on Monarch Recoveries. I believe that he also won a case against Blemain and used their charges in his defence too.

I have some info from him saved which will be very helpful if I am allowed to use what he did in my defence to. I need to search for this when I come back from work this afternoon. Welshperson also done a good thread over the road...which contained in detail a lot of info on charges...that is what I am going to concentrate on for now.

The thing that worries me is that the court do not know nothing about my side of the case....all they get is applications from Blemain and had been from my sol...adjourning the case and taking it forward.

I am thinking maybe it is time I write to the court a summary of what has been happening...and what I have/am doing to try and reach a settlement with the Blemain as they are in the dark about what I am doing...and if I turn at the hearing on the 18 Fe 13.....the court will not know anything about what I have been doing and want.