Posts
With around £9bn of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) mis-sold to UK consumers the issue of the mis-selling of financial products is big consumer news; yet the potential for the mis-selling of consumer credit products - particulary pay day loans and second charge mortgages regulated under the Consumer Credit Act - is relatively new and unchartered waters. Govan Law Centre believes alarm bells should be ringing over the growing potential for mass mis-selling in the UK consumer credit market, with the growth of aggressive pay day lending and the ongoing mis-selling of expensive home secured loans. Changes introduced by the 2006 Consumer Credit Act have opened new gateways for consumer redress in law and through the independent Financial Ombudsman Service.
GLC todays publishes a 'think piece' paper which discusses the scope and possibility for consumer redress in relation to mis-sold and unfair consumer credit products in the UK. The paper is available here. Thoughts and comments are welcome and can be made below.
1 of 2
ReplyDeleteHere is PROOF of when your mortgage loan is securitised, all the FSA MCOB rules/Pre-Action Protocols are violated and your consumer rights breached. As the SPV in its original Mortgage Sale Agreement(MSA) & Mortgage Administration Agreement(MAA) DOES NOT allow loan modifications. Below, the SPV has been authorised by the parties(namely the noteholders/investors) to ammend the MSA, so as to allow borrowers loans to be modified. That is why your 'lender' will NEVER disclose the MSA or MAA, unless under a CPR 31.6 order.
Note that a 'loan arrangement' is not a modified loan, which is one where a switch to say interest only, extended length of loan, capitalising the arrears etc as per 7.1 of the Pre-Action Mortgage Protocols.
Terms which exclude rights of consumer forebearance, can be deemed unfair and as stipulated under UTCCR 1999 5(1) and in Schedule 2.
REPOSSESSION IS THE SPVs FIRST RESORT
Company name Mansard Mort 2006-1
Headline Amendments to Transaction Documents
RNS Number : 8189M
Mansard Mortgages 2006-1 PLC
04 February 2009
COMPANY ANNOUNCEMENT
For Immediate Release
4 February 2009
Mansard Mortgages 2006-1 Plc
(the "Issuer")
RE: Amendments to Transaction Documents
Class A1a Notes: ISIN XS0272295907
Class A2a Notes: ISIN XS0272296897
Class M1a Notes: ISIN XS0272298166
Class M2a Notes: ISIN XS0272299057
Class B1a Notes: ISIN XS0272303008
Class B2a Notes: ISIN XS0272303693
Residual Certificates: ISIN XS0272306019
Terms used and not defined in this notice shall have the same meanings given thereto in the Glossary set out in the Prospectus dated 31 October 2006 relating to the Instruments referred to above.
The following amendments have been made to the Mortgage Sale Agreement dated 31 October 2006 and amended on 21 December 2006 (the Mortgage Sale Agreement) and the Servicing Agreement dated 31 October 2006 (the Servicing Agreement).
The parties to the Mortgage Sale Agreement and the Servicing Agreement have consented to amendments which permit the Servicer to agree, acting as a Prudent Mortgage Lender and subject to certain conditions and limitations set out below:
(a) to convert a Loan between any of these three types of mortgages: Interest-Only Loan, Repayment Loan and Part and Part Loan upon a request by a Borrower; and
(b) to extend the maturity date of a Loan upon a request by a Borrower provided that the new maturity date is a date which is not less than 2 years earlier than the Final Maturity Date.
The definition of "Converted Loan" has been amended to apply not only in respect of Loans which are converted from one loan type to another but also to include Loans in respect of which the maturity date is extended (as described above).
Conditions
The Servicer may agree to convert a Loan into a Converted Loan, provided that:
the Servicer, acting as a Prudent Mortgage Lender, believes in good faith that the current monthly payments cannot be met by the Borrower due to a change in circumstance affecting the ability of the Borrower to make timely payments;
the Servicer obtains a duly completed income and expenditure form from the Borrower plus proof of new income or new circumstances, as applicable;
The problem with taking a complaint to the FOS regarding a second charge mortgage is that the FOS do not check calculations. They trust the lenders to give them the correct information. This makes the idea of a complaint to the FOS about lack of fairness and transparency a complete waste of time - they believe whatever these dodgy lenders tell them. The FOS don't understand or investigate the trickery of the interest charges or the alleged litigation costs. I've been right through the process and believe me although the adjudicator (and Ombudsman) may have had the best intentions they just didn't understand what the lender was up to.
ReplyDelete