beware of sub prime lenders and mortgage brookers

HelpWhereIcan

Jeff, I really do sympathise with you and believe (as most here seem to) that although the broker and solicitor have their share of the blame, you really have to accept the fact that it is your wife who has defrauded not only the lender, but you. She has put your home, marriage and sanity at risk. Because you are married and have joint assets, you have to face the consequences of her actions, and face the fact that many people will interpret your list of events as follows:

jeff12345659 wrote:

1 My wife started a business

Entrepreneurship is always to be admired.

jeff12345659 wrote:

2 I took out a mortgage with the C&G ( decent lenders) to fund the business.

Provided C&G were aware of the true purpose of the loan, all parties went into this with their eyes open. You knew the house would be at risk if the business failed and you had problems with the mortgage payments.

jeff12345659 wrote:

3 The business ran into trouble.

When did you become aware of this? If at this point, what discussions did you have about the business's future?

jeff12345659 wrote:

4 My wife was reluctant to admit the probelms.

She would not be the first business owner to be in this position and 'reluctant to admit' it.

jeff12345659 wrote:

5 She approached the morgage brookers who she new and sub-rented premisses from her.

OK

jeff12345659 wrote:

6 The brookers could not arrange business finance so out of greed persuaded her to re-mortgage the property, without my knowledge.

I know people love to think that mortgage advisers could persuade someone to do something they did not want to, but it just cannot be done.

They may have been crooked and helped your wife to commit fraud, but I fail to see how they could persuade her to act illegally and to betray you if she was not pre-disposed to do so anyway. Why did she not seek alternative advice or come clean with you and look to fix things legitimately if she was so aghast at the idea of commiting fraud. I am a small business owner, I have money/cash flow issues at times, but know that I would never 'cross the line'.

jeff12345659 wrote:

This mortgage is arranged with the I group and payes the G&C mortgage off.

Did you not see ANY paperwork, did you not notice that your direct debit had changed? Did you not have any need to see any bank statements, speak with the C&G etc etc at all after this was set up?

As Ian says - your wife actually defrauded two lenders and you twice and yet you blame the lender and everyone else but she is blameless.

jeff12345659 wrote:

7 My wife needed more money so the brooker said it would be better to start another mortgage-this of course gives them more fees . The mortgage is arranged with SPML and payes of the I Group.

Again, what action has been taken against the broker by the regulator, the police, the lender? There is more in place to investigate wrong doing on their part than you seem to accept.

Again, Did you not see ANY paperwork, did you not notice that your direct debit had changed? Did you not have any need to see any bank statements, speak with the C&G etc etc at all after this was set up?

jeff12345659 wrote:

8 Things start to go tits-up when arrears occur.

SPML have a very proactive approach to arrears collection, and the phone calls and letters start after the first missed payment - just how long did your wife intercept correspondance from them for? They may not have phoned like they should, but they have to show the judge evidence of their attempts to collect and the letters create a 'paper trail' and are produced automatically so they will have sent these religiously.

Did your wife's behaviour not change? I have seen many people with mortgage arrears facing repossession and few of them are 'happy, go lucky" or "the same as always" at the prospect.

jeff12345659 wrote:

9 SPML send a debt counselor the report on the situation.
10 The debt counselor reports that he had a lenghty meeting with both of us. This is lie!! he even accepts a cheque from my account wife my wife forging my signature, in front of his eyes.

So the debt counsellor who (although he may not have done his job properly) thought that he had come to an arrangement with your wife about the arrears to help you stay in your home is now the one to blame? Did he advise your wife to bounce cheques and tell her not to worry because all would be ok or did he tell her to keep up with payments and come to an arrangement or the house could be repossessed?

jeff12345659 wrote:

11 I find out about the SPML when the Court Baliffe arrives at my our house.
12 I inform SPML and request a meeting. They refuse to see me.

Unfortunately for you, it is something lenders hear very regularly as a stalling attempt. It ranks up there with "What letters? We didn't receive any letters!" defence. It may have been true in your case, but in the majority of cases it is not.

jeff12345659 wrote:

13 I employ a solicitor to help me. He was an absolute waste of time and money. The Court case to address these probelems was set for 4 months down the line. The solicitor get the statement from the debt counselor and doubts my story. He decides, without my sanction to adjourn the Court hearing. I challenge him and he tells me that the counsellor was b e sending a signed statement and this would discredit me. The counselor never submits the signed statement and eventually said that the had become confused.

The advice you received from your solicitor on this matter may not have been good to hear, but would have been accurate based on what he knew at the time and probability. Solicitors are not 'caped crusaders' righting all wrongs at the stroke of a pen. They are advocates and can only put you case forward as well as they can based on known facts and not hearsay or conjecture. They cannot change the facts. An adjournement would give him extra time to work out how to help you - I don't know why you think this was a bad idea.

jeff12345659 wrote:

14 Six months latter I appear in Court and it was a dissaster as the district Judge was overwhelmed by the counsel from SPML.

I have appeared at these proceedings (to provide evidence that a remortgage was possible) and, in my experience, the judge actually expected a lot more of the lender and questioned them more closely than the customer. That's why the evidence supporting SPML's case would have been overwhelming (remember the papertrail?). The judge would need to be convinced beyond doubt that all reasonable attempts to collect the arrears had been made.

jeff12345659 wrote:

15 SPML said if I paid £4000.00 per month I could have the keys back to the house.

In other words, "pay what has been obtained from us by deception and the amount you owe us and we can stop the proceedings." Seems a fair offer to me.

The person who you should be blaming in all this is your wife. Get her to accept responsibility and help you address things if you want your marriage to survive.

The debt counsellor will have been disciplined/retrained for his part in this by his employers, but his actions did not lead to your house being repossessed - your wife's failure to repay the arrears/come to an arrangement did.

The broker and the solicitor will receive their comeuppance in time, but it will not affect the repo order. Their assistance to your wife in committing fraud did not lead to your house being repossessed - your wife's failure to repay the arrears/come to an arrangement did.

I don't want to be harsh, but you have nothing to gain from trying to apportion blame and deny the legitimacy of the repo order other than the loss of your sanity.

Take a step back, address the situation as it is (rather than how you would like it to be) and set about getting help from your wife to settle your bankruptcy and repo order - then you may be able to work on rebuilding your marriage and getting things back to the way they should be.

I genuinely feel for you, but you need to come back to reality.

saver_sam

Originally Posted by jeff12345659
15 SPML said if I paid £4000.00 per month I could have the keys back to the house.

If this was before a judge at the possession hearing, the judge has the discretion to allow you time to pay the arrears, which could be over the remaining length of the mortgage term as long as it appeared affordable to your i&e. unfortunately if the remaining term is perhaps a short time then the amount per month could be quite high (i.e. £4000- i dread to think what the monthly payment was let alone how many months in arrears you were). if you cannot met this then the judge may have no alternative but to grant possession.

jeff12345659

saver_sam wrote:

If this was before a judge at the possession hearing, the judge has the discretion to allow you time to pay the arrears, which could be over the remaining length of the mortgage term as long as it appeared affordable to your i&e. unfortunately if the remaining term is perhaps a short time then the amount per month could be quite high (i.e. £4000- i dread to think what the monthly payment was let alone how many months in arrears you were). if you cannot met this then the judge may have no alternative but to grant possession.

The origainal mortgage wa interest only and the monthly amount was approx £2000.00 SPML made the demand of £4000.00 per month.
The mortgage was about 6 Payments in arrears at the time possesion was obtained.
I arranged a mortgage but as SPML would not give me a redemption figure despite many letters demanding this.
SPML have made a claim that amounts to about £620,000.00 plus £48,000.00 costs. This despite that over the last four years they have had about £92,000.00 from me.
It angers me when they demand costs from me.
I did not ask for any mortgage from SPML.
I did not benifit from any monies from SPML.
I believe that my indebtedness is only that of the C&G mortgage.
Why should SPML benifit from this fraud. If the received all the money the demanded they would certainly benifit.




What I find difficult to understand is the

saver_sam

jeff12345659 wrote:

I arranged a mortgage but as SPML would not give me a redemption figure despite many letters demanding this.

I hope you mentioned this at the court proceeding. I know of a recent case where two mortgage companies were applying for possession and the judge was not impressed that proceedings were being held up due to one of the companies not giving the redemption figure, as the customer had obtained a bridging loan to clear all there arrears. If it was not provided by the time it came back before him in 2 weeks time then he would award a wasted costs order.

I did not benifit from any monies from SPML.

However you might have benefitted from the monies that smpl lent as your wife was able to continue her business with the extra money and probably provide money into the household.

jeff12345659

saver_sam wrote:

I hope you mentioned this at the court proceeding. I know of a recent case where two mortgage companies were applying for possession and the judge was not impressed that proceedings were being held up due to one of the companies not giving the redemption figure, as the customer had obtained a bridging loan to clear all there arrears. If it was not provided by the time it came back before him in 2 weeks time then he would award a wasted costs order.



However you might have benefitted from the monies that smpl lent as your wife was able to continue her business with the extra money and probably provide money into the household.

Thanks for your comments, saver Sam
I am still arguing what benifit I gained from SPML. This is fundamental to calculate my indebtedness. As far a a benifit tiomy Wife's business is was just polonging the enevitable, the business was doomed.
My business, which I have been running since 1986 was also subsidising my Wife's business. If my Wife had applied for a business loan they would have looked and her business and said NO.
I was running my business from home and you can imagine how damaging it was to be bannished from my home for six months. I manufacture and assemble specialised electroncs which is fundamental to my business.
I had built up a reasonable wealth over the years since I started my business.
The house was mortgage free and I had modest saveings of about £100,00.
It all started to go wrong when my Wife started her business.

MortgageMamma

Jeff.

You only have your WIFE to blame for all this. I think this thread has gone on a long time and there is nothing anyone can do to help you on here except offer our opinions and sympathies for what has happened to you. But as has already been said. you need to face the reality of the situation now, albeit grim. If you manage to keep your relationship with your wife together after all this then I think that in itself is remarkable. I personally am a believer in fresh starts though.

Best of luck sorting this out. I'm sure at some point in the future this nightmate will be behind you.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

If you don't mind me asking, How long have you and your wife been married and what type of buisness did she have??

jeff12345659

Hi
We have been married for nearly 10 years and her business is interior design.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Jeff you said

"If my Wife had applied for a business loan they would have looked and her business and said NO."

and

"The house was mortgage free and I had modest saveings of about £100,000.
It all started to go wrong when my Wife started her business".


These are two very telling statements, Your wife wiped out your home and £100,000 in savings for an interior design business:eek: , my next question is where did the money go?, have you looked at your wife business accounts, receipts, and client data base, are you sure your wife has not been taking you for a ride and stashed the money elsewhere:eek: :eek:, in Interior design you get the clients to spend their money, not yours!!. If there are any bad debts/customers owing her money, its time to take them to court for a change. Otherwise, you have been done like a kipper!!

Good luck

homer_j_3

jeff12345659 wrote:

Thanks for your comments, saver Sam
I am still arguing what benifit I gained from SPML. This is fundamental to calculate my indebtedness. As far a a benifit tiomy Wife's business is was just polonging the enevitable, the business was doomed.
My business, which I have been running since 1986 was also subsidising my Wife's business. If my Wife had applied for a business loan they would have looked and her business and said NO.
I was running my business from home and you can imagine how damaging it was to be bannished from my home for six months. I manufacture and assemble specialised electroncs which is fundamental to my business.
I had built up a reasonable wealth over the years since I started my business.
The house was mortgage free and I had modest saveings of about £100,00.
It all started to go wrong when my Wife started her business.

Jeff, firstly, I think whatever you decide to do about your relationship, you will arrive at a decision with your eyes wide open.

The title of your thread is that subprime lenders should be approached with caution. You are right in saying this but I would also add that you should beware of securing money against your home, regardless of the lenders prime or subprime status. This is why you will find the same statement warning you that your home will be at risk in every financial promotion regarding mortgages. This is not mentioned because the marketing departments cant fill the space.

The reallity is that You have gone from mortgage free to losing your home because you decided to risk your home for your wifes business. Your wife is the common factor in all of this and hopefully you will be able to realise that she has caused your loss and heartache.

You say that you fail to see where you have benefited. I dont see why SPML should lose out just because you personally cannot say you have had any benefit. Unfortunately, I dont think that anybody has benefitted. Granted SPML will get their money back through reposession and I can say that if they allowed you 6 months to correct the situation, then you would not have had much more allowance with a prime lender.

A district judge will always side with the customer if they have shown willing to try and repay the debt. They know full well that hardship can happen to the best people but if your wife ignored letters or failed to contact them to say that she was in financial difficulty and needed help which would lead to a payment plan then I cannot agree more that the reposession should happen because it would cost YOU more in the long run in costs. interest and heartache. Without sounding cruel, they are only stopping the rot get any worse.

Once your property is sold, hopefully you will get something back and you can get your life back on track.