beware of sub prime lenders and mortgage brookers

jeff12345659

Thanks for your comments but I think I should make it clear that I was not willing to risk my house by re-mortgaging it to a sub prime lender.
I was prepared to risk it to the tune of £200,00.00 with the C&G and no more than that.
Please remember that I have signed no agreement or entered into any contract with SPML.
There have been many cases where a person has gambled the family home to fund a business. When things have gone wrong the argument from the partner is that the implications of what I signed and the risks involved were not explained. Also the relationship was used to gain the partners cooperation. This is known as "undue influence".
Many lenders have lost their case under this argument.
I would argue my case as stronger than this simply because as I was unaware of the mortgage with SPML how could I make any decision on what I was unaware of?

silvercar

If you were allowed to use the "unaware" arguement, the lender will be out of pocket. Your wife, who is at fault, would retain her home and have her business debts written off. No lender, prime or sub prime, is going to do this.

You need to accept the situation you are in. Trying to place blame will not help you out of the mess. Either find a way of repaying the loan or accept repossession.

There are people on singingpig.com who can explain how to sell your home (albeit for under market value) even in the throes of a repossession order.

I am making no judgements on what has gone on, just trying to suggest a way forward.

Good luck with it!

langylangy

i have had a mortgage with SPML for 3 years and last year i had some difficulty paying and fell 10 months behind with it, they were very good to me and let me pay it off slowly without taking it to court and they wiped off the charges i had incurred so SPML in my opinion are higher interest yes but very fair as well.

jeff12345659

Yes fair point, you had a mortgage with SPML, I have never had or ever will have a mortgage with SPML.
I suspect that once SPML were made aware of the fraud then they just wanted to sweep it under the carpet, sell my home and make a tidy profit as a result, even if I loose everything I have worked for over 30 years I shall make my case and expose bad their attitide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I must admit that this story is rather difficult to beleive and I am sure that I would be sceptical if I had read these postings.
If you should believe me then let me put this simple question to all the people that doubt my case.
If you were asked to pay a loan, plus costs you might accept the situation if:-
1 YOU HAD ARRANGED THE LOAN
2 YOU HAD HAD THE BENIFIT FROM THE MONEY.

silvercar

Yes fair point, you had a mortgage with SPML, I have never had or ever will have a mortgage with SPML.

But actually you did! You were as duped as SPML, but a mortgage was taken out on your home with SPML.

They were duped and you were duped, by your wife and the mortgage advisor - so hold them responsible not SPML.

homer_j_3

jeff12345659 wrote:

Yes fair point, you had a mortgage with SPML, I have never had or ever will have a mortgage with SPML.
I suspect that once SPML were made aware of the fraud then they just wanted to sweep it under the carpet, sell my home and make a tidy profit as a result, even if I loose everything I have worked for over 30 years I shall make my case and expose bad their attitide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I must admit that this story is rather difficult to beleive and I am sure that I would be sceptical if I had read these postings.
If you should believe me then let me put this simple question to all the people that doubt my case.
If you were asked to pay a loan, plus costs you might accept the situation if:-
1 YOU HAD ARRANGED THE LOAN
2 YOU HAD HAD THE BENIFIT FROM THE MONEY.

Let me ask you something?

Would you accept losing money that you had lent out to someone unknowingly that they had given you fraudulent details?

If you think that the lenders professional indemnity insurance will cover SPML in this instance, you will be sadly misguided. The PI insurance company will want to see evidence that they have exhausted ALL avenues to recoup money before paying out and will probably only pay out should your house fail to cover the debt.

They are not profiting from your misery, they are reclaiming money that they are entitled to and owed.

I think every person on this thread has sympathy for you and understands your grievances but ask yourself the question, we all cannot be that misguided to be all telling you the same thing and it is not just us brokers.

The poster that has a mortgage with SPML and was 10 months behind just shows that they are willing to work with people that they feel will work their way out of their problems.

jeff12345659

Let me try and explain my point more clearly.
There was a chain of events that took place
a) my wife approached the brooker for a loan
b) they arranged a loan without my sanction or knowledge.
c) the loan was arranged and the monies served to compound/prolong the problems of my wifes business.
d) when things go wrong SPML expect me to sell my home to avoid them loosing money.
Where did I feature in the chain of events, that is until SPML want to avoid any shortfall in their profits ?
Just to repeat my stance on this matter. If SPML can either show me any contractual obligation I have to them then I will respect such a contract.
If SPML can prove that I have benifited from any monies loaned from them I will pay them back-in full.
The are having difficulty in either counts, but are using their muscle as a large company to fight me. This is proving difficult for me to fight, as a bankrupt it appears that I have no right to even question this situation, despite the fact that it is the condcuct, or should I say mis-conduct of others that put me in this situation!
I have to thank the wisdom of one particular District Judge for helping me in this cause and using his judgement to look at the wider picture.
I have seen the good, the bad and the indifferent judgements from varoius DJ's and I can't comment on the DJ's in question
I know believe that it is time to take this matter the the High Court. This is going to be difficult for me to achieve, especially as a bankrupt. Any monies I might have to use to aid me in this cause are now vested in my Trustee.
Let me be a bit dramatic about my situation, but this is how I view it from a human rights point of view.
1) The misconduct took place and the dodgy mortgages were put on place.
2) When things went wrong SPML wanted to recoup all of their monies plus expenses.
Why is it that there is that nobody wants to look at the culprits of these wrongs, and yes that includes my Wife.
I had to report her misconduct to the police, knowing that she could be charged with fraud, not easy but I wanted justice.
I thank all of the people that have contributed to this theme. I don't agree with all of the responses but without wishing to sound patronising I am pleased that it has aroused some comment.

homer_j_3

Jeff,

As I said in my previous post, I and everybody else understands that your grievances rest with the fact that all this mess has affected you the most even though you had no involvement in the events leading upto it. I think I am safe to say that no-one would be happy to be in your situation and that you are admirable for sticking with your wife.

I guess in this instance, your marriage vows of "for better or for worse" have clearly been honoured. It is the fact that you have stuck by your wife that may have been the reason why you are not getting anywhere with the legal proceedings in claiming to be a victim of fraud and identity theft.

I think the discussion on here is starting to go round and round and whilst I do not believe that SPML are in the wrong for what they are doing, I understand you have emotion attached to the situation where many of us have not.

Trying to be a little more proactive in helping you, have you requested a data subject access from SPML? You can get copies of everything they have about you on their records. You can do this under the data protection act and should include information such as letters sent, diary notes of conversations held, copies of application forms etc.. I would get your wife to sign the letter so you can see if there is anything you are missing in bringing legal action against the fraud your wife has committed.

Emmzi

1. Only half the house is yours - the rest belongs to wife? Then why should you get to keep all of it?
2. You seem to be looking for everyone to agree with your vision of the world. You are doing this by telling the same story over and over. The presented facts aren't changing- so why would people's opinions? Just what are you looking for here?

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Why didn't your wife say NO to the Mortgage Broker? Because she wanted the money AT ALL COSTS, regardless that it meant that YOU would be losing your home and life savings.

She went along with the Mortgage Broker's proposals, she went with him to the Solicitors to sign away the roof over your head, Why? she wanted the money AT ALL COSTS, she didn't think about YOU all that YOU had worked for, YOUR feelings. She could have and should have said NO, NO, NO, NO!!!! but she didn't, As have already been said, she is ultimately the one who has committed the fraud against YOU, her own husband, If you can't trust your wife, who can you trust:eek:

How were SPML to know what was going on behind the scenes, they lent the money in good faith, now they want their money back, this does not seems unreasonable to me. Just because the paperwork was fraudulently signed by YOUR wife doesn't take away the fact that the money was given to HER. SHE TOOK THE MONEY BEHIND YOUR BACK AND SPENT IT. If your standing by her, OK, then pay HER DEBTS simple really:mad:

Don't forget - FOR RICHER FOR POORER!!!!!