alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Jun 19, 2021 12:40:40 GMT
This seems like a another real mess that AC have created. Either AC knew what they were doing and knowingly entered into a loan that subsequently turned out to be unauthorised as outside their regulatory permission or AC management did not not know what they were doing. You are missing the third possibility, which is actually the correct one. Perhaps consider how AC might have entered into an unauthorised loan even knowing what they were doing. Consider that the court still allowed the contract to be enforced. Even more concerning then. I would much rather the company that I have entrusted by money to would simply take good care of it and get the basics right as opposed to acting like cowboys and entering into unauthorised transactions which then go to court to be argued over. As usual the beneficiaries of such actions are AC themselves with the lenders left to pick up the pieces if the transaction fails. Not really the kind of actions I would hope to see from the custodians of my money and if this was a deliberate action as opposed to sheer incompetence then it makes me wonder what other boundaries they are pushing or authorities they are exceeding in their bid to keep afloat.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981 
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Jun 19, 2021 13:27:30 GMT
This seems like a another real mess that AC have created. Either AC knew what they were doing and knowingly entered into a loan that subsequently turned out to be unauthorised as outside their regulatory permission or AC management did not not know what they were doing. You are missing the third possibility, which is actually the correct one. Perhaps consider how AC might have entered into an unauthorised loan even knowing what they were doing. Consider that the court still allowed the contract to be enforced. Not sure I understand this, AC either did know what they were doing or they did not, only 2 possibilities or perhaps a third is that they did not have a clue.
Are you saying you believe AC entered into an unauthorised loan knowing what they were doing but got lucky as the court decided to allow enforcement or that AC knew it would be enforced by the courts even though it is unauthorised.
Although AC got lucky in the courts this is not the sort of actions you expect from a professional financial organisation. The FCA may well take a dim view of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by phlitb on Jun 19, 2021 13:36:36 GMT
I trust there is a silent majority here that do actually understand the point ilmoro is making concerning this case |
|
dave4
Member of DD Central
Cynical is a hobby not a lifestyle
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 616
|
Post by dave4 on Jun 19, 2021 13:45:57 GMT
I trust there is a silent majority here that do actually understand the point ilmoro is making concerning this case Ssssshhhoooshhhhh
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Jun 19, 2021 14:34:56 GMT
With regards the hearing yesterday: Started 10.30, ended 16.18. The debtors were challenging Assetz's standing to bring the application. Heavy references made to the Lendy London Loan and the Unbolted litigation. The court reserved judgment until 'the week after next' (ie w/c 28/6)
Since the contemporaneous reporting of the hearing above I have been able to obtain the judgment referred to. There's certainly a lot of detail to this case. Effectively the borrowers lived in a property that had been represented to Assetz as having been occupied by a third party. In truth the borrowers lived in the property which meant the mortgage should have been regulated. It wasn't.
The borrowers purported home address of "Rook" was in fact occupied by the mortgage broker "DE". It was said yesterday that Rook had equity of some £400k which could be available to disburse to Assetz. DE was said to have stopped paying the mortgage some 15 months ago and had fraudulently registered a charge or restriction over the property. For completeness the comments made in the judgment are as follows:
|
|
|
|
Post by honeybadger on Jun 20, 2021 8:27:46 GMT
So in this instance I'm gleaning assetz did not know. As opposed to knowing yet still doing it anyway, as per the potential third option above.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Jun 20, 2021 9:17:21 GMT
So in this instance I'm gleaning assetz did not know. As opposed to knowing yet still doing it anyway, as per the potential third option above. Indeed, para 15 above explains the judges findings. At para 6 the judge did say though:
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Jun 20, 2021 10:51:50 GMT
So after all the daft speculation about Assetz knowingly entering into an unauthorised loan for some "clever" reason it turns out that the real reason is the simplest and blindingly obvious one - the management did not know what they were doing.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Jun 29, 2021 18:20:26 GMT
In The County Court at Clerkenwell and Shoreditch District Judge Swan - Courtroom 3 - 3rd floor Wednesday 30 June 2021
Assetz Capital Trust Company Limited -v- Kenwa**/Kenwa** - 5 mins - Review
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Jul 28, 2021 9:36:48 GMT
Wrt to the Epping loans and the hearing mentioned within the quoted post I understand the borrower was made bankrupt on 07 July 2021.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Aug 25, 2021 22:07:31 GMT
In The County Court and The Family Court at Barrow in Furness tomorrow: Assetz -v- Mart** 2. 5 hrs Disposal &/or Directions
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Sept 24, 2021 19:48:07 GMT
With regards the hearing yesterday: Started 10.30, ended 16.18. The debtors were challenging Assetz's standing to bring the application. Heavy references made to the Lendy London Loan and the Unbolted litigation. The court reserved judgment until 'the week after next' (ie w/c 28/6)
A write up of the case “P2P Lender Assetz ‘innocent victim’ in Fraud as borrowers declared bankrupt” will be published on Sunday.
The reason for the delay can be aptly summed up by the court:
Due to an over-sight of a court clerk, the matter had not been listed on CE file (the court’s electronic filing system) nor added to the daily list and the listing officer was not notified of the hand down date or that the Deputy Judge had agreed to sit. Unfortunately, this meant there was no record of this case having been heard on 7 July when the oral hand down took place. This matter should have been listed and published on gov.uk but due to this over-sight this was not done. This has highlighted a serious training issue which will be addressed as a priority to ensure it does not happen again.
It was not a deliberate act for this case not to be published.
I spoke to Deputy ICC Judge Greenwood on 14th September who has advised me that he can provide a full written copy of the judgment on or by 21st September 2021. As soon as this is ready I will send you a PDF copy by e-mail to you. This will include all the information that was handed down in court should you have been able to attend.
I would like to apologise that the high standards you should have expected were not met on this occasion.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 6,765
|
Post by Mousey on Sept 26, 2021 21:25:17 GMT
Deputy ICC Judge Paul Greenwood granted a bankruptcy petition against two borrowers who obtained a £1.89m crowd-funded loan from P2P firm Assetz Capital. The borrowers were said to have been “knowing parties to a mortgage fraud exercised on the Assetz companies, which were innocent victims of that wrong“. An application for disclosure of the lenders details was dismissed as “no more than a fishing expedition“
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Sept 26, 2021 22:51:51 GMT
Deputy ICC Judge Paul Greenwood granted a bankruptcy petition against two borrowers who obtained a £1.89m crowd-funded loan from P2P firm Assetz Capital. The borrowers were said to have been “knowing parties to a mortgage fraud exercised on the Assetz companies, which were innocent victims of that wrong“. An application for disclosure of the lenders details was dismissed as “no more than a fishing expedition“ Hard to see how Assetz companies are innocent victims, they will have made commission on these loans, the innocent victims are AC's lenders.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,524
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 27, 2021 10:01:44 GMT
Deputy ICC Judge Paul Greenwood granted a bankruptcy petition against two borrowers who obtained a £1.89m crowd-funded loan from P2P firm Assetz Capital. The borrowers were said to have been “knowing parties to a mortgage fraud exercised on the Assetz companies, which were innocent victims of that wrong“. An application for disclosure of the lenders details was dismissed as “no more than a fishing expedition“ Hard to see how Assetz companies are innocent victims, they will have made commission on these loans, the innocent victims are AC's lenders. Unfortunately a seemingly ill-informed comment.
|
|
