0800 919 021
Surrenda Link Mortgage Holdings, sister company of the above noted, had the best advisors money could buy: PINSENT MASONS.
According to a press release, 40 million Euros were granted to primarily non-resident Spanish property owners.
According to the ‘Governor’ of this transaction, it was a very challenging task that they nonetheless successfully fullfiled.
This is that Rupinder Sehmi, from Via Capital Limited, said:
‘Via Capital has the objective of providing our clients with focused capital and funding solutions that concurrently meet capital market investor requirements. Our role as advisor to the innovative mortgage originator, Surrenda-link Mortgage Holdings Limited, proved Via Capital’s strength in matching originator and investor objectives, whilst demonstrating our ability to structure and execute complex cross boarder real-estate transactions.’
Rupinder however was not aware of what really lied behind it all: misselling, lying, cheating, tax evasion on a grand scale, anguish, anxiety, stress…
Below are some questions Rupinder should be asked:
Did you notice that neither Surrenda Link or Premier Balanced Fund Ltd. were allowed to operate in Spain?
How complex was it to find a witless lawyer in Bilbao that would sign off millions of euros worth of mortgages on the pretext that it would promote legitimate, lawful ‘tax avoidance’?
What do you really meant by “complex boarder real-estate transactions”?
Are you aware that, by application of the Spanish Civil Code, your clients could end up losing the full 40 million Euros?
Article 1,306. If the deed which constitutes the unlawful cause should not constitute a crime or misdemeanour, the following rules shall be observed:
- Where both contracting parties are at fault, none of them may recover what he has given pursuant to the contract, or claim the performance of what the other should have offered.
- Where only one contracting party is at fault, he may not recover what he has given pursuant to the contract, or demand the performance of what he should have been offered. The other, who was a stranger to the unlawful cause, may claim what he has given, without the obligation to perform what he should have offered.
What we cannot understand in Erva are the following:- if any of our members have any thoughts then share them with everyone.
1. Before embarking on what we now know to be, fraudulent tax evasion, tantamount to predatory lending as it has been termed in the USA. Would it not have been a simple matter to go on line to the CNMV and enter the details of the company wishing to sell these products, as we have done, to ascertain if the company was registered with the Spanish Authorities.
2. Perhaps IFAonline,co,uk (Professional Adviser) states “Premier offers Spanish IHT mitigation scheme” As a so called professional adviser, should they not have checked the authenticity of their advert and ask the Spanish Tax Ministry, the rules appertaining to taking out a loan on a mortgage free property and would this be allowed for lawful tax mitigation. Erva did just this via their lawyer Antonio Flores of Lawbird Legal Services, Marbella. Within three weeks we were supplied with a Binding Consulta stating that this would be classed as tax fraud. As a matter of interest this is not a new tax law but was passed by the Spanish Parliament in 2003, two years before this article and others were published and two years before these tax evading schemes were sold in Spain.
3. Perhaps it would have been better if Rupinder Sehmi of Capital Ltd., could have put his comments in a format that could be understood by normal retired ex pat pensioners, What is written here is “gobble de gook” He was correct in one sense, the cross border (as he calls it) complex real estate transactions (not sure what he means, neither does he, we suspect) are exactly that. Perhaps he should have done his homework before putting pen to paper.
All the people mentioned above are so called professionals with both legal and tax representatives and resources to have thoroughly investigated if these schemes were legal, for the purposes mentioned in their reports before embarking on their pillaging of the pensioners who did not understand the complexity, as Rupinder Sehmi of Capital Ltd. states. Then again perhaps they did and ignored all the warning signs in an effort to feather their nest with some nice commissions. We are surprised that such well know institutions such as Rothschild and Surrender Linked Mortgages could be so un-professional.
Had these schemes been sold in England (they weren’t as they had been outlawed) the Fraud Squad and FSA would have jumped on them from a great height.
Having read the last to posts, I feel sick to my stomach at the mayhem caused, not only with Surrender Linked Mortgages but with all the banks who came to Spain with their fraudulent schemes. Whilst I am not involved in this particular institution, I was conned by another bank I do know that my lawyer Antonio Flores is working every minute to unravel these schemes on behalf of his clients. He tells me that he is working 7 days a week to gather all the evidence to bring SLM and other banks to the courts. We could not possibly have a better lawyer to champion our cause. Thanks Antonio, you have given me hope where a couple of years ago I had none. I only hope I live long enough to see the end of this nightmare.
Just to add to the comment above. Do I understand correctly that if a contract is entered into for the purpose of unlawfully avoiding (evading) taxes, for example IHT then the contract is “null & void”. In this respect, providing I was coerced and did not know the implications, tax wise of the tax situation, could we get the contracts voided. If so would I have my property back and any draw down I had could not be recovered by the bank. However I would be able to sue the bank for any monies that I had put into the fund such as interest paid on the mortgage and loss of interest promised on the investments. Can any one help. I seem to remember reading something on the site some time ago referring to this subject.
Karen. We understand from our lawyers that there have been a number of rulings in the provincial courts that state. Where a contract has been entered into for the purpose of evading taxes that the contract is “null & void”. The Supreme Court have also ruled that in effect there is no contract as it is not possible under Spanish Law to enter into a contract, then the entity responsible for such contract cannot claim damages from the recipient. However, the person who entered into the contract, if doing so unknowingly, can claim damages that have been caused by the contract. Lawbird Legal Services have lodged a number of writs with various courts asking for the contracts to be “null & void” as a result of this case law. We are still awaiting the outcome of the court. If successful, then it gives you the opportunity for your lawyer to do the same. It will be necessary for you to prove that the bank/institution/IFA sold the scheme for the purpose of evading such taxes. for example Inheritance Tax, which to our knowledge most, if not all these institutions have done so. As you know, we now have from the Spanish Ministry of Taxes the Binding Consulta stating that to take out a loan, on a mortgage free home is against the law if it was entered into for the purpose of evading both Wealth & IHT, constitutes tax fraud. As this is a Binding Consulta, passed by the Spanish Parliament there is no right of appeal and the courts must uphold this. Our lawyer Antonio Flores, has in most cases he is dealing with has the evidence to submit. We must add that this is our interpretation of the law and suggest to our members who are not clients of Lawbird Legal Services to get in touch with their relevant legal representative, for their opinion. We wish you success with your case.