Surrenda-link Sell Your Endowment
Call us on freephone
0800 919 021
Click here to sell your endowment policy

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.