“Do not lie down but stand up and fight them!"
ERVA is looking for María Tremurici-Falter, Marbella-based collaborator to the Senegal Consulate, agent for Sparekassen Lolland A/S and the “first woman to run a financial company”.
Some Equity Customers wish to talk to her about the qualities of their Equity Release products, as advertised on Sur in English some years back (search Maria on this link), since it appears that the bank wants to now foreclose…
Thick-skinned Yvette Hamilius resilience cannot be explained other than by assuming she has been paid a truckload of money, or blackmailed in some sordid manner, to endure the barrage of persistent attacks from hundreds who feel, and quite rightly may we add, totally conned by the company that she represents.
There is no need to transcribe the article that appeared on the Luxembourgeois online newpaper www.wort.lu but we will add that, if lawyers acting for Ms. Anne Vershchaffel succeed in having foreclosure proceedings, brought by Jyske Bank, declared null and void due to using an unregulated valuation company from Girbraltar on a Spanish property, the 200 or so “customers” of Mrs. Hamilius will be able to sleep a bit better.
Because the concomitant effect of attaining this ruling is not only that Landsbanki will be barred from bringing foreclosure proceedings in Spain as they too used one of such unregulated businesses but also, that the mortgage loans would be automatically void by application of article 6.3 of the Spanish Civil Code:
Legal agreements that contravene obligatory or prohibitive laws are null and void, unless applicable laws envisage a different legal outcome.
If Inheritance Tax savings was not enough enticement -or more accurately, as Steve Dewsnip tells us, it would save your home from the predatory Spanish Taxman– , the perfomance of the deal was presented as being so good that you would end up having that extra generous income by putting “your bricks to work for you” (Allan Graydon).
The attached is a brutally misleading illustration that, additionally, omits any reference to adverse market movements.
But the banks rationale was different: why would you want to put your customers off buying into the product if it was working for the bank? At the end of the day, if it all went tits up banks would argue that the customers could and should have “gone elsewhere to get accurate advice” (Nordea Bank Ipse dixit).
Rumour has it that for someone somewhere in the mountains of South Cordoba…it did actually work for a few months. The ERVA investigations teams are keen to meet this endangered specie…
(the attached was given to a Rothschild customer).
Lawyers acting for a Jyske customer have filed a petition against Jyske Bank to declare foreclosure proceedings null and void,on grounds that the valuation was carried out by an unlicensed valuation company, Gibsons Chartered Surveyors.
And whilst the company’s legality was not put under question, their ability to legally provide valid valuations for mortgage loan purposes in Spain was and therefore, acting lawyers have requested, initially, that foreclure proceedings are halted and annulled and will, at a second stage, apply for the mortgage loan contract to be set aside.
Lawyers acting for the bank have contested the petition by claiming rather confusingly that Jyske Bank A/S London Branch is not Jyske Bank A/S Denmark nor Jyske Bank Gibraltar, and that as a result, they do not come under Spanish laws. This has proven to be a lie.
Also, they have not however contested the fact that only companies authorized by the Bank of Spain can provide valid valuations and insist that, as the loan was “granted” in London, Uk laws apply to the loan.
The repercussions of this could be enourmous for Gibson Chartered Surveyors have worked for Barclays Bank Plc, Newcastle Building Society, Norwich and Peterborough Building Society, Credit Suisse (Gibraltar) Ltd, and ABM Amro Bank when giving out, presumably, hundreds of mortgage loans in Spain.
Such a worrying discrepancy could not go unanswered and consequently, Erva lawyers have now written to top-firm Uría & Menéndez for an explanation. It does not take a great capacity of comprehension to understand that the “offending” paragraph would have met great resistance from the instigators of Rothschild’s CredictSelect Loan Facility, a fundamentally flawed, predatory and deceitful product.
As Rothschild put it, an asset backed loan that is unlike a conventional mortgage (sic).
Bill Blevins, the man that has lent his name to the company Blevins Franks, can be said to be one of the few that, when it comes to Equity Release, did the right things.
By partnering with Seniors Money Lifetime Loans, his company offered a serious, comprehensible and a more or less transparent service to equity rich expats, yet in need of cash, living in Spain. Or, at the very least, we could not find a search-engine enquiry result similar to the barrage of negative comments in respect to the truly fraudulent schemes this site is all about.
But doing things right did have its drawdowns: local land registries kept turning down the registration of many clauses of these mortgage loans because they did not adapt to mortgage laws. Seniors Money Spain Finance Ltd., not content with the antics of overzealous registrars within their jurisdictional fiefdoms, chose to appeal every single of the registrars rejections to register the “reverse loans” (at least 10 that we know of) to the Directorate General of the Land Registries and Notaries (DGRN), who partially accepted the claims (the decisions are mostly copy-pasted).
The Registrars, who had previously mocked the work of lazy Notary Publics by questioning their legal capacity, went to new heights by challenging the decision of the DGRN (their bosses), in Court, because the top brass of these privileged casts had issued their legally binding opinions…a wee bit late! And won!!
Such a mess could have easily been prevented by doing what other banks did so well: just cheat. Rothschild, Nordea, Jyske and a few others went down a straight line and signed straightforward mortgage loans to expats who thought they were being sold a reverse mortgage.
As Steve Dewsnhip put it: it is a mortgage loan that is not really a mortgage loan, so don’t you worry.
The below statement has been made by an Hamilton’s ex-employee who has confirmed his willingness to cooperate in a potential Court case against Rothschild.
For legal reasons, his name and other personal circumstances have been removed.
It’s credibility can be proven by reference to other almost identical statements, promotional literature and other means of proof;there is total consistency in the “modus operandi”, names, premises on which the product was sold, alibis used by the bank to attempt to excuse any liability etc.
In 2002 moved to Spain.
We bought a home in Estepona and took a couple of months to settle in.
I responded to an advert in the SUR in English, for FPC ( Financial Planning Certificate) qualified advisers for Hamiltons based in La Cala de Mijas. I contacted Hamiltons and met with the owner Dean Murphy and the manager Peter Hardy.
The interview went well with the two individuals extolling the virtues of an IHT avoidance scheme funded by Rothschilds and the Premier Investment Company based in the Isle of Man.
The basics were simply a debt in the form of a mortgage with Rothschilds was created to mitigate the amount of any inheritance on death of the property owner. Any beneficiary would inherit the value of the asset less any debts and therefore reduce any IHT demand, which was said to be very onerous in Spain.
The mortgage funds would be placed in an offshore investment fund out of the reach of the Spanish Tax authorities. The fund had an historic performance well in excess of the mortgage charge rate, so technically the investment return paid the mortgage and any surplus growth would be added to the fund or the borrower could draw down any surplus to supplement income.
This was not a new Rothschilds scheme, the product has been in the Rothschilds portfolio for many years, there is mention of this scheme all over the internet dating back years.
I was offered a job and required to attend a training session, which was attended by Steve Dewsnip Director Rothschilds Guernsey and Charles Walton Premier Fund managers IOM.
During this meeting I became aware from statements made that the scheme had been put together by Charles Walton the fund manager with Premier (who subsequently became the fund manager for all the other funds which followed the switch from premier to the many other funds, none of which made the returns quoted to clients)
Charles Walton was a long time friend of Dean Murphy.
Dean had worked in Dubai where he operated an investment company serving ex pats who lived and worked in the tax free environment of Dubai. During this time he had met Charles Walton.
I was informed that the IHT scheme had been put together by Charles Walton and he had approached Rothschilds as a funder along with Surrendalink Mortgages as an alternate funder.
Charles Walton explained the scheme in detail, how the money was relased from the property by way of a mortgage and the funds would then be invested offshore outside the reach of Hacienda.
THE CLIENT HAD NO CHOICE REGARDING THE INVESTMENT FUND. THE FUND WAS VETTED AND APPROVED BY ROTHSCHILDS AND THE LOAN WOULD ONLY BE GRANTED ON THE STRICT UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FUNDS WOULD BE INVESTED WITH THE FUND DICTATED BY ROTHSCHILDS.
We were never given a choice of funds to pass on to clients.
When the fund was changed due to poor performance, we could not sell the new fund until Rothschilds had approved the fund. HOW CAN THEY SUBSEQUENTLY CLAIM THEY DID NOT GIVE INVESTMENT ADVICE……………ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, THEY DICTATED THE FUND FROM THE OUTSET.
My argument has always been that the funds were placed into experienced investor accounts in the Isle of Man, with no regard to the clients knowledge of experienced investor funds.
Steve dewsnip then took over the meeting extolling the history of Rothschilds and the fact that they had survived on reputation and would not do anything to tarnish that reputation of the bank. We would never read the headline “Rothschilds evicts Spanish resident”, it just would not happen.
There were at least 10 people in the training room who heard this statement, in my case I attended 3 meetings with Steve Dewsnip/ Charlie Walton where this statement was made.
I will also state for the record that whilst there was several members of the sales force who were financial services experienced and qualified in the UK, there were other sales people who had no experience in Financial Services experience who were trained in house on this product.
The scheme seemed genuine and was supported by opinions from Ernst & Young in Madrid and Uria & Menendez, Abogados in Madrid.
We were given point of sale material which included these opinions all given to support the scheme.
We were given qualified appointments, met with clients in ther home, instructed them of the IHT liability in the event of death, informed them of the scheme to mitigate IHT, signed them up and handed the paperwork into Hamiltons who sent it off to Rothschilds.
Once approved we were required to meet with the clients and convey them to the lawyers in Malaga, lawyers appointed by Rothschilds, the client was given no choice ( this would not be allowed in the UK) The Notary would attend the lawyers office and Notarize the loan documents.
The clients never saw any money it went from the bank straight into the investment fund.
The issue in every case was the poor performance of the investment fund. With one poor choice being followed by another then another then another, none of which were in the clients control. Every time the fund crashed Hamiltons sought leave of Rothschilds to switch the fund.
In the UK if you move a fund, you are paid a commission, I would think Hamiltons were earning commission time after time, switch after switch.
If the funds had performed we would not now be talking. I have always maintained that the way to the table with Rothschilds is to pursue the Investment advice route.
Barclays Bank were recently fined £30 million and ordered to compensate all investors who took advice on a Barclays nominated fund that had an elevated element of risk, when the client were risk averse.
The clients could only invest where Rothschilds dictated, they nominated the fund, approved the fund, they must be liable for the fund performance and the current situation culminating in repossession.
This is a true statement, let me know if you require any further information
Regards
We welcome any further ex-Hamiltons or Ex-Henry Woods sales reps to come forward with a statement, each of which represents a nail in the coffin for the Equity Release obnoxious products.
Lawyers acting for Rothschilds victims have had to postpone the filing of the claim due to the sudden implementation of a new regulation that makes most litigants, residents or not, to have to pay a fee for filing a claim in Spain.
It is almost certain however that claimants will qualify under “legal aid” provisions, with a view to being exempt from having to pay these extortionate and extremely unpopular measures.
No sooner have the claimants been cleared of having to cough up to have justice served, the writs will be submitted with the Courts.
Claimants against other lenders will also be requested to submit income documentation to their lawyers so as to qualify for the exemption.
The Malaga Mercantil Court accepts a claim brought against Nordea Bank Luxembourg for misleading advertising after having verified, ex officio, that the document complies with procedural rules and regulations on the matter.
Service of process will now follow upon which, the defendant will have 20 days to prove that the rubbish that is still on offer on the Nordea website is entirely correct, accurate and not misleading; Mmmm, tough task for the Madrid high-flying legal-eagle snobs…
Let’s just remember one of many:
We are proud of our NORDIC VALUES, they differentiate from our competitors-
Latest news: the Somali Bankers’ Association has taken exception and they too wish to contest it vigorously.
Documents
And so it was, that, in relation to an Equity Release fraud case in Spain against Danske Bank Luxembourg, the defendant held the following:
We conducted our due diligence according to the internal rules and procedures Danske Bank Luxembourg has in place. As part of this process, the Capital Assurance product, sold on the basis of a tax-planning proposition, was fully cleared by KPMG. We therefore reject the claimant’s action for it is groundless, without merit, and we will defend ourselves vigorously.
Fully cleared by KPMG? What does that really mean in Danske Bank Luxembourg banking jargon?
Mr. Klaus Mønsted Pedersen: have you read the attached document by KPMG Madrid, denying that they ever gave the blessing to the cash-predatory tax-evading Capital Assurance Product, ever authorized your company to use their name and in fact, formally requested you to eliminate from the brochure any reference to the product being approved by KPMG?
