Pepper 2

24TACD2017 The tax determination against Pepper: costing them €129 Million.
Just for fun, well not really, the only person having fun here is us.

When can we expect answers to the question posed? I would remind you that ‘you’ the company may not exclude or hinder the Mortgagor’s right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy by unduly restricting evidence available to the mortgagor or by imposing a burden of proof which, according to law should lie with the Bank.


As the supposed new owner of my facility: I am writing to you to ask you to demonstrate the extent of your entitlement to be the beneficiary of our mortgage?


We are the owners of the property at the address listed above and you are ‘asset services’ my mortgage, it has come to our attention over the last several weeks and there have been many stories documenting the problem that asset servicing companies are foreclosing on homes without proof that they own the loan. We have learned that in many case’s, servicing companies like yours do not even know who owns the loans you service. Employees at several leading institutions have admitted to rubber stamping tens of thousands of foreclosures every month, without even checking to make sure that the company had a legal right to proceed with foreclosure. In some cases, banks allegedly falsified mortgage documents to cover up their mistakes. There have been reports of two institutions trying to foreclose on the same home, banks foreclosing on homeowners who were current on their payments, and even of a bank foreclosing on a home where the homeowner had never taken out a mortgage to begin with. This is not merely a “technical problem”–it is the difference between having a warm bed at night and being out on the street.

As a homeowner and a customer of your company, I am horrified to see that either GE or Pepper has taken some 31 people to court from March 1st 2013 through to March 19th 2013. I had always believed that if we played by the rules, we would be protected, but now we know that companies like yours think the rules don’t apply to them.

To protect ourselves and our family, we need to know who owns our mortgage. Within forty days, we would like to know the name, address, and phone number of the company or investor that owns our mortgage. Furthermore, in light of the recent allegations of foreclosure fraud, we demand to see the original mortgage note proving ownership over our home loan.

If you fail to produce a mortgage note proving that you have a right to collect my mortgage payments, we will be forced to consider all options available to us to ensure that our home is protected.


To the question at hand: can you please enlighten me as to the extent of your entitlement to be the beneficiary of our mortgage, a simple ‘We own the mortgage, the subject matter’ etc, is simple not good enough. When GE Money wrote to us, it was just a letter informing us that they had sold the Mortgage, so what rights did you buy and to what extent is your purchase of the Mortgage. I would like a detailed description please, after all this is a contract between both parties.

Having claimed some rights to our mortgage it would be my understanding that you hold all paperwork and data on us, is that correct?


With reference to your letter dated 15th August, you state that as of the 5th of August you are implementing a new IT system and a different method to calculating the interest. Firstly, what exactly are you changing in the calculations of the interest?

Secondly, what is the interest rate used at the moment and what changes are you making and what effect it will have on our mortgage?

Thirdly, you are an asset servicing company, who gave you the right to change any interest rates?

Finally, can you tell me how you calculate your interest rates?

In closing what gives you the right to unilaterally change our mortgage contract?


We would like to inform you of the following information, for your records: we the below signed, only recognise GE Money, AKA GE Woodchester Home Loans Ltd as the official owners of our mortgage and it is understood that we are still in the Middle of Court proceedings with them. Please revert to the your Affidavits of the 6th of December 2012 and subsequent court dates up to 17th June 2013.

I suppose it would beg the question; can a non-existent entity sue for losses if that entity no longer exists but we can address that later!

We would also draw your attention to the letter we received from (“Pepper”) dated the 5th of October 2012, stating ‘it is just a name change’, however, our agreement, mortgage and deed of assignment is with GE Money, trading as GE Woodchester Loans Ltd, GE Capital Woodchester Finance Ltd Ire, GE Capital Woodchester Home Loans Ltd, AKA GE Money. We do not wish you to sell our contract to a 3rd party.


1. In relation to Securitisation and we are fully aware of the contents of our contract regarding Securitisation but for the purposes of our up and coming court case can you for clarity:

i. What is the name of the document that is used to record the Transaction?

ii. Who draws up / creates this document?

iii. Who is responsible for this document?

2. In relation to tracing an individual Loan:

i. What is the process used to trace an individual loan in order to discover if it has been securitised?

ii. If a person is aware their loan has been securitised what is the process of tracing that loan to discover what Bond it was placed in?

iii. In your accounts the loan balances should be deducted from your balance sheets, can you confirm why these figures are deducted. Is it because the loan has been settled by the consequence of Securitisation or a default insurance policy or any other special purpose vehicle?

3. If a debt is ‘sold on’, albeit at a fraction of it realistic value, is it accurate to say that the Original indebtedness has technically been ‘cleared’?

4. Is it Lawful for a Financial Institution to sell-on a debt without full prior disclosure to the borrower, when the original Mortgagee will not be setting the Interest Rates or Managing the arrears?

5. Did GE Woodchester Home Loans Ltd disclose any personal data to Pepper, without first getting our express consent? under the data protection act.

6. Under the ‘Anti-Money-Laundering laws of Ireland:- did GE Woodchester Home Loans Ltd obtain from Pepper all relevant details about their license and their ability to collect money?

If so, can you forward details of Pepper’s License and what steps GE Woodchester took to ensure the above details were scrutinised.

7. Can you forward us a copy of GE Woodchester’s MARP [A4 version] and likewise Pepper’s/

8. Can you forward us a copy of GE Woodchester’s booklet on MARP, likewise Pepper’s.

9. Can you furnish us with any minutes of your MARP meetings where our loan was the topic of discussion?

10. Is Life Assurance on a Loan / Mortgage mandatory under the CCA?

11. Default Insurance:

i. Did GE Woodchester Home Loans Ltd or GE Money take out a Default Insurance Policy against our Loan / Mortgage or person?

ii. If yes, with whom is this insurance policy held?

12. Is there any Legal regulations applicable to Financial Institutions obliging them to retain a Provision Fund or Deposit Account to clear Default Loans?

If yes, what are these regulations?

13. Do GE Woodchester agree or disagree with the statement “a contract under Irish Law is only a contract when signed by both parties”?

Is there a crime or an injured party?

GE were/are a sub prime lender, that is basically a company that will give you a mortgage when most other will not and for that privilege you will pay a hefty interest rate, over and above the base rate.

So GE entered the Irish mortgage market and its boom period was at the tail end of the Celtic Tiger, basically when most people were in trouble and trying to save a business or save a home.

Why would any company give you a shed load of money knowing that you would probably default within a given time (this is not a slur on GE customers, maybe you were one of the lucky ones and were just guided to GE by your unscrupulous broker).

So GE took a gamble on you, not really: they sold your mortgage on and straight away and made around €10k per €100K, they then did the same with your insurance policy, the one they made you assign to them, the one that protects their interests, all throw that big bad word, securitisation and bondholders.

Effectively GE don’t own your mortgage, having been paid in full, they also took a gamble on you defaulting and would have insured again your defaulting, boom – paid again.

Now GE Woodchester Home Loans has been sold to Pepper, an asset management company and forget the newspaper reports, we have information that they paid €0.16 in the €uro, boom:- paid again.

And Pepper are coming after you for the full 100% of that facility and Ms Hayes keeps telling me that I am the bad boy by not being able to pay my debt, sorry, alleged debt.

So the question was; is there a crime and is there an injured party in this whole sordid affair.

If you have grievances against your mortgage company then you need to be voicing your concerns, don’t wait until they attack you, first up best dressed.Write to them and ask those sticky question, then ask them again; when they don’t answer.

It will stand you in good stead when they try and get you in the courtroom.

Why am I post this page and exposing my fight now, because all GE / Pepper ‘people’ need to start asking these questions ‘on mass’.

Group together and fight them together.