Cartel Client Review: Why were threads deleted.

MSE_Martin · 18 March 2010 at 8:58PM

Elsewhere on the site I have been asked about why Cartel threads were once deleted, in the light of the company now being suspended by the MOJ (see full story at http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...get-them-back?)

As I know some people feel this was the wrong move let me set out why...

We warn against fee-paying claims handlers.

This site has always warned people against using any fee-paying claims handlers whatsoever. These warnings are is all over the main site: in the credit write off guide, all news stories done on it, plus the PPI reclaiming guide and earlier iterations of the bank charges reclaiming step-by-step guide.

I've also said it in my various columns, TV and radio programmes on many occassions.

For us that answers the question "should I use cartel?". Our answer is "never pay any claims handler that charges a fee up front."

2. We focus on telling people how to save money.

MSE resources are focused on telling people how to save money in a proactive way.

To try and resouce trying to tell people everything they shouldn't do is impossible - unlike a programme such as Watchdog we have always concentrated on been macro-preventative rather than micro-curative. In other words, we aren't primarily a 'problem solver'; instead we focus on how to do it right (as best we can)

That's always been the MSE aim - there are far fewer good choices than bad ones.

3. Resources need prioritising.

It is my job (with the team's guidance) to prioritise our resources. While many people feel we are now a 'national institution', we are not a publicly-funded consumer site - this forum is a totally free resource. Taking on any company takes time and resource, especially when it gets legal.

The vast majority of people have bank accounts, so bank charges impacts everyone. Yet with fee-paying claims handlers our view is simply don't use them - therefore prioritising resources to helping people who do is less of a focus.

It's a bit like when people ask us "I know you say never ever ever ever spend on a balance transfer card - well I read that then i did it - it's all gone wrong what do I do?"

Frankly at that point we can't put major resources in to help. We try and provide guidance on how to get it right in the first place - if that guidance goes wrong for some unforseen reason we will try and help - but if people are acting completely counter to the main site stance it gets very difficult to spend too much time on it.

4. We must operate within the law.

When any company threatens to sue, I have no choice but to ensure that those complaints are legally valid. In the case of Cartel, to do that was a massive resource on the site - it would've taken many journalists and a legal team, so I had to choose whether to prioritise that or not.

In the end we looked into it and used the following statement http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=1365571. I suspect that anyone who read this - coupled with all the main site articles which warn people away from fee paying firms - would have been unlikely to go ahead.

In other cases which are more directly related to MSE's core remit we do fight, and behind the scenes have had many legal battles to keep posts up (and protect our users being sued themselves for their comments).

5. Why allow the articles now?

As you may have noted in the last year we have developed the MSE news service. It has a different agenda from the main site and covers money news more than just money saving

MSE Guy is a former Daily Mail jouralist and has a speciality in news - far more than I do - so he's enabled us to bring a new angle to the work the site does.

He's been working on this story for a long time, and has built up an expertise on the subject - he's been interviewed on many programmes about it - which I've been happy to let him do even though it's far from core MSE content.

We were very close to publishing a story when we found out BBC Moneybox was due to do one - we rushed to get it out as soon as we could after that - but were overtaken by events when the MOJ said it was investigating.

6. We are very proud of the forum and how it helps consumers

This forum is quoted as a source by many journalsits now; a recent Guardian editorial 'thanked heavens' for it as one of the few true areas where consumers can work together and take companies on. I am very proud of that and want to do all I can to make it work.

These days we have an in-house lawyer to help with so many legal challenges by companies - every single one is about the forum content, not the main site. Behind the scenes we fight many to protect consumers' ability to state their case - and to protect our users from being sued for defamation themselves.

Yet everything is a balance of resouce - and one big case like this would leave us unable to fight all the others for a good period. And ultimately I have to pick and choose - it's as simple as that .

I am genuinely sorry we can't fight every single case of injustice out there, but I am emailed many 100s times a day (literally) with people urging us to take up one cause or another - we simply can't do them all. There are many other organisations out there who specialise in the type of work needed for this case far more than we do.

I have an editorial staff of 13, yet most have regular work (updating articles, collating deals) and frankly barring Guy, Wendy and myself none of the rest have any experience on the "taking on companies that have gone wrong" side.

We've been in the midst of massive bank charges cases and a range of others which I choose to focus our resources on, that has cost time of the team and I and money - both because the reach more people, and because I believed we could do more good.

Overall I know some people feel we should've done more, I can understand that and am sorry people feel that way. I too wish we could've done more - I wish we had unlimited resources - but we don't. The biggest blocker here is my own time, for something like this I need to know the subject inside out to make a call - I'm the personal bottleneck - and this just isn't one I've ever got to.

If you feel we should've focused more on Cartel I understand it, but even in hindsight I'm afraid I stand by the judgement call we made.

The person who actually blamed this site for so many people losing money on Cartel is grossly unfair to everything we do.

Martin

DarkConvict · 18 March 2010 at 9:07PM

Overall I know some people feel we should've done more - and I can understand that and am sorry people feel that way.

Don't say that, you do what you can with the time and money available.

Your a journalist not a politician, you are doing more than just your job title already

And i think its goes without saying we are all thankful for what you have done. Anyone can make a forum and website but not so many can make a community like MSE.

You had to put the overall community in front of a single business, and as you say its the forum not the site that was the problem, you can control editorial material but forums from 'experience' you can't without moderation as it is individual peoples views not those of MSE.

ooobedoo · 18 March 2010 at 9:59PM

Martin,

I have been on this website for many many years (under a different name-forgot the password and changed isp etc etc) and an important fact to realise is that you are not the government.

MSE , I believe has saved people's sanity,educated both financially & in doing research, counselled, and basically help so many people that I doubt you would understand.

I stupidly used this company, I am gutted that I did but at no point ever would I blame this website....why would I??? I believe that the Ministry of Justice has had a large hand in this. I don't know if this is true but 5000 complaints has been stated. You warned people against this and I just wish I had seen your advice before untaking this. I feel stupid, and very naive.

I think that anybody who does crititise you or the website can let their feet to the talking....you and your who staff should be commended.

dunstonh · 18 March 2010 at 10:15PM

I enjoyed that read Martin, thank you.

As someone who was involved in the early Cartel issues i can understand the approach taken and the reasons behind it. I know my comments were backed up by links to articles on the web as well as opinions. Although of course, it is easy to get drawn in to discussion about areas that perhaps could cause issue. However, there were some posters that appeared to be posting internal emails from Cartel and there was no way to know if these were real or trouble makers making it all up. Some of the language and tone used was quite strong with some posters as well. So, the board admin did have to do something about it.

The only shame is that instead of certain posts being removed that may have caused issues, the whole threads were.

I had another company director PM me directly telling me to remove posts I made on their product with the threat of legal action (I really dont try to make a habit of it!!!). I didn't (as each comment was linked to resources of fact) and since then the FSA has announced it is investigating them for all the reasons that I mentioned.

Perhaps the forums are a little ahead of the game at times

we have always concentrated on been macro preventative rather than micro curative

love that.

milly88 · 18 March 2010 at 11:09PM

I have been helping a lot of peeps on another Claims Management Company on here on this forum and on other sites as well. The company concerned has complained about me helping peeps and has told lots of untruths about me on public forums which is very worrying, but in the best way possible I will continue to warn people about paying upfront fees, about being cold called and being told that they will be able to claim thousands back and after parting with their hard earned cash with very little prospect of receiving the refunds that they sign up and pay for and I will continue to guide them to reclaiming their money back.

Sadly, to my knowledge so far not one person has been successful in receiving any repayments and I believe that the many other Claims Management Companies will eventually go the same way leaving many more consumers up the creek without a paddle.

I firmly blame the MOJ they have been very neglectfull in properly monitoring Cartel as they have received many thousands of complaints. In Cartel's case it appears that there have been 5000+ complainees what took them so long to decide to suspend their authorisation, 2 years is totally unacceptable.

Also from looking at Cartel's annual accounts this evening I was horrified to see that they were trading insolvently and that was upto last September, so how comes that this happen in this day and age with Money Laundering Laws. There were other aspects that I picked up on their accounts which really concerns me and in particular the huge debeture of £1million and the humongus Salaries and very little National Insurance, very weird?

I do hope that there with be some compensation for Cartel customers who have paid money unwittingly and that the MOJ will be made accountable for allowing this to happen.

VIGILANT22 · 18 March 2010 at 11:44PM

Since 2007 I have stood back and waited for Cartel to be suspended/closed down...I remember them from the Cartel Mortgage days and the way they operated then, so I had a fair idea how this would go.

People have been warned and warned about paying fees...however they still do it...You can take the horse to the trough but you can't make it drink....

What upsets me most of all are the number of ifa's & mortgage advisers who put their name to Cartel and "exploited" their own clients....but that's another story.

The Ministry of Justice have a lot to answer for handing out these licences will nilly.....close them all down I say......

Rallydriver · 19 March 2010 at 3:30AM

I find it embarrasing that people in this society think the government should protect everyone from themselves.

Its not the government's responsibilty to stop every scam that might come along.

People have a responsibilty themselves to take care of their own interests and not be misguided by their own greed too.

DarkConvict · 19 March 2010 at 10:50AM

People have a responsibilty themselves to take care of their own interests and not be misguided by their own greed too.

Thats people wanting to take the easy way out, clear £10,000 of debt for ~£800, sure! If its to good to be true it actually is, sadly there are enough gullible or greedy people out there that put their heart before their head.

Then again they do actually try and make in convincing paying on articles on the web twisting the words of what CCAs are, they are unenforceable not written off, its more debt management than anything else and thats freely available anyway,

jamesd · 19 March 2010 at 3:11PM

MSE_Martin wrote: »

These days we have an in-house lawyer to help with so many legal challenges by companies ... Behind the scenes we fight many to protect consumers' ability to state their case - and to protect our users from being sued for defamation themselves.

Thanks!

I know that the practical reality is that even if I have all of my facts perfectly lined up, if I need to present a defamation defense in court I'll already be well on the way to being bankrupt if it's a case from someone who's willing to burn money to hurt me.

A quick topic removal with counters to show how few people read some objectionable comment is a good bit or proactive defending that can help to prevent it going that far.

Your priorities in this area seem fine.

Cartel Client Review: Why were threads deleted.

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free