Credit Issues Limited

gomer

2) I would be surprised if the average Joe knew what he she was meant to look for (considering there can be so many versions of this) and what to do when the bank comes back and challenges what he/she has found.

.....And that's exactly what your 'Industry' relies on - people not having the savvy to know how easily they can do it for themselves. Take that away from the equasion & what have you got? Or should that be how many clients have you got left?

I know full well how the industry operates because i have more than enough experience in the field, you need to remember that i'm not the average 'joe' & i don't get sucked in by inflated claims or cheap brainwashing tactics because i KNOW how easy it is to do it yourself.

Hope that helps.

sombrero

Druss

If I was in this business and confident of saving clients money I would operate the company on a true no win no fee basis subject to an application fee (non recoverable of £10.00).

druss

Sombrero if only it was that simple, the solicitors still want to be paid upfront to represent client so we'll take a medium size firm at 1000 cases per month.

Staff costs minimum 20 people

36,000 staff costs
5,000 overheads

1000 x say £250 for solicitors = £250,000


Total costs per month = £291,000

Where in the current economical climate do you lay your hands on almost £300,000 per month for probably at least 6- 8 months before claims started to be won? The banks?

Excuse me can I borrow money so I can sue you.


Cloud cuckoo land.

We would all love not to charge upfront fees but its not realistic without some ones deep pockets.

Even the guy who is not charging fees is cherry picking, loans only, no credit cards, must have payment protection of 2k or more.

This rules out 95% of my customers claims, do they not have the right to be represented by someone.

One of the firms I know charge £395 up front and give a full refund if they are unsuccessful at any point, that is how confident they are, but they simply cant fund a fee free service.

Due to demand solicitors have allready started to put their prices up!

Dont forget they are competing with firms who charge more upfront , offer little or no refund and take 30% of any amount written off who can afford to pay solicitors more money.


PS IF ANYONE HAS VERY DEEP POCKETS AND INTERESTED IN SETTING THIS UP SEND ME A PM ILL BE THERE LIKE A SHOT

greystonesben

At last, thank you Druss for pointing out what people like Sombrero, Gomer and Brock fail to understand... that not everyone is the same!

Yes you guys would be more than happy to do it yourself, or even tell and push others to do it themselves, but not everyone is like you! The world is a wonderful place because people are not the same.

So there will be people willing to do it themselves, people that will do it themselves after being told to, people who wont do it, people who will want a company to do it fot them and so on...

I know there might be cheaper firms out there Druss but just looking at one of the firms you mentioned, it looks like they rely on the case going to court in order for the solicitors to be paid? What happens if the lender wants to settle out of court? I may have misunderstood it though? The benefit of CI is that where the sols part own the company, they do not have to rely on taking the lenders to court and infact are looking to settle out of court in the majority of cases, as it is a lot quicker.

I guess it's down to personal choice. If I knew a company didnt have to go to court then I would chose them over a company which does. Purely because if Im paying £250 p/m on a personal loan each month and taking it to court is going to add an additional 4-5 months to the competion time, then thats an extra 4-5 months of £250 p/m loan repayments which I wouldnt of had to pay if an out of court settlement could have been reached.

When you mentioned there is a user on the forum able to do it without upfront fee's but is very picky, that wouldnt happen to be Petermb would it?

Brock wrote:

That appears to be the typical rate charged by firms operating in this industry. If CI doesn't charge that amount then I apologise, although I assume that they will get their pound of flesh somehow.

And here lies the problem, I have highlighted the key element. You are having a go at something which you havent got all the facts for. As while 30% of say £20k is a lot of money to pay, credit issues only charge a flat £1000 completion fee. Irrelevant of how many agreements you have or the value of them. Or even how much time was spent on the case!

I think a lot of your guys fail to understand the attitude of half of the country nowadays. They want things done for them. We are living in a soceity where 'Service' is the key. Most people prefer to buy newer kitted out, ready-to-live-in houses as they cant be bothered to do it themselves, or have no time. How is this any different?

Assuming things about a company isnt the best way to go about making your point.

petermb_2

druss wrote: »

Sombrero if only it was that simple, the solicitors still want to be paid upfront to represent client so we'll take a medium size firm at 1000 cases per month.

Staff costs minimum 20 people

36,000 staff costs
5,000 overheads

1000 x say £250 for solicitors = £250,000


Total costs per month = £291,000

Where in the current economical climate do you lay your hands on almost £300,000 per month for probably at least 6- 8 months before claims started to be won? The banks?

Excuse me can I borrow money so I can sue you.


Cloud cuckoo land.

We would all love not to charge upfront fees but its not realistic without some ones deep pockets.

Even the guy who is not charging fees is cherry picking, loans only, no credit cards, must have payment protection of 2k or more.

This rules out 95% of my customers claims, do they not have the right to be represented by someone.

One of the firms I know charge £395 up front and give a full refund if they are unsuccessful at any point, that is how confident they are, but they simply cant fund a fee free service.

Due to demand solicitors have allready started to put their prices up!

Dont forget they are competing with firms who charge more upfront , offer little or no refund and take 30% of any amount written off who can afford to pay solicitors more money.


PS IF ANYONE HAS VERY DEEP POCKETS AND INTERESTED IN SETTING THIS UP SEND ME A PM ILL BE THERE LIKE A SHOT

Just to make sure people are under no illusion.
I am not cherry picking cases at all.

I have found the man with deep pockets and put a scheme together that is totally free for the public to use.

The problem is that to run on Conditional Fee Agreement the claim must be in excess of £5000. To ensure the cases are in excess of £5000 we need at least £2500 of PPI . I would love to take cases less than that but it is not possible.

Having said that we are not simply running cases regarding PPI. We are looking at all issues including Unenforceability and Non-disclosure.

druss

greystonesben wrote: »

At last, thank you Druss for pointing out what people like Sombrero, Gomer and Brock fail to understand... that not everyone is the same!

Yes you guys would be more than happy to do it yourself, or even tell and push others to do it themselves, but not everyone is like you! The world is a wonderful place because people are not the same.

So there will be people willing to do it themselves, people that will do it themselves after being told to, people who wont do it, people who will want a company to do it fot them and so on...

I know there might be cheaper firms out there Druss but just looking at one of the firms you mentioned, it looks like they rely on the case going to court in order for the solicitors to be paid? What happens if the lender wants to settle out of court? I may have misunderstood it though? The benefit of CI is that where the sols part own the company, they do not have to rely on taking the lenders to court and infact are looking to settle out of court in the majority of cases, as it is a lot quicker.

I guess it's down to personal choice. If I knew a company didnt have to go to court then I would chose them over a company which does. Purely because if Im paying £250 p/m on a personal loan each month and taking it to court is going to add an additional 4-5 months to the competion time, then thats an extra 4-5 months of £250 p/m loan repayments which I wouldnt of had to pay if an out of court settlement could have been reached.

When you mentioned there is a user on the forum able to do it without upfront fee's but is very picky, that wouldnt happen to be Petermb would it?



And here lies the problem, I have highlighted the key element. You are having a go at something which you havent got all the facts for. As while 30% of say £20k is a lot of money to pay, credit issues only charge a flat £1000 completion fee. Irrelevant of how many agreements you have or the value of them. Or even how much time was spent on the case!

I think a lot of your guys fail to understand the attitude of half of the country nowadays. They want things done for them. We are living in a soceity where 'Service' is the key. Most people prefer to buy newer kitted out, ready-to-live-in houses as they cant be bothered to do it themselves, or have no time. How is this any different?

Assuming things about a company isnt the best way to go about making your point.

It's still a lot to pay when there are cheaper companies out there providing in my opinion a better service.

I find it laughable how you point out that not taking cases to court is a good thing surely this is why the customers pay the money over?

THEY WANT THEIR BALANCES WRITTEN OFF!

You seem to claim a success and charge the customer £1000 even when the lender has not written the debt off!

Yes all companies could stop at this point and the customers have a letter saying the agreement is unenforceable, but the debt remains showing as outstanding on your credit file which will affect getting future credit.

But wouldnt you want a firm to then go the extra mile and get the debt written off as well?

I know I would.

druss

petermb wrote: »

Just to make sure people are under no illusion.
I am not cherry picking cases at all.

I have found the man with deep pockets and put a scheme together that is totally free for the public to use.

The problem is that to run on Conditional Fee Agreement the claim must be in excess of £5000. To ensure the cases are in excess of £5000 we need at least £2500 of PPI . I would love to take cases less than that but it is not possible.

Having said that we are not simply running cases regarding PPI. We are looking at all issues including Unenforceability and Non-disclosure.

Hi Peter

Wasn't having a jab, honest.

From our conversation will willingly pass clients over as I think your endeavour is brilliant, it just simply wont suit everyone so am thinking of the broader picture as well.

Natalie6999

I thought this site was free from advertising - either through self promotion or through getting third parties to promote these businesses.

sombrero

http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/newsrelease170209a.htm

This is a very good link from the Ministry of Justice Website about misleading statements.

Once a company confirms NO WIN - NO FEE to a client there is the clear assumption that in the event that the company is unable to deliver savings then no fee shall be charged.

This is the reason why the Ministry of Justice and Martin Lewis say do not pay money upfront.

Question - if a case goes to court how does this company ensure that the client does not have to pay costs to the other side if the case is lost?

The reason I ask is that often we are talking about sums of money in excess of £20,000. If a client sued a credit card company and lost the client would be liable for substanial costs. Costs could be several thousand pounds.

petermb_2

After The Event Insurance protects the client, and solicitor from adverse costs should a case lose. In most cases the premium for this is either deferred by the insurance company or covered by funding.