has anyone had dealings with Kerobo Claims Ltd

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

Its interesting to read some of the warnings on that page.

Such as the one that when cold calling, the claims company should not take payment from the potential client until they have issued a range of information in writing first and allowed a reasonable time to read it.

Or that cold calling where legal action may be required is not allowed. So, all those telephone calls about unenforceable credit must be in breach of the MoJ rules as they will nearly always require legal action.

Just done a thread on this one Dunstonh.

gozkids

Thanks to Common Sense 2 and marshallka for the links.

marshallka

Don't know if this will be of any relevence to your complaints (on any of these upfront claims companies!!) but got it from the MOJ website

Scam Warnings
The Claims Management Regulator is aware of scams which have conned a number of consumers into sending money overseas via a money transfer at their Post Office.
In 2009 the Ministry of Justice issued news releases (listed in the Archive) warning of such a scam which involves consumers being telephoned by people who claim they are from the Ministry of Justice or the Office of Fair Trading.
The consumer is typically told that there is a sum of money ready to be paid to them following a successful claim, but that they must first pay a fee. The fee must be sent overseas via a money transfer at their nearest Post Office. A similar scam is being carried out in the name of authorised claims management businesses.

• The Ministry of Justice and the Office of Fair Trading would never contact consumers asking them for bank or personal details

• The Ministry of Justice and the Office of Fair Trading would never ask consumers to make a payment to them overseas by money transfer

• The Claims Management Regulator is not aware of any authorised claims management business that takes fees by requesting money transfers to go overseas.

If you are asked to make such payments, do not give any of your personal details to the caller, and do not send any money.
If you believe you have been a victim of this scam you should report the matter to Action Fraud on 0300 123 2040 or via their website at www.actionfraud.org.uk. To go direct to the reporting form click here.



Also a good factsheet here
https://www.claimsregulation.gov.uk/userfiles/file/Summer%20Bulletin%20August%202010%20web%20version.pdf

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

Its interesting to read some of the warnings on that page.

Such as the one that when cold calling, the claims company should not take payment from the potential client until they have issued a range of information in writing first and allowed a reasonable time to read it.

Or that cold calling where legal action may be required is not allowed. So, all those telephone calls about unenforceable credit must be in breach of the MoJ rules as they will nearly always require legal action.

I have just had a call from a company called lifestyle claims and when I mentioned cold calling they said they were allowed to do this. I then asked to be put through to their manager.

When I was put through I was told that they were allowed to cold call clients so long as they did not refer cases to solicitors and they said they actually referred their cases to other claims management companies (one being Legal Redress!!). Now on their website it does state



Will I have to go to court?

.........In very limited circumstances it may be necessary for you to attend court.

AND

.............Who is Lifestyle Claims ?

..............Lifestyle Claims is a specialist Claims Management
Company that concentrates on reclaiming compensation for mis-sold financial policies. Our professional team will manage the entire claim process, including any appeals to the Ombudsman and if required any court proceedings. Lifestyle Claims has access to legal advice through a panel of lawyers so we can give you the best chance of winning you claim.


How would this be interpreted and how can they say they do not refer to solicitors or am I reading this wrong?

On MOJ warning in August 2010 it said

Cold calling consumers by telephone
We are aware that some businesses have been cold calling consumers and then referring their claims either directly to a solicitor on indirectly (through other claims management businesses) to a solicitor. Neither is permitted. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) have made it clear that their rules on referral arrangements means that solicitors must not have a financial arrangement with an introducer in respect of claims which has been obtained (either by that introducer or through an intermediary) by way of unsolicited face-to-face or telephone “cold calling”. This means that an introducer must not cold call any potential client if a claim might require legal action and therefore be referred to a solicitor or a solicitor is likely to be asked to review a claim. This does not only apply to personal injury claims, but to any other claims that are referred to solicitors, including claims about enforceability of consumer credit agreements.

Now I am confused? Does the above mean that this company DOES pass over to solicitors maybe?



I also asked where they had my data from and they said it was from a marketing company called "pure marketing"

milly88

Hi Marshallka

This company is yet another spin off from Client Connection Ltd with one of their companies as Cento Client Review and Money Claiming Experts people (nice sounding name to this site?) they have a great sales pitch, but rarely do peeps get paid out. Now funny when I was researching this name Life style claims I found a product with Barclays Bank called this coincidence or what?

According to the MOJ they are not allowed as set out in the rules of their authorisation, cold call you and neither are they allowed to take upfront fees which they do on a regular basis.

There are such good forums arround with a wealth of information that any claims that they make can all be done without paying out any money and especially to someone who calls you out of the blue and who you don't know and give your credit card details too without seeing their terms and conditions or know any background into this company.

The questions that I ask is:

Why do they keep changing their name?

Why do they continually cold call peeps when they are not allowed to and get away with it with the MOJ?

Why do they continually get away with taking upfront fees when they are clearly breaking the rules of holding a licence with the MOJ?

Why are the MOJ powerless in dealing with the flouting of these rules?

marshallka wrote: »

I have just had a call from a company called lifestyle claims and when I mentioned cold calling they said they were allowed to do this. I then asked to be put through to their manager.

When I was put through I was told that they were allowed to cold call clients so long as they did not refer cases to solicitors and they said they actually referred their cases to other claims management companies (one being Legal Redress!!). Now on their website it does state



Will I have to go to court?

.........In very limited circumstances it may be necessary for you to attend court.

AND

.............Who is Lifestyle Claims ?

..............Lifestyle Claims is a specialist Claims Management
Company that concentrates on reclaiming compensation for mis-sold financial policies. Our professional team will manage the entire claim process, including any appeals to the Ombudsman and if required any court proceedings. Lifestyle Claims has access to legal advice through a panel of lawyers so we can give you the best chance of winning you claim.


How would this be interpreted and how can they say they do not refer to solicitors or am I reading this wrong?

On MOJ warning in August 2010 it said

Cold calling consumers by telephone
We are aware that some businesses have been cold calling consumers and then referring their claims either directly to a solicitor on indirectly (through other claims management businesses) to a solicitor. Neither is permitted. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) have made it clear that their rules on referral arrangements means that solicitors must not have a financial arrangement with an introducer in respect of claims which has been obtained (either by that introducer or through an intermediary) by way of unsolicited face-to-face or telephone “cold calling”. This means that an introducer must not cold call any potential client if a claim might require legal action and therefore be referred to a solicitor or a solicitor is likely to be asked to review a claim. This does not only apply to personal injury claims, but to any other claims that are referred to solicitors, including claims about enforceability of consumer credit agreements.

Now I am confused? Does the above mean that this company DOES pass over to solicitors maybe?



I also asked where they had my data from and they said it was from a marketing company called "pure marketing"

marshallka

Hi Milly88, I agree about the MOJ and rule breaking and being allowed to get away with this. What I was saying is that the above "warning" from MOJ to claims management companies is a little vague to me (and I think LIfestyle claims also!!!) as they said they "are" allowed to cold call providing that they were not passing over to solicitors. (which in their own terms and conditions DOES look they sometimes do!!!). I think that MOJ needs to re-write this if cold calling is not allowed at all. Lifestyle Claims "told" me they were allowed to do this as they are "introducers" who pass claims to other CMC's (one being Legal Redress). How do you read the above warning???

milly88

Hi Marshalka
They are actually a CMC and they are authorised by the MOJ in their own right.

In earlier posts you would see that they would tell prospective punters that they use solicitors called Forbes Douglas, after researching this I found that Forbes Douglas were just another Claims Management Company and they did not even employ any solicitors. I also have that in writing from the MD of Forbes Douglas.

It seems to me that they bend just about every rule going and get away with it.

Milly88

marshallka wrote: »

Hi Milly88, I agree about the MOJ and rule breaking and being allowed to get away with this. What I was saying is that the above "warning" from MOJ to claims management companies is a little vague to me (and I think LIfestyle claims also!!!) as they said they "are" allowed to cold call providing that they were not passing over to solicitors. (which in their own terms and conditions DOES look they sometimes do!!!). I think that MOJ needs to re-write this if cold calling is not allowed at all. Lifestyle Claims "told" me they were allowed to do this as they are "introducers" who pass claims to other CMC's (one being Legal Redress). How do you read the above warning???

marshallka

milly88 wrote: »

Hi Marshalka
They are actually a CMC and they are authorised by the MOJ in their own right.

In earlier posts you would see that they would tell prospective punters that they use solicitors called Forbes Douglas, after researching this I found that Forbes Douglas were just another Claims Management Company and they did not even employ any solicitors. I also have that in writing from the MD of Forbes Douglas.

It seems to me that they bend just about every rule going and get away with it.

Milly88

Don't they just. I think we need clarification on this "cold calling" business. Companies that ring me TELL me they are allowed to cold call UNLESS they pass to solicitors....hmmmm... how could that ever be proved.

I once rang and spoke to MOJ about it and they told me that its not exactly cold calling half the time because you "may" have had finance in the past that had a box ticked to say that you did not mind your data being passed round. I suppose for them to say this to everyone it makes their job easier!!!

milly88

I have a very good idea where they got my number from and many that posted on the earlier days 90% plus also had dealings with the same firm. So yes they cold called me as I always tick the box that I don't want to be contacted. It is a flimsey argument by the MOJ and why are they finding excuses to take their side.

I will PM you.

marshallka wrote: »

Don't they just. I think we need clarification on this "cold calling" business. Companies that ring me TELL me they are allowed to cold call UNLESS they pass to solicitors....hmmmm... how could that ever be proved.

I once rang and spoke to MOJ about it and they told me that its not exactly cold calling half the time because you "may" have had finance in the past that had a box ticked to say that you did not mind your data being passed round. I suppose for them to say this to everyone it makes their job easier!!!

ESP_ALI_120

I have been dealing with Kerobo and ATM Solicitors since Jun 2009 and have been following this thread for the past 6 months. I haven’t really needed to add anything until today as I have received a demand from and Insurance company for Legalcare Protection Policy and Disbursement Protection Policy. I will try to tell my story as best I can with a chronological list of events. Apologies if it is very long winded!

1 Jun 2009
Letter of authority from Kerobo claims signed by me.

29 Jun 2009
Letter from Kerobo states case will be placed with a solicitor.

21 July 2009
Letter and documentation form ATM Solicitors
Client care letter
Conditional Fee arrangement
Terms of business
Authority form
ATE insurance application form

All the documents were signed by me on 28 July 2009 and returned to ATM

1 Sep 2009
Phoned ATM and someone was to call me back

8 Sep 2009
Letter received from ATM with copy of conditional fee arrangement and I was advised the will now take initial steps to commence the claim.

7 Oct 2009
Letter from Kerobo – case against MBNA has been accepted by ATM Solicitors

4 Nov 2009
Phoned – and a I was called me back. ATM had received the documents back from MBNA and a letter was in the post to me.

3 Nov 2009
Letter received – breaches have been found in the agreement and a revised letter had been sent to MBNA outlining these breaches.

8 Dec 2009
I phoned and was advised ATM were in the process of applying for after the event insurance (the After Event Insurance Application was signed by me on 28 July 2009)

4 Jan 2010
Letter received from ATM – have received a letter from MBNA denying any liability. They advised me in the letter “I have responded informing them that we are issuing proceedings. We are awaiting approval from insurers before we can further your claim.”

31 Mar 2010
I phoned. I was advised they are still waiting after event insurance and when it is approved they will let me know.

26 April 2010
Phoned again – still waiting after event insurance.

11 Jun 2010
I phoned again – still waiting for after event insurance which was applied for on 8 April 2010.

20 Jul 2010
As per tel call to Natalie Clements, the insurance is now through and they are waiting an expert opinion (from a Director) about issuing proceedings. An audit report (about breaches) is due within 1 month.

29 Jul 2010
Letter received from ATM Solicitors to advise me of the outcome of the recent “test case” hearing which took place in Manchester. The advised me that and Appeal seems the most likely course of action and it is estimated it would take 6 months to receive a final decision from the Court of Appeal. They also advised me they are exploring other avenues of the claim and will continue to keep me updated.

7 Oct 2010
Letter received from Ultra Insurance Company Ltd. Demanding payment of £577.50. States Legalcare Protection Policy and Disbursement Protection Policy was issued on 1 October 2009.

The letter states that “the balance of the premium due in respect of the policies namely the sum of £577.50 was due to be paid either (1) within 7 days of your case concluding or (2) on the 25th September 2010 (i.e. 360 days after the issue of the policy) which ever first occurred.

A copy of the proposal form is attached to the letter from Ultra Insurance, which I have never seen before and has NOT been signed by me. A copy of the After Event Insurance Application is also attached, which was signed by me on 28 July 2010.

I have never seen the policies and as per my notes above, according to ATM Solicitors, the after event insurance wasn’t received until around July 2010.

According to the letter from ultra insurance – insurance policy was issued on 1 October 2009 and £52.50 was paid and allocated. I certainly didn’t make this payment.

I would really appreciate any help or advise on this. I plan to get onto ATM Solicitors first thing on Monday morning.