Warning - do not use wolstenholmes solicitors

mjmal51

anotherproblem wrote: »

Hi I had to pay my soliciter the £100.00 fine when the SDTL was filled in - I am suprised if you were able to send one in late without payment. The solicitor just got the form in before the £100.00 fine became a £200.00 fine.

So lets see how long it takes for the SRA to sort my claim out. Thank goodness for the forum thats what I say.

I didn't get away with the fine £100 + £78 interest in the end, it arrived a few days after my last post. So I paid that and had it added to my SRA claim which went to the adjudicator last Fri, having been with WH admin for 8 days to see if they objected!
Spoke to HMRC but they did not seem to entertain any appeal such as "lytton-man" had and he seems to be a rarity in that WH did get round to registering his property.

mjmal51

Latest from Google news

"Law firm suffered £1m court defeat weeks before collapse

SRA closed doors of Wolstenholmes shortly after property developers won £1m negligence claim


Law firm Wolstenholmes lost a £1m negligence claim brought by a Manchester-based property developer just weeks before the Solicitors' Regulation Authority (SRA) closed its doors, Crain's has discovered.

The bulk conveyancing firm failed to file a defence against the claim, which was brought by PPMCR Ltd and related to the £3.5m sale of a leasehold property in London's Mayfair.

A judgment against Cheadle-based Wolstenholmes was handed down by the High Court in Manchester, but the SRA stepped in before any damages or costs could be awarded.

PPMCR Ltd was owned and run by property developers Nabeel Chowdery and Ali Zolghadriha, but both of them resigned as directors 12 months before the company went into receivership last December.

Imran Hussein, who took over as managing partner of Wolstenholmes from Nasser Ilyas last September, three months before the SRA stepped in, told Crain's that the firm was facing a series of other liabilities, including debts of around £2.5m.

Hussein said that he and three other partners — all of whom were appointed between June and September last year — had no idea of the problems the firm was facing. They have all been suspended by the SRA alongside Ilyas.

Hussein and Ilyas even dispute who actually owned the firm in the period between February and December last year. Each say the other had effective control.

Audited
“Myself and the other partners were given draft accounts up to 2008 and we were told that the 2009 ones were in the process of being audited,” Hussein said.

Hussein added that although he took over as managing partner on September 1, Ilyas still owned the firm through a trust and personally guaranteed its overdraft right up until the SRA's intervention. He said he had handed the trust deeds to the SRA which prove Wolstenholmes' ownership status.

Hussein insists that he only became aware of the scale of the problems facing the firm following a visit by the SRA ten days after his appointment as managing partner in September.

A second visit by the regulator in November uncovered issues that ultimately led to the practice being closed.

Hussein said he was unable to transfer any funds while at Wolstenholmes. He added: “I wasn't on the mandate. I couldn't sign a cheque for stationery. I certainly didn't authorise any transfer of funds.”

Hussein said his involvement with the collapsed firm had caused significant personal turmoil.

“My life has been ruined by this. I've reported to the police threats of violence against me and I've also had to leave my flat, which was vandalised,” he said.

“I have also had my practising certificate suspended, although I've applied to get that back. I'm determined to clear my name.”

Bill Jones, managing partner of Manchester-based JMW Solicitors and a specialist in solicitors' regulatory matters, said: “It would be unusual, to say the least, for a firm of solicitors to appoint a managing partner who was not already a member of the partnership and who was not even authorised to sign cheques, although there is nothing in the rules to say that this is prohibited.

“The role of a managing partner should be to take overall responsibility for the running and management of the firm and to do this he needs to have a certain status and authority within it.”

Brahan_seer_3

Very interesting the latest google news. By doing a little checking on google I have spotted from the redhotcurry website some additional background information in Nasir Ilyas. It was reported on that website that Nasir Ilyas was appointed by the then Trade and Industry Secretary, Patricia Hewitt in 2005 as a member of the Ethnic Minority Business Forum (EMBF), an advisory non-departmental public body which strengthens the Government's dialogue with black and minority ethnic business communities.

His write up included that he was a partner in Wolstenholmes, a founder member and Chair of the Chai Centre (a non-profit making Health Centre based in Burnley), Chair of the Danes House Economic Development Trust (which was set up to revive the deprived local economy), managing director of Premiere Properties Ltd (a develpoment company) and a member of the Government Task Force set up to look into the disturbances that occurred in Burnley in 2001 - so not altogether a bad apple?

Betty123

so not altogether a bad apple?


Do not be fooled by this smoke screen, looks like the truth with regards to NI is now coming out, the worst is still to come.

happy_to_help

I had conveyance done by Wolstenholmes that turned out to be conveyance done by Stirling Law that was completed just before Christmas.
When they sent the monies from the sale they neglected to pay the estate agents infact they not only sent me the full funds from the house sale but an additional £2300.
As it was just before Christmas this was not corrected before the end of banking. I moved out to turkey, as was my plan, on 28th dec.
With no Internet yet and a defunct mobile phone contract. The only address that was left was an unused address in England which would serve as a hodling address until our return date which was then still unknown.
I received an e mail some weeks into January having now hooked up to the internet from first my estate agent explaining that he had not been paid. Payment was sent via a cheque for the full amount. Some time after that an e-mail from the solicitors asking for their funds to be sent. This email I did not respond to as I was in the process of setting up a new house life and paying back monies I shouldn’t have been sent was low on my list. No other e-mails were received from the solicitors. In fact not until my partner returned to England on Feb 22 did I find out they had tried to get in touch at all.
First letter in the middle of Jan and then in Early feb with a statutory demand for funds that totalled £1234 on top of the monies owed with the threat of making me bankrupt and Police involvement as they said I was defrauding their company. I was given to the end of the week to transfer funds or costs would esculate.
I tried to phone the gentleman dealing with my case to plead that \I was unaware of their letters demanding payment and costs until now and would gladly pay the funds owed via cheque or bank transfer but not the extra charges. I was unable to get a hold on the phone the man in charge and just received further demands via e-mail and copied versions of the charges.
I did pay the full amount but feel I was unfairly treated. I am posting this letter in the hope that someone who understands the law may feel I have a case to claim back my overpayment and could either act on my behalf or know of someone that would.

Brahan_seer_3

happy_to_help wrote: »

I had conveyance done by Wolstenholmes that turned out to be conveyance done by Stirling Law that was completed just before Christmas.
When they sent the monies from the sale they neglected to pay the estate agents infact they not only sent me the full funds from the house sale but an additional £2300.
As it was just before Christmas this was not corrected before the end of banking. I moved out to turkey, as was my plan, on 28th dec.
With no Internet yet and a defunct mobile phone contract. The only address that was left was an unused address in England which would serve as a hodling address until our return date which was then still unknown.
I received an e mail some weeks into January having now hooked up to the internet from first my estate agent explaining that he had not been paid. Payment was sent via a cheque for the full amount. Some time after that an e-mail from the solicitors asking for their funds to be sent. This email I did not respond to as I was in the process of setting up a new house life and paying back monies I shouldn’t have been sent was low on my list. No other e-mails were received from the solicitors. In fact not until my partner returned to England on Feb 22 did I find out they had tried to get in touch at all.
First letter in the middle of Jan and then in Early feb with a statutory demand for funds that totalled £1234 on top of the monies owed with the threat of making me bankrupt and Police involvement as they said I was defrauding their company. I was given to the end of the week to transfer funds or costs would esculate.
I tried to phone the gentleman dealing with my case to plead that \I was unaware of their letters demanding payment and costs until now and would gladly pay the funds owed via cheque or bank transfer but not the extra charges. I was unable to get a hold on the phone the man in charge and just received further demands via e-mail and copied versions of the charges.
I did pay the full amount but feel I was unfairly treated. I am posting this letter in the hope that someone who understands the law may feel I have a case to claim back my overpayment and could either act on my behalf or know of someone that would.

Complain to the firm first - ask about their complaints proceedure. they should have included that in their client care material at the outset. Then once you have exhausted their complaints proceedures (and are still not satisfied) complain to the LCS. What happened here possibly amounted to inadequate professional services. Stirling Law in all probability will not want it to go that far as their file in all probability will not stand up to scrutiny by the LCS

mjmal51

Finally received the compensation from SRA (although no interest included), so that is a relief.
After all these months and the worry caused for at least the first 2 months (only helped by this forum) I now intend to pursue a claim for distress and inconvenience with LCS.
Anybody have any idea how to present a case and how much is a reasonable claim?
May get nowhere but at least I'll have tried!

Catwoman8950

mjmal51 wrote: »

Latest from Google news

"Law firm suffered £1m court defeat weeks before collapse


Hussein said he was unable to transfer any funds while at Wolstenholmes. He added: “I wasn't on the mandate. I couldn't sign a cheque for stationery. I certainly didn't authorise any transfer of funds.”

This is simply not true since it was him who authorised the transfer of 20k WH still owed me just before Christmas! :rotfl:

Catwoman8950

Brahan_seer wrote: »

Very interesting the latest google news. By doing a little checking on google I have spotted from the redhotcurry website some additional background information in Nasir Ilyas. It was reported on that website that Nasir Ilyas was appointed by the then Trade and Industry Secretary, Patricia Hewitt in 2005 as a member of the Ethnic Minority Business Forum (EMBF), an advisory non-departmental public body which strengthens the Government's dialogue with black and minority ethnic business communities.

His write up included that he was a partner in Wolstenholmes, a founder member and Chair of the Chai Centre (a non-profit making Health Centre based in Burnley), Chair of the Danes House Economic Development Trust (which was set up to revive the deprived local economy), managing director of Premiere Properties Ltd (a develpoment company) and a member of the Government Task Force set up to look into the disturbances that occurred in Burnley in 2001 - so not altogether a bad apple?

If I'm not mistaken, hasn't Patricia Hewitt been involved with something unsavoury lately?

Catwoman8950

mjmal51 wrote: »

Finally received the compensation from SRA (although no interest included), so that is a relief.
After all these months and the worry caused for at least the first 2 months (only helped by this forum) I now intend to pursue a claim for distress and inconvenience with LCS.
Anybody have any idea how to present a case and how much is a reasonable claim?
May get nowhere but at least I'll have tried!

I would would be interested to hear this as well.