Warning - do not use wolstenholmes solicitors

Simply_Me_2

isayoldchap wrote: »

Hi Simply Me
I hope you can include the increased mortgage rates on your claim form with the SRA

I hope so. I shall let you know.

picklesjsw

moongate wrote: »

in response to picklesjw no 444

i think you will find that as soon as any fraudulent act was discovered it was infact David Burke and Steven Clarke who actually were the first people to report Wolstenholmes to the SRA. I am sorry to hear that your friend had problems. As a matter of interest how much did they lose and was it for online conveyancing? Mr Burke left before any online conveyancing was set up in WH

Nonsense. The problems started in 2008 when David Burke was involved in WH. In fact I wrote several letters to David Burke and he was well aware of the issues going on. It seems they got a lot worse when he left, but he was involved whilst things were going wrong!

If David Burke did report WH to the SRA why did he not chase this up? Obviously he didn't even report them because he knew it would damge him, as my friend's file will!

rfsp wrote: »

Credit card payments

If you have paid for out of pocket expenses, or even provided your deposit (over £100 and up to £30,000) using a Credit Card, you might consider exercising your statutory rights under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Yes. Anybody who paid Wolstenholmes through their Credit Card [not Debit Card] should contact their card provider with a copy of anything they have from Wolstenholmes and the BBC article; and claim the funds back under s75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. It will probably be quicker than dealing with DWF [the intervening Solicitors]. Even if this is done compensation should still be claimable through the LCS which will be paid by the SRA indemnity fund.

rfsp wrote: »

Today i had emailed SRA regarding WH situation.

Is anyone can advice me what will happen to the money we have paid to WH and the file? Is it better if i contact my credit card company to get the refund or wait for the intevention agents advice?

PS: Now its almost 105 days since i have paid 2200 by credit card

As I have written above it is probably quicker to claim through your credit card company.

If people paid by debit card, then: If it was a VISA [including VISA Electron] debit card then you may be able to initiate a chargeback procedure - contact your bank - but if it was another debit card then you will have to wait for DWF to get their act together.

moongate wrote: »

STEVEN CLARKE and DAVID BURKE
SOLICITORS

As you may well be aware, the law firm of Wolstenholmes LLP Solicitors has now been closed down by the Law Society.

STEVEN CLARKE and DAVID BURKE would like to make it absolutely clear that they have had NO involvement whatsoever in the management of that firm since September 2008.

On the 31st July 2006 they retired as partners in the firm of Wolstenholmes, and they sold their interests to a new proprietor. On the 1st August 2006 the new proprietor established the new firm of Wolstenholmes LLP and Messrs Burke and Clarke became members of the LLP with a tiny minority holding.

In the Summer of 2008 the proprietor brought in a new Management team and one of their first acts was to strip Messrs Burke and Clarke of all management functions. A major dispute then followed over the way in which the firm was being managed and the way it was going forward, and the end result was that on the 3rd December 2008 Messrs Burke and Clarke were locked out and excluded from the practice altogether. A retirement deed was then subsequently negotiated on terms which were very favourable to Messrs Burke and Clarke.

We wish to emphasise that we have not been involved in any of the activities or actions of Wolstenholmes LLP since September 2008.

Might be that David Burke hasn't been involved in any of the issues of WH since September 2008 but the issues started when Nasar Illyas took WH over, and David Burke was involved! I have clear written evidence as to this, and I sincerely hope David Burke is also struck off! I will be lodging this with the SRA & sending a copy to DWF.

Any Solicitor - who is legally obliged to act competently - who worked for WH should have reported them & Nasar Illyas to the SRA. David Burke obviously didn't do this because had it done so the SRA would have intervened long ago and struck of David Burke as well as Nasar Illyas.

rfsp wrote: »

ALSO SEE BELOW PART OF THE EMAIL I HAVE RECEIVED FROM LCS......


Thank you for email about Wolstenholmes.

As you are aware we have recently received a large number of reports, and concerns, concerning this firm.

Both the Legal Complaints Service (LCS) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) are actively monitoring the situation and as a result of this the firm have now been intervened into by the Law Society (this means that the firm has closed down). The intervention will protect the immediate position and preserve documentation and any client monies.

The agent in charge of the intervention is Kieran Walshe of DWF solicitors. Their details are:

Centurion House,
129 Deansgate,
Manchester,
Lancashire,
M3 3AA

Tel: 0161 603 5000
Fax: 0161 603 5050

If you suffer financial losses, or additional expense, as a result of any poor service provided by Wolstenholmes, we have power to direct the payment of compensation - for this and any distress and inconvenience you may suffer.

If regulatory action is required, this will be initiated as soon as possible by the SRA.

In the meantime, we understand that customers are clearly concerned about the situation, and what they should do.

If you need your file for matters that are ongoing, you have two options:

1.DWF has taken possession of all Wolstenholmes files. You can either contact DWF for your file (but will need to provide ID) and then seek independent legal advice about progressing your matter.
2.You can wait for DWF to contact you for instructions on what they would like you to do.

Files which have been sent out to other firms (e.g. Sterling Law, Dar & Co) are also currently being transferred to DWF although there may be a delay in DWF taking possession of them.

For customers concerned about deposits paid, Wolstenholmes accounts have been frozen. DWF will need to do a reconciliation of accounts, but if you need these funds again you should contact DWF.

The LCS cannot give legal advice, but we hope this may be of some practical assistance to you:-

If you haven’t exchanged contracts

If you haven't yet reached a stage of your transaction where you are financially committed, for example, you haven’t exchanged contracts – we would recommend that you instruct a new solicitor to complete the transaction - with or without Wolstenholme's file.

You can complain later, provided that you do so within six months.

If you have already exchanged contracts and are about to complete

If you have particularly pressing concerns, for example you have exchanged but now need to complete your sale / purchase imminently, you will need to urgently decide how to proceed. The best course for you would be to take independent legal advice. There may still be a means of completing with the assistance of a new solicitor, particularly if no mortgage is involved - but it will not be possible in all cases.

Very helpful! I'm quoting the above here for new readers of this thread who don't have the time and patience to read all 38 pages before this.

just_me_ wrote: »

I have dealt with Imran Hussain, and he comes across as an articulate, well dressed person.....However, I understand he was involved in a couple of now defunct law companies "Edward Mardale Solicitors" & AIM Legal or AIM Ltd.
Surely it's too much of a coincidence that any law company he is involved in, suddenly goes under (& from what I understand, just disappear without paying the rent, etc)

I'm sure the SRA will be investigating this. Unfortunately this is common behaviour for fraudsters in all fields, not only fraudulent Solicitors. It is the most articulate fraudsters who are most successful in screwing people over because they are more manipulative and people end up trusting them more.

just_me_ wrote: »

In Relation to Wolstenholmes, I work for a company that purchases properties, and unfortunately we used Wolstenholmes. Having purchased a block of properties over a 6 month period, we were supplied with various Completion Statement (through the sale taking longer than expexcted).

To cut a long story short, when our accountant was preparing our accounts, we had a dispute with our bridging lender stating that we had paid £x of interest & only £y remained.

The bridging company gave us figures, but we requested complaetion statements on 13/02/09 for the properties.

Having gone through Nasir, Bilal, Tracey, Pat, Kevin, Sheila, finally Alexandra was able to provide us with the completion statements. However, these were received at end of November 2009.

In the meantime, we paid extra interest to our lender (which we get back), but also couldn't complete our accounts, and hence have been penalised by Companies House.

Can we pursue Wolstenholmes for these??
If so, couldn't individuals pursue Wolstenholmes to pay for the Stamp Duty.

Yes. You can make a complaint to the LCS to try and get compensation for this. I suggest you contact the LCS by telephone first, and you may have to contact DWF as well. Any compensation will be paid out of any funds that may remain from the frozen funds or if none is left over then from the SRA indemnity fund.

just_me_ wrote: »

Finally, putting personal details online I disagree with, but understand why some people will defend posters posting address' & family history online

I agree where it is not of a fraudster, but where it is of a fraudster, I disagree with you. Let 'em get what they deserve! What goes around comes around!!!

Catwoman8950 wrote: »

I support moongate in this and also have "inside information". Gavin Wall bailed out of Wolstenholmes in the middle of last year, like other staff, because they saw how things were going. Yes, Mr. Wall did set up in business on his own and took some ex-WH staff with him. This does not mean he is complicit in what has been going on at WH.

He left WH on good terms, and took some WH staff with him by request of Nasar Illyas from what I understand. And anybody who knew what was going on there and had sufficient evidence - by being there - could have and should have forwarded it to the SRA. The bare fact that Gavin Wall didn't report WH - being a Solicitor - shows how incompetent Gavin Wall is, and that he should be struck off too.

It is one thing somebody like me - not a Solicitor - reporting one issue to the SRA. My information wouldn't be sufficient to shut them down; but any Solicitor who worked or was involved with WH should have copied files and submitted them to the SRA to show how bad things were there. [For those who think that would have been illegal, they're wrong. Submitting such information to the SRA is entirely legal, as it is for financial institutions to submit confidential information to the FSA; but they would not be able to disclose it to other persons or use it for their benefit.]

Librachick wrote: »

Well I have just called (Stirling Law - She said it was i not e as in Sterling) and they have my file! I have asked her to send it to me, but they are only allowed to send it to DWF not to my new solicitor (which might save me some money!!), since I will be paying twice now, thanks to WH.

I was advised that they are sending them over in "Batches" as there is nothing DWF can do until the SRA have finished their investigations.

I have called DWF and it took over 7 minutes to locate Keiran Walshe, who was not at his desk. The Welsh girl on the reception asked if he was based at the Manchester office, as she was unable to find him!!! Sounds as efficient as WH!

I have left my home telephone number, so I will see if I he returns my call.

This is so frustrating, it is like pulling teeth:D

In my experience DWF are slow like other large firms. They will get things done but slowly - unfortunately. I wouldn't call them incompetent or fraudulent - like WH - but slow DWF definitely are.

Good Luck!

Catwoman8950 wrote: »

OK, but what will happen if DWF have not got my file? Unlike the other posters on this forum, Wolsteholmes acted for me in a probate matter. I have been reliably informed that my file which contains some very important documents may have "disappeared" before the SRA intervention took place.

You will have to wait till DWF have all files and have collated everything before that happens. If necessary DWF will get a court order to search Illyas's property as well as the others involved; but it might take a while. If you have any information, then I suggest you forward it to the SRA and DWF.

Good Luck!

shocked_solicitor wrote: »

Please see my post above - re DWF please be patient with them as it takes a huge amount of time to contact all the clients they have files for. Files with impending completions will take priority over other files. An intervention is a massive thing to deal with by they will be working closely with the SRA to ensure that you are all protected as much as can be - I know the process as I have been an agent for the SRA (formerly all under the Law Society).

True, but DWF have been known to deal with things slowly! I have unfortunately had quite a few dealings with them.

shocked_solicitor wrote: »

ok I am a solicitor and I have spoken to the Solicitor Regulation Authority (SRA) today. The official solicitors acting in the intervention of this firm is DWF LLP tele. 0161 603 5000. Contact name Mr Walshe. I would advise that you do not instruct any of the firms that are mentioned on this site to do your work due to the various links that have been made. These are as follows:-
1. Helen Murgatroyd (HM) one of the suspended solicitors from Wolstenholmes (W) was a member of Chartbridge Law LLP (C) until it went a while back. She was in business with a man called Schofield (RS).
2. RS was made bankrupt for £1.1 million in June 2009 at the Oldham County Court - this is on public records and is also on the SRA website as he now has a restriction on his practicing certificate - he is not allowed to run a firm. Look him up on the SRA site!!
3. C traded from Greengate Business Centre, Greengate Oldham OL4 1FN until it went into administration
4. RS is listed on the Law Society website as working at Megsons LLP - trading address Greengate Business Centre, Greengate Oldham OL4 1FN (same as old address for C)
5. Stirling Law trading address is Greengate Business Centre, Greengate Oldham OL4 1FN (sound familiar?? - yes same address again)
6. Assistant Solicitor at C was Abbie P (shown on Law Society page under Stirling Law), was then an Assistant Solicitor at Megsons LLP and is now listed as being with Sterling Law

so we have Stirling claiming the files of Wolstenholmes with HM being one of the suspended solicitors from that firm having been a partner of C with RS. The trading address for all these firms is the same (except W of course) - draw your own conclusions!!! All of this information is available on public websites so feel free to check the accurancy of this information.

Another link is the phone number posted for Stirling being 0161 624 5777 - someone has traced it to a firm called Ramsdens Firthwhitehead...... this firm was RSs firm before it became C

I repeat my advice - only use the firm the SRA have appointed to intervene for your own protection.

Not all solicitors are bad - people like these give the profession a bad name and I am sorry for everyone who has been affected by this!!

I agree with most of this and it is certainly interesting information. However, I must recommend not to use DWF. Go to a local high-street Solicitor after getting several recommendations and searching for information on them on the web.

DWF are very expensive and specialize in work for large clients. I would recommend against using them. The intervention work will be paid for by the SRA - and hopefully claimed from those involved (Illyas & Co) following criminal proceedings (which would result in an Asset Confiscation Order); but for the work people retained WH to deal with, I recommend against using such an expensive firm, who are notoriously slow in their work - in my experience.

lewismartin wrote: »

BBC news are reporting on a £50 million scam related to 2006 where the people having now been charged. Look how long its taken to build the case.

Three years on and it looks like WH are upto no good. Any astute person in the housing sector is aware of how various scams works. there are numerous ways of robbing people/banks in the property sector. eg low conveyancing fees will attract a swarm of customers with the help of google to build up hefty clients' account, which can disappear to foreign accounts.

Discovery made a comment which seems to tie everything up.

Facts. Anybody care to differ?

Nope.

moongate wrote: »

with regard to the sale of Wolstenholmes. There is infact a deed of trust between NI and IH which states that NI still owns the firm and brought in IH to try and get him out of this mess. Whilst i am not defending IH, NI is the true owner and i would like to see proof otherwise before i am to disregard the trust agreement which has been seen.

I second "RobS77"s post below in response to this.

RobS77 wrote: »

Erm- why would you use a deed of trust for this purpose? That should have started some very serious alarm bells ringing for anyone who knows the first thing about law. Anyone stupid enough to have the legal title of a business transferred to them while continuing to manage it on behalf of someone who is a) incompetent or b) corrupt or both gets what they deserve.

Agreed 100%.

picklesjsw

THE_RECORD wrote: »

Hi all, this is my first post here i would like to take this opportunity to tell you a few facts. Firstly i do NOT work for Wolstenholmes this forum has been bought to my attention.

I can confirm that the sale between Mr.Ilyas and Mr Hussain did take place back in February 2009-since then Mr Hussain has been in full contol of wolstenholmes. Mr. Hussain has never denied this. I found Mr. Ilyas to be very fair and honourable in his dealings. I dont know what has gone wrong with Wolstenholmes lately.

I brokered the deal, chasing Mr Ilyas you are wasting your time.

All clients money is protected by SRA and there is no evidence whatsoever that any money is missing.

all the best for 2010

Complete rubbish! Illyas was the real problem in all of this, and numerous people have information to prove this!

opinions4u wrote: »

Some would suggest that he would fit in well with the political elite of this nation.

So true!

MissPomPoms wrote: »

I'd like to know more about this and does anyone know if Nasir Ilyas can start any new ventures whilst under investigation or if he's already trading under a new name.

Technically Illyas is not allowed to be involved in any Solicitors firm, but unfortunately there are numerous routes for con-artists like Illyas & Co to get involved in new companies and the legal services sector. Unfortunately it happens quite often.

cicero001 wrote: »

Re: the above post - these press releases would have simply been drafted by a PR agent and released to the press - it is akin to advertising and is just to get the name 'out there' .

It does not alter the fact that the 'buck stops' with the managing partner.

Law Society Solicitors' Rule 1.1 is to always act in the Clients' best interests - he has clearly breached this as well as numerous rules regarding clients' monies, advertising, handling complaints.

We should be able to trust solicitors as we trust doctors and there should be NO sympathy for those who breach the Solicitors' Rules.

Mr Hussain will have had sight of the accounts, the systems and a detailed idea of how many files there were and staffing levels when he took over the practice. If he did not carry out due diligence, then this has been to the detriment of clients - if he did then he did nothing to rectify the situation.

I am pleased to see he has been suspended as this will stop him causing any more problems before he is struck off.

We hope. As I have written above, it is not impossible for a suspended or barred Solicitor to get involved in the legal services sector - whilst it is illegal, it's still not impossible - and it's not illegal at the moment for these crooks to get involved in other businesses to defraud innocent victims.

cicero001 wrote: »

TO hopefully allay some fears; DWF are a first class firm and would not have been chosen by the SRA if they were not - they will take over files (unless you choose another firm) and , in conjunction with the Law Society, will complete on purchases/sales (where possible).

I'd hardly agree with DWF being a world-class firm. Yes, they are professional and I am not being libellous in these comments; but like many large firms they are very slow - probably in order to bill more - and as we know it's hardly comforting that they've been chosen as intervening Solicitors by the SRA - where was the SRA since 2008 when the problems with WH were coming clear and continuously deteriorating???

cicero001 wrote: »

Monies should be held in the Wolstenholmes client account and accountants will identify what money belongs to who. Once this is done, the monies should be unfrozen. If any monies have 'disappeared' these should be paid in full by a fund run by the Law Society to which all solicitors contribute as part of their practicing certificates.

SRA indemnity fund I believe you mean.

cicero001 wrote: »

therefore - whilst it may take time and stress - nobody should actually lose money.

Not exactly true. Some people will lose money because they will be depending on the funds to get the deals put through, but will lose the deals. Whilst this will most likely be reimbursed, there will still be a serious loss for some that will be impossible to quantify; and in my experience the LCS and SRA intervening Solicitors try to use the lowest quantification system possible; so most likely some will lose out.

cicero001 wrote: »

Mr Hussain and Co. will hopefully be struck off and will not be able to practice again.

Illyas & Co would be more correct. Again, hardly comforting to those who have been screwed over by this bunch!

Simply_Me wrote: »

The bank I was told to pay my money into by Sheridan Wall of Stirling Law Solicitors was:

The bank details are :-

Lloyds TSB

Sort code 30-13-90

Account No. 00053307 - Wolstenholmes. (Heald Green, Birmingham OSC 4 Ariel House, 2138 Coventry Road, Birmingham, B26 3JW). Is this a client account?

Yup it's a client account. I've still got my friend's full file - there's a copy of a cheque from WH with those account details on it there.

Simply_Me wrote: »

Interestingly my mortgage providers money which they also sent o 17 December 3 days before completion was to take place bounced back to them and they still have their money. My money went into the above account on 17 December and I have never seen it since.

I was under the impression that my money and the banks money should of all been going into the same account obviouslyy not.

Not necessarily. There can be several client accounts for a firm. Also, it could be that their money transferred later in the day and could be they entered details incorrectly. Too many options to reach a conclusive conclusion on this.

paulrac wrote: »

STEVEN CLARKE and DAVID BURKE
SOLICITORS

It appears that the real problems started to occur when David and Steven were forced out of the firm. It is most unfortunate to read that there good names and reputations have been tarnished by the dishonest conduct and performance of the new owners/management team. Lets hope the SRA promptly resolve these issues as ultimately its the clients that are left suffering.

See my response to a similar post further up. Typical PR rubbish!

cakinwande wrote: »

I cant help but think that Asma was not totally innocent in all this. When I instructed WH back in April, Asma was my assigned solicitor. Not only did I not hear from her, my mortgage lender never managed to speak to her either. About 2 weeks later I was told that Natalie Liddle was my solicitor, only to be told that after two months of hearing nothing, she had left the company. Asma knew what was going on this whole time.

All WH staff are guilty, none of them can claim incompitency, how can you work at a place and not know that a situation as bad as this was going on?!

Exactly!

cicero001 wrote: »

I have read the posts (no doubt planted) suggesting that Imran Hussain is as much a victim as anyone else. Rubbish!
I had dealings with Mr Hussain before he joined Wolstenholmes. Despite the polished image, he is dishonest. He lies, does not return calls, is evasive and also shockingly incompetent.
I also know one of his former colleagues, a very honest and hardworking solicitor, who had a dreadful time with him; properties not registered, files in a mess, unhappy clients etc.
Do not be suckered in by him and his cronies into believed anyone else is to blame. He was in charge - the firm was obviously understaffed - surely as managing partner this was his domain. Law firm are required to deal effectively with complaints - he didnt.

I agree, though I'd say Illyas is the worst culprit in all of this mess.

cicero001 wrote: »

He should be struck off and possibly arrested. The courts have no sympathy with dishonest solicitors and i am sure the 'pretty boy' would be welcomed with open arms in strageways!

I disagree that the courts have no sympathy with dishonest Solicitors.

Firstly, the polished image of crooks like that is likely to get them reduced sentences because even Judges are taken in - they are after all only human beings like the rest of us!

Secondly, where a priest, Solicitor, Doctor, or other "professional" is struck off, the courts are generally sympathetic to the fact they have lost their "professional" career, which in itself is punishment; so their sentences are reduced accordingly. I disagree that this is how it should be; but unfortunately it is the case.

Trevor_Johnson

Thank heavens that that the SRA has shut down :j wolstenholmes, let this be a lesson to us all. do not trust solicitors !!!!!! without first doing the re-search..................:mad:

I was that man ! :eek:

Please be aware all solicitors are not like "wolstenholmes" but this company has certainley shaken our confidence in the whole legal representation process.:huh:

I only hope I can now get my money back from the compensation board !

Too the layman, these directors should be never able to work in the private / public sector again, give them a job in a pig farm, !!!!!

shocked_solicitor

picklesjsw - what's your interest in all of this? - you appear to be a DWF client - but you also seem to have a lot of knowledge about other matters on here including views on Stirling Law etc

Wiseman52

Response to all- I am not very good a posting replies with quotes so please read.

The business model is similar that is true but others firms also work on this model (volume conveyancing). If its not broke why fix it!

For example, this Forum mentions two other firms Friday Property Lawyers and Your Conveyancing Services….check the website it also looks very similar to Wolstenholmes website…so what next tarnish them too with the same brush? No

This business model has been used effectively for a very long time the difference is making it work is that those people behind them have practical experience of the profession unlike Wolstenholmes. Behind Wolstenholmes model were two non- solicitors/conveyancers who had no experience and didn’t understand the profession but ultimately in charge.

Please also note Fridays Property lawyers are regulated by the Council of Licencsed Conveyancers only 1 full licence holder, it states so on the website but Your Conveyancing services- I couldn’t find on the website who they are regulated by but I’m sure if I looked harder I could find out.

Also a lot of Law firms, you will find (search law society and Council of licensed conveyancers) have 1 or 2 regulated principles that is quite normal. It just means how many partners/solicitors. There are firms with 1 regulated principle that are perfectly fine.

As a guide some of the firms I have worked at had 4, 2 and 10 regulated principle. I now work for one of the magic circle (very large reputable city) firm.

You, in this business, also come across sole practioners/conveyancer who are great at what they do.

I can’t say it enough behind Wolstenholmes model were two non-solicitors /conveyancers.

To those who keep mentioning names, like I say and many others in the profession who have contributed to the forum please do not. You do not know who has and not reported it to the relevant authorities as those who have don’t go around shouting it at the roof tops because they would have been sacked, for those who didn’t report I share your views, but please refrain from stating names.

As to how a WH client had been given a contact number for HS easy – google, confusion on part of client a lot of clients think/thought they’re were the same company because of Gavin taking on the best of WH staff for his own new practice but they’re not. That was probably due to the WH website not being updated with who had left the company – easily done or someone at WH could have given the number for HS as to were the person who they were trying to speak to had taken up employment. Even some of my one of my ex-client’s rang HS asking for me (further instruction) when I don’t even work there now how did that happen? Mistake/confusion perhaps.

No files were passed to HS at all and they wouldn’t touch them with a bargepole! HS are trying to put the whole WH episode behind them and getting as far away as they can and build a reputation. Call Gavin this forum gives his number he will tell you- Try it and then post your response.

Having read this forum I feel abit sad that people think that HS are linked when they’re not. They is a great deal of animosity from WH towards HS because HS set up as direct competition. Those who left WS to Join HS were told to leave immediately that minute!

So ex – employees have been offered jobs at Stirling Law to finish off work on files that have been sent there until they are cleared- a person I used to work with is working there, that’s how I know before you ask – conveyancing world is small you recognise names on letters and correspondence.

No I did what I could before I left WH and that’s it never touched a file after that.

I agree the SRA have a very large task ahead of them. What I post is what I saw, what I heard and what I know first hand from working at WH sir, Fact. Those also like me with personal experience and posting on here will agree and I still speak to some of my ex-colleagues in fact one is starting where I now work next month, so that makes two of us ex- WH here- does that mean we are going to be tarnished with the same brush? No, thankfully those in the profession know better. Some things at WH were not secret they were eventually in your face. I can only offer you what I can it is for you to believe or not. I have no hidden agenda, rest assure, just to enlighten you from my personal experience, should you not require any further posts do let me know.

When I make reference to ‘hearsay’ or ‘employees gossiping’ I meant making assumptions abit like those I have read on this forum, which I have tried to inform and correct, we are all guilty of that in offices the term is ‘office politics’.

To those solicitors posting here, one is clearly not in the field of conveyancing. The credentials of the person in conveyancing are in my opinion are truly judged by how many years practical experience the individual, not the company, has in conveyancing running their own caseload. You could have a qualified solicitor with 3 months experience or a conveyancer with 15 years behind them – who would you choose to represent you?

You do not have to be a qualified solicitor to do conveyancing or personal injury for that matter but read reviews and ensure that the company is registered with the Law Society or council for Licensed Conveyancers

Thank you for those showing me support and I am very happy to have shed some light and put some of the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together for you, I hope your matters are resolved very very quickly and peacefully. Either wait for DWF or for quicker results instruct new local solicitors asap with or without your file, documents can be reproduced – it will cost but as you have found out it is worth every penny.

Best Wishes

Librachick

I phoned my bank yesterday and I have put in a claim to get my money back from WH. They said the maximum it can take will be 3 months. I was advised that SRA /DWF have the right to activate WH accounts and pay back my money then freeze the account again.

I have instructed a new solicitor, however, it is costing nearly 3 times as much, but due to my circumstances they are reducing it by £27!! Last of the big spenders. They said they will start from scratch (so at least another 8 weeks) as they can't just believe that WH did everything right and they are regulated to ensure they do their own searches etc. More money, but what else can I do, if I don't want to move on with my life and get over the WH debacle.

When I called Imran Hussain on 21 December, he promised he would send my file and my refund within 2 - 4 days, I sent an email to him re-iterating what we had said in the conversation. However, the email was deleted without being read and he has never answered his mobile again, I left messages on his voicemail. DWF have my file, but I don't care about it anymore, since the new solicitor said the original deeds of mine are obsolete the minute the property is sold.

So I am moving on, this has been eating away at me daily, but I am not in nearly the same boat as a lot of you like Tracie X and simply me.

So I wish you all the very best with sorting this out.

Keep thinking about the song by Lena Martell "one day at a time".

shocked_solicitor

Wiseman52 wrote: »

To those solicitors posting here, one is clearly not in the field of conveyancing. The credentials of the person in conveyancing are in my opinion are truly judged by how many years practical experience the individual, not the company, has in conveyancing running their own caseload. You could have a qualified solicitor with 3 months experience or a conveyancer with 15 years behind them – who would you choose to represent you?
You do not have to be a qualified solicitor to do conveyancing or personal injury for that matter but read reviews and ensure that the company is registered with the Law Society or council for Licensed Conveyancers

I object to being mis-quoted and if you read my posts properly I have never given any advice on conveyancing simply on the intervention process as I have been an agent for the law society myself and acted in numerous interventions. I also stated that credentials should be checked and that people should use licenced conveyancers, solicitors or FILEX.
As to say if it ain't broke don't fix it - most professionals who value practice rule one which is to put client first and provide good service would say that low cost bargain basement conveyancing should be banned or more strictly regulated - just check the archives of the law society gazette on complaints about these outfits - as the old saying goes if you pay peanuts you will get monkeys!!!
I sincerely wish everyone who has had problems with this firm the best of luck for the future. I will not be posting anymore as the forum is being taken over by opinions rather than fact and all useful information has been posted.
File collection should happen via DWF regardless of who you wish to instruct - they are insured to carry out this process - it is time consuming but the system is SRA regulated and backed - instruct a local solicitor or licenced conveyancer so you can go into the office and sit and wait to speak to someone if you can't get any response to your queries - do your research on the firm first or seek recommendations from friends and relatives is the best advice I can give you to protect yourselves.

Wiseman52 is entitled to his opinion but just have a look at the reputation that personal injury practitioners and conveyancing firms have these days - all because they use non-qualified people - see the law society web page and do a google search - you can then draw your own conclusions rather than have someone elses pushed down your throat.
All best wishes to everyone affected!!

fair_play_3

Picklesjsw,
What a vitriolic little minded person you are. If your going to slag legal firms and solicitors off try to use facts and not your slant on hearsay.:mad:
People like you only get their kicks from anonymous sites. Lots of people have had their names and personal details spread about on this site by people like you who only use daft names to hide behind.
Now give it a rest and let the poor people who are waiting action/money get some sound advice from the fair minded on this forum. :mad:

anxious_24

hi i would just like to say wether you come back on this thread or not you and a few others have been very helpful to me and others and i personally would like to say THANKYOU for your help and advise given to me