Warning - do not use wolstenholmes solicitors

Horrified_Solicitor

sue276 wrote: »

DWF say they can't find our casefile and my new solicitor says she cannot do anything for us without it? Is this true?

It's very difficult to do anything without the file, but it may be possible to reconstitute it by asking the other solicitors (assuming they weren't WH) involved in the sale and purchase to let your new solicitors have copies of correspendence and documents. Make it clear to your new solicitors that you realise that there may be gaps and all you want is for them to do their best in the circumstances.

anotherproblem

Horrified_Solicitor wrote: »

It's very difficult to do anything without the file, but it may be possible to reconstitute it by asking the other solicitors (assuming they weren't WH) involved in the sale and purchase to let your new solicitors have copies of correspendence and documents. Make it clear to your new solicitors that you realise that there may be gaps and all you want is for them to do their best in the circumstances.

Hi What I fail to understand is where are these missing files - some one some where must have them. I did not realise that there were so many of us with missing files. I have said this before though and it still worries me greatly - why has no one thought to check out the computers. There must be such a lot of information on them that we need.

anotherproblem

mjmal51 wrote: »

As I was a buyer WH insisted the seller paid for the indemnity insurance which may or may not turn up in my file
I did see a sample quote to the seller before completion and it was from
https://www.titlesolv.com/pages/?CFID=144223&CFTOKEN=58337971
who seem to be fairly commonly used.

I have checked this company and they were very understanding but unfortunatly my property is not insured by them. But thanks for your help. What I need is to find out who WS used to insure properties. I have now emaied a few companies at randum and gone back to DWF and asked if they can shed some light on it.

sue276

anotherproblem wrote: »

Hi What I fail to understand is where are these missing files - some one some where must have them. I did not realise that there were so many of us with missing files. I have said this before though and it still worries me greatly - why has no one thought to check out the computers. There must be such a lot of information on them that we need.

My partner asked them why they hadn't checked the computers and he was told they couldn't/didnt have access

anotherproblem

sue276 wrote: »

My partner asked them why they hadn't checked the computers and he was told they couldn't/didnt have access

So the SRA have not done their job properly have they!!!. I mean -look at how much information is on those computers. It stands to reason that a company who are mainly internet based will have the bulk of the information on their computers. In not ensuring that the DWF have access to these surely the SRA have failed to protect the clients.

Google44

EVERYONE


I've sent a letter to IR to check if my SD was paid. The IR called me today saying that WH have instructed another company to report that house was a lot less so they can avoid paying SD. They have correct it now and will send it to me in writing.


So it looks like WH (Mathew Roberts) was trying cash on paying SD.


Warning. All of you who legaly own the house bought via WH and if the house cost over SD bracket of 175K - I suggest check with IR. Otherwise, you may get suppriced when you try to sell it at some point.

Hope this helps.

Horrified_Solicitor

sue276 wrote: »

My partner asked them why they hadn't checked the computers and he was told they couldn't/didnt have access

That's highly suspicious. Normally, when an intervention takes place, one of the first steps is to copy the entire computer system. If the intervened firm tries to obstruct this process, then an immediate application is made for a court injunction to compel them to allow access. In practice, this can be done without notice in a matter of hours.

However, this would not apply if the computer systems had already been removed or destroyed. I'd go back to DWF and ask for a more detailed explanation.

Horrified_Solicitor

Google44 wrote: »

EVERYONE


I've sent a letter to IR to check if my SD was paid. The IR called me today saying that WH have instructed another company to report that house was a lot less so they can avoid paying SD. They have correct it now and will send it to me in writing.


So it looks like WH (Mathew Roberts) was trying cash on paying SD.


Warning. All of you who legaly own the house bought via WH and if the house cost over SD bracket of 175K - I suggest check with IR. Otherwise, you may get suppriced when you try to sell it at some point.

Hope this helps.

Ouch! This looks as if someone was fraudlently altering deeds to show the price as less than the Stamp Duty threshold and then stealing the Stamp Duty money. To put it bluntly, such an activity is theft. I suggest that you report it to DWF as it is in everyone's interests that any thieves are prosecuted.

anotherproblem

Horrified_Solicitor wrote: »

Ouch! This looks as if someone was fraudlently altering deeds to show the price as less than the Stamp Duty threshold and then stealing the Stamp Duty money. To put it bluntly, such an activity is theft. I suggest that you report it to DWF as it is in everyone's interests that any thieves are prosecuted.

Oh My goodness! I just realised that what WS tried to indicate to me as a simple oversight may also have been some form of deception but I am not sure what. When they sent me the land registry TR1 form and the contract it stated the property was £205,000 when it was only £117.000. I picked up on it and refused to sign any documents until they were correct.

Catwoman8950

mjmal51 wrote: »

Think I posted it before or at least the link which takes you there
http://www.sra.org.uk/sra/news/wolstenholmes.page
Won't do any harm to post again.
This does say the main claim including the new solicitor goes to the SRA which is different to the seemingly authoritive long post by picklesjsw (maybe new rules for this special case?)

It is also pretty much what is said in the letter I received from the SRA (see my post #914) via DWF. I think each of us needs to follow the instructions we personally have been given. I am planning to make my claim to the SRA without the assistance of a solicitor, once I collect my files from DWF, and the information given on the SRA website about what supporting documents you need to send with the claim is very useful IMO. When that has been dealt with (or at least I know that my claim is being processed), I will send a formal claim to the LCS for negligence on the part of WH.