loancheck/solicitors claiming ppi

tiggrae

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Lesley (and others)

The solicitor here is not being genuine.

Don't presume that because they are sending you these letters and asking for a meeting that what they are saying is correct - they have been negligent!!!

If they took out Focus Insurance they would have entered into a Conditional Fee Agreement with you.

Before they did that they would have to have done a risk assessment of your case to ensure it had a more than 51% chance of success.

As part of this risk assessment they would have had to ensure that the quantum of your claim was greater than £5000.

They would then have taken out a loan to cover the costs of the insurance premium from Focus plus the Court fee and any other legitimate costs. This loan would also cover the Loancheck fee.

However, if you contact Focus insurance they will probably tell you that they did not consider the Loancheck fee to be a legitimate cost.

They will also tell you that the solicitor is responsible for re-paying the loan.

You are allowed to get from your solicitor a statement of costs to find out what they have done to date on your file - you can even get a copy of your file.

I would suspect that little has been done to justify their costs and more importantly what has been done by Loancheck to justify their fees. I would again suspect very little if anything as the arm of Loancheck that should have done this work went bust some time ago.

If you make a complaint to the Law Society now you will probably get better treatment from your solicitor and a more genuine response.

If you don't then please let me know.

You should go to citizens advice and get some FREE time with a solicitor, to me it's an unfair contract term under the Unfair Contract Terms Regulations 1999 and should not be enforceable

fedupwiththeworry

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Lesley (and others)

The solicitor here is not being genuine.

Don't presume that because they are sending you these letters and asking for a meeting that what they are saying is correct - they have been negligent!!!

If they took out Focus Insurance they would have entered into a Conditional Fee Agreement with you.

Before they did that they would have to have done a risk assessment of your case to ensure it had a more than 51% chance of success.

As part of this risk assessment they would have had to ensure that the quantum of your claim was greater than £5000.

They would then have taken out a loan to cover the costs of the insurance premium from Focus plus the Court fee and any other legitimate costs. This loan would also cover the Loancheck fee.

However, if you contact Focus insurance they will probably tell you that they did not consider the Loancheck fee to be a legitimate cost.

They will also tell you that the solicitor is responsible for re-paying the loan.

You are allowed to get from your solicitor a statement of costs to find out what they have done to date on your file - you can even get a copy of your file.

I would suspect that little has been done to justify their costs and more importantly what has been done by Loancheck to justify their fees. I would again suspect very little if anything as the arm of Loancheck that should have done this work went bust some time ago.

If you make a complaint to the Law Society now you will probably get better treatment from your solicitor and a more genuine response.

If you don't then please let me know.

Hi,
Thanks for that information.

So in my case where they want a meeting, are you saying they are just doing this to bump up their fees ?

I'm trying to think back now as it's all taken so long, but I'm pretty sure that in the 2 cases they are dealing with for me I had signed a CFA which then earlier this year I was advised that Counsel had decided not to persue the case, this after they had already evaluated previously. The solicitor thought both cases had merit so then sent both cases to a different counsel who agreed to take them on. I had to sign 2 new CFA's.

With regard to the claim they want a meeting on (I haven't yet heard re the other one) they state that as well as getting further information from me they would then like to seek counsels opinion on the limitation point i.e. 6 years is coming up soon, and my claim generally prior to taking any further action on the matter (i.e. prior to issuing letter of claim) they will consider this further after the meeting.

They go on to state that they will ask counsel to take the matter on under a CFA but must warn me that if counsel declines to do so then they would have to consider whether or not they can continue with the CFA already in place, however they can review this once they hear from counsel (if applicable).

They are of course aware that they have sent this to ABC (another counsel) of ABC civil law but having reviewed the documentation and considering their previous experience with counsel on other matters, they would consider it beneficial to seek a further opinion from a different counsel.

That would be number 3 !!!

tiggrae

fedupwiththeworry wrote: »

Hi,
Thanks for that information.

So in my case where they want a meeting, are you saying they are just doing this to bump up their fees ?

I'm trying to think back now as it's all taken so long, but I'm pretty sure that in the 2 cases they are dealing with for me I had signed a CFA which then earlier this year I was advised that Counsel had decided not to persue the case, this after they had already evaluated previously. The solicitor thought both cases had merit so then sent both cases to a different counsel who agreed to take them on. I had to sign 2 new CFA's.

With regard to the claim they want a meeting on (I haven't yet heard re the other one) they state that as well as getting further information from me they would then like to seek counsels opinion on the limitation point i.e. 6 years is coming up soon, and my claim generally prior to taking any further action on the matter (i.e. prior to issuing letter of claim) they will consider this further after the meeting.

They go on to state that they will ask counsel to take the matter on under a CFA but must warn me that if counsel declines to do so then they would have to consider whether or not they can continue with the CFA already in place, however they can review this once they hear from counsel (if applicable).

They are of course aware that they have sent this to ABC (another counsel) of ABC civil law but having reviewed the documentation and considering their previous experience with counsel on other matters, they would consider it beneficial to seek a further opinion from a different counsel.

That would be number 3 !!!

presume this isn't to reclaim PPI but to have the loan agreement set aside - the law in this area is dodgy - both morally and legally and personally I wouldn't touch it with a barch pole

fedupwiththeworry

tiggrae wrote: »

presume this isn't to reclaim PPI but to have the loan agreement set aside - the law in this area is dodgy - both morally and legally and personally I wouldn't touch it with a barch pole

Hi,

No it's the PPI I'm reclaiming.

getmymoney

You should definately make a formal complaint to the practice. The Loancheck audit report was probably flawed from the outset and now your solicitors have looked into the matter further they realise that is the case. Have they asked you for money for disbursements?

getmymoney

Also - if you are just seeking to recover the PPI, why was an audit report necessary, why would proceedings be necessary? More to the point why would they need insurance - if you go via FOS there is no costs risk and therefore no reason to have insurance in place? Are you sure your Solicitors arent pursuing unenforceability or/or the recovery of secret commission paid out on the arrangement of the PPI. If you dont know they the Solicitors clearly arent providing you with sufficient advice.

THOMAS123

getmymoney wrote: »

Also - if you are just seeking to recover the PPI, why was an audit report necessary, why would proceedings be necessary? More to the point why would they need insurance - if you go via FOS there is no costs risk and therefore no reason to have insurance in place? Are you sure your Solicitors arent pursuing unenforceability or/or the recovery of secret commission paid out on the arrangement of the PPI. If you dont know they the Solicitors clearly arent providing you with sufficient advice.

Also, ask them if Loancheck did the original Risk Assessment that they relied upon saying the case had merit.

If they did, and Loancheck were wrong, and then Loancheck took a (big) fee for the advice then you and they have recourse to them for wrongful advice.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Also, ask them if Loancheck did the original Risk Assessment that they relied upon saying the case had merit.

If they did, and Loancheck were wrong, and then Loancheck took a (big) fee for the advice then you and they have recourse to them for wrongful advice.

Someone now is asking who Black Knight Associates are? I asked this some time back and it seems they are something to do with Loancheck? Has anyone ever heard of these as the poster says that Loancheck have passed the case to them??

maxdp

Check out this links it puts loancheck and black knight together.
http://www.sitelogr.com/s/loancheck.co.uk

fedupwiththeworry

Thanks everyone, I need to have a trawl back through all the previous letters I think. OMG was supposed to all be so simple.