loancheck/solicitors claiming ppi

Natalie6999

Loancheck & anyone who is in anyway involved with them are nothing but a bunch of robbing crooks & no one should touch them with a barge pole.

There is enough information around to help anyone get their money back without having to resort to these scumbags.

Doesn't MSE think that it's time to ban anyone associated with them from this site?

THOMAS123

maxdp wrote: »

Check out this links it puts loancheck and black knight together.
/QUOTE]

Your right but not for the obvious reason (see my earlier post)

Software houses often register domains in their own name until the client has paid them for the site, if you get my gist!!!!

THOMAS123

Natalie6999 wrote: »

Anyone who is involved with the running & promotion of loancheck should be prosecuted & banned from working in claims management.

It appears that the same names keep on appearing in these so called ethical companies who do not fulfill their promises & rip off clients.

It is time MSE banned anyone who has anything to do with Loancheck & the recruitment of clients from this site.

My personal opinion is that anyone with a Loanheck case being dealt with by a solicitor (who is not progressing that case) should cancel their solicitors contract on the grounds of negilgence and the inability to progress the files properly.

They first need to send a complaint letter telling the solicitor of their intentions and also ask the solicitor if their insurance cover is still valid.

Then for PPI claimants they may as well go straight to the FOS using the template letters contained on this site and do it themeselves for free!!!!

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

My personal opinion is that anyone with a Loanheck case being dealt with by a solicitor (who is not progressing that case) should cancel their solicitors contract on the grounds of negilgence and the inability to progress the files properly.

They first need to send a complaint letter telling the solicitor of their intentions and also ask the solicitor if their insurance cover is still valid.

Then for PPI claimants they may as well go straight to the FOS using the template letters contained on this site and do it themeselves for free!!!!

Hi Thomas, its ok saying that in that the people "go to FOS" BUT they would have missed the deadlines of claiming as you have to take your PPI complaint to FOS within 6 months of FIRST complaining. This is why the companies need worming out of the woodwork as they have actually "cost" these people their claims. Surely some sort of compensation is due to them for this? Wouldn't loancheck have taken out an insurance for this type of thing?

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

Hi Thomas, its ok saying that in that the people "go to FOS" BUT they would have missed the deadlines of claiming as you have to take your PPI complaint to FOS within 6 months of FIRST complaining. This is why the companies need worming out of the woodwork as they have actually "cost" these people their claims. Surely some sort of compensation is due to them for this? Wouldn't loancheck have taken out an insurance for this type of thing?

I am pretty sure that the solicitors actually never got round to complaining about the PPI as they were still trying to get information out of the Lenders in the majority of cases.

Also, I don't think PPI was high on the agenda with Loancheck as they were only paid for a detailed report and in PPI cases such a report is not necessary.

I would say to everyone it's worth a go as they will only lose the costs of a few stamps if they fail?

I don't imagine Loancheck had any Professional Indemnity Insurance

gemz3

How do you know all of this information thomas? My case was rejected by loancheck 9 months or so ago, i think i had a lucky escape

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

I am pretty sure that the solicitors actually never got round to complaining about the PPI as they were still trying to get information out of the Lenders in the majority of cases.

Also, I don't think PPI was high on the agenda with Loancheck as they were only paid for a detailed report and in PPI cases such a report is not necessary.

I would say to everyone it's worth a go as they will only lose the costs of a few stamps if they fail?

I don't imagine Loancheck had any Professional Indemnity Insurance

When you say "information out of lenders" do you mean as regards the £10 people were charged for the SAR? Surely the SAR's only take 40 days to arrive so after some have waited for over 2 years I think that these are long overdue and should have been chased up by now:eek:.

Also were Loancheck classed as a claims management company?? What about this Black Knight that ninja asked about? Are they classed as a claims management company also? What about introducers, should they be registered to handle data and are they classed as a claims management company? You seem so knowledgeable that i wondered if you could help cause we are all still learning???

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

When you say "information out of lenders" do you mean as regards the £10 people were charged for the SAR? Surely the SAR's only take 40 days to arrive so after some have waited for over 2 years I think that these are long overdue and should have been chased up by now:eek:.

Also were Loancheck classed as a claims management company?? What about this Black Knight that ninja asked about? Are they classed as a claims management company also? What about introducers, should they be registered to handle data and are they classed as a claims management company? You seem so knowledgeable that i wondered if you could help cause we are all still learning???

I think Loancheck had several problems!!!

If you market to consumers and then pass them on to a solicitor you have to be registered with the MOJ and are classed as a Claims Management Company.

Loancheck therefore was a Claims Management Company.

However, the vast majority of ts cases were introduced to it by what it called Professional Intermediaries, and the main one, Professional Investments Limited, run by Peter from this forum, went bust in mid-2008.

This would have left thousand of cases just sitting in filing cabinets with SARs.

The other introducers of work to Loancheck were also Claims Management Companies.

Black Knight Associates does not market to consumers and pass work to solicitors so therefore it is not classed as a Claims Management Company - it provides software to solicitors, accountants etc and loans to solicitors representing consumers to enable them to progress cases against lenders.

All of these companies should be registered to handle data.

Hope this helps

Natalie6999

How come Petermb got away with running a company through this site, it seems it is one rule for one & one rule for another.

Judging by his track record, he is no better than the rest of the scumbags involved with loancheck.

Isn't it about time that they were all brought to justice?

lesley65

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.

Hi getmymoney

i believe that mu solicitor was pursuing unenforceability and the recovery of secret commission along with the misselling of ppi, this is how they got my claim above the value of £5000, this is so frustrating as i was only ever wanting my ppi payments back. at the time that i started this nearly 2 and a half years ago i was cracking on with it myself when peter introduced himself to me on here via a pm, my son had just been diagnosed a severe epileptic and was quite poorly so i handed it over to peter to sort out for me, stupid stupid stupid mistake i know.

theres a couple of things that worry me about all of this.

1. if i pull out of this contract i am liable to pay all of the solicitors costs so far.

2. i can no longer do any of the claims myself even if i could pull out because of the 6 year limitation period.

i understand that i should make a complaint to the law society but i'm really worried that i could make matters worse.

lesley x