loancheck/solicitors claiming ppi

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

How about this as a possible scenario.

Loancheck risk assess each case and recommended the case to a solicitor who rely upon Loancheck's arguments.

The solicitor then pays Loancheck a large fee for a report to confirm the case is a good one

The solicitor runs the case and finds out that there is no chance of the client ever getting any money as the claim has very little chance of succeeding, even though the report was positive.

Petermb, if you were the solicitor what would you do?

Would you insist that Loancheck gave you back the money?

What would you say to the client?

Of course, this is just a hypothetical scenario and as such should not be taken as a reflection of the reality of what has happened

Surely the solicitors should have checked that the Loancheck model worked accordingly though first? Why did the solicitors rely upon Loanchecks model? Didn't they thoroughly do their homework?

As regards if the solicitors now are waiting for details from the administration of the company (if this company was running its business accordingly that is!!!!) then why don't they just inform the clients now of this. All the clients that they KNOW have no chance SHOULD be informed NOW instead of hanging on.

WHy would they hang on TBH? What have they got to gain or lose? Makes you wonder?

Also who misled the clients then, the solictors or loancheck? My guess would be both TBH. The solicitors are continuing to mislead clients now by "stalling" and Loancheck misled them in the beginning stating what they did.

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

Surely the solicitors should have checked that the Loancheck model worked accordingly though first? Why did the solicitors rely upon Loanchecks model? Didn't they thoroughly do their homework?

As regards if the solicitors now are waiting for details from the administration of the company (if this company was running its business accordingly that is!!!!) then why don't they just inform the clients now of this. All the clients that they KNOW have no chance SHOULD be informed NOW instead of hanging on.

WHy would they hang on TBH? What have they got to gain or lose? Makes you wonder?

Also who misled the clients then, the solictors or loancheck? My guess would be both TBH. The solicitors are continuing to mislead clients now by "stalling" and Loancheck misled them in the beginning stating what they did.

I would doubt if 2 years ago many solicitors knew much about these types of cases.

Did Watsons have any experience prior to their involvement with Loancheck?

If you look at his website it appears that he only has 4 members of staff and 2 of them are involved in his estate agency.

Petermb - do you know Watsons and can you help here?

maxdp

THOMAS123 wrote: »

I would doubt if 2 years ago many solicitors knew much about these types of cases.

Did Watsons have any experience prior to their involvement with Loancheck?

If you look at his website it appears that he only has 4 members of staff and 2 of them are involved in his estate agency.

Petermb - do you know Watsons and can you help here?

From what I understand about WATSONS he used to handle cases on his own then got greedy and took too many on board. Last year about mid year I understood from his office that he was going to take on other(s) to help I was told that he had subsequently taken on one other solicitor and they were going to whizz through the backlog.

When I told them that my other case with another Solicitor had got a lot further the lady in the office was rather shocked:eek:. I asked if he would release me from the contract if he could not deal with this in the next two months as I wanted it passed onto another Solicitor.

He then rang and said that he was confident he would start my case within the next couple of months and that if the case went on to another solicitor it would be a step backwards.

THOMAS123

maxdp wrote: »

From what I understand about WATSONS he used to handle cases on his own then got greedy and took too many on board. Last year about mid year I understood from his office that he was going to take on other(s) to help I was told that he had subsequently taken on one other solicitor and they were going to whizz through the backlog.

When I told them that my other case with another Solicitor had got a lot further the lady in the office was rather shocked:eek:. I asked if he would release me from the contract if he could not deal with this in the next two months as I wanted it passed onto another Solicitor.

He then rang and said that he was confident he would start my case within the next couple of months and that if the case went on to another solicitor it would be a step backwards.

And now 8 mnths later..........

My advice would be to move now.

maxdp

THOMAS123 wrote: »

And now 8 mnths later..........

My advice would be to move now.

Yes thank you Thomas I am on the case. Letter is going off recorded delivery to them in the morning.

Thanks for your help

THOMAS123

maxdp wrote: »

Yes thank you Thomas I am on the case. Letter is going off recorded delivery to them in the morning.

Thanks for your help

Let's hope you're the first of many people on here to take such positive action.

Let's know how you get on and if we can help.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

And now 8 mnths later..........

My advice would be to move now.

I see what you are saying here Thomas123 but would another solicitor see things the same way as Watsons did and make the "same" complaint against a firm (ie voiding, unenforceable, commissions etc)?

Would they take the case on and actually say that you have claim at all and also surely going to another solicitor would just be the same as going through a solicitor from day one without any help from Loancheck - which is what most (if they could have afforded anyway!!) would have done. Will there be any charge to the client cause Loancheck said there would be no charge win or lose.

Surely there has been a lot of misleading in the meantime and also they are 2 years+ down the line in making a complaint and isn't there something within the courts whereby if a complainant knows" they have a complaint then they have to bring it to the courts within 3 years of knowing? How would they stand there?

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

I see what you are saying here Thomas123 but would another solicitor see things the same way as Watsons did and make the "same" complaint against a firm (ie voiding, unenforceable, commissions etc)?

Would they take the case on and actually say that you have claim at all and also surely going to another solicitor would just be the same as going through a solicitor from day one without any help from Loancheck - which is what most (if they could have afforded anyway!!) would have done. Will there be any charge to the client cause Loancheck said there would be no charge win or lose.

Surely there has been a lot of misleading in the meantime and also they are 2 years+ down the line in making a complaint and isn't there something within the courts whereby if a complainant knows" they have a complaint then they have to bring it to the courts within 3 years of knowing? How would they stand there?

At least people will know quickly where they stand - if Watsons have allowed the claim to run out of time then the cleint can sue for negligence.

People would be better going directly to solicitors but the main reason CMC's exist is because they find people before the solicitors do and charge them ( a fortune) for helping them with the investigation work before it gets to a solicitor.

If everyone was a member of this forum then they would be well informed but the problem is the vast majority of people are not and are (mis) led to believe that the service provided by CMC's is value for money.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

At least people will know quickly where they stand - if Watsons have allowed the claim to run out of time then the cleint can sue for negligence.

People would be better going directly to solicitors but the main reason CMC's exist is because they find people before the solicitors do and charge them ( a fortune) for helping them with the investigation work before it gets to a solicitor.

If everyone was a member of this forum then they would be well informed but the problem is the vast majority of people are not and are (mis) led to believe that the service provided by CMC's is value for money.

I agree with you there thomas123 in that CMC's "FIND" people that may or may not have claims regardless of whether they think it or not. There are plenty of solicitors who may take on cases if your complaint is a valid one and also FOS are looking at ways of making insurers responsible (although nothing concete yet!!) BUT this is just for PPI.

If you have a complaint about your "agreement" then I am unsure if FOS actually deals with commissions, voiding, etc.

If your complaints is solid though and its evident that you have been totally "ripped" off by the firm then I am sure someone would be able to find another solicitor to take this on with no problems whatsoever. Plenty of firms if you google them and I am sure anyone would really think twice next time of checking the terms of their contracts too and ASK questions before signing.

If it were me too, then I would not let Loancheck and all involved get away with what they have done, they have clearly misled people from the beginning and in my eyes they should be investigated thorougly before being able to do the same again. Why do they keep closing down and re-emerging? Why are they allowed to do this?

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

I agree with you there thomas123 in that CMC's "FIND" people that may or may not have claims regardless of whether they think it or not. There are plenty of solicitors who may take on cases if your complaint is a valid one and also FOS are looking at ways of making insurers responsible (although nothing concete yet!!) BUT this is just for PPI.

If you have a complaint about your "agreement" then I am unsure if FOS actually deals with commissions, voiding, etc.

If your complaints is solid though and its evident that you have been totally "ripped" off by the firm then I am sure someone would be able to find another solicitor to take this on with no problems whatsoever. Plenty of firms if you google them and I am sure anyone would really think twice next time of checking the terms of their contracts too and ASK questions before signing.

If it were me too, then I would not let Loancheck and all involved get away with what they have done, they have clearly misled people from the beginning and in my eyes they should be investigated thorougly before being able to do the same again. Why do they keep closing down and re-emerging? Why are they allowed to do this?

I agree that there should be an investigation into what has happened.

The non-PPI claims can be very complicated and no doubt expensive to run for a solicitor.

They would usually ask for money up front from the client to cover their fees and the Court fees. This could be well over a thousand!!!

It would be interesting to know how many solicitors are still willing to do this work on a no win no fee basis and importantly have the funding in place to persue the claim.