Loancheck/Watsons Solicitors

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

If the solicitors had to pay an audit fee to Loancheck for the cases of about £2k per case and as such "zero" cases have been completed (except the one we know of on here) then how much would the solicitors be outstanding up to now? How much was paid over to Loancheck etc in all and why have they gone bump??? Whose fault is it that the cases are not going to court? If Loancheck had to pay the fee back to the solicitors if the cases did not progress then how can this be done as the loancheck company, severn administration are in administration or can they claim it back from the company still trading??? Also where did the solicitors get their money from to pay over to loancheck in the first place? Won't they be repaying that back now? What a mess.

There were about 1800 cases according to the accounts so that's £3.6m

Barclays funded £1m, and looking at the reports other lenders provided the rest of the money.

In theory this would be all re-payable to the solicitors - but if the companies are in administration then presumably there's no money.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

There were about 1800 cases according to the accounts so that's £3.6m

Barclays funded £1m, and looking at the reports other lenders provided the rest of the money.

In theory this would be all re-payable to the solicitors - but if the companies are in administration then presumably there's no money.

Was that £3.6m just over a year??? Wow, how have they got through that amount of money then??? So the solicitors are outstanding this money then and will have to repay it I assume?

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

If the solicitors had to pay an audit fee to Loancheck for the cases of about £2k per case and as such "zero" cases have been completed (except the one we know of on here) then how much would the solicitors be outstanding up to now? How much was paid over to Loancheck etc in all and why have they gone bump??? Whose fault is it that the cases are not going to court? If Loancheck had to pay the fee back to the solicitors if the cases did not progress then how can this be done as the loancheck company, severn administration are in administration or can they claim it back from the company still trading??? Also where did the solicitors get their money from to pay over to loancheck in the first place? Won't they be repaying that back now? What a mess.

I wonder how many solicitors got greedy thinking that this was an easy ride and take on as many clients as they could. I know that was the case with one of mine. They took on another solicitor to try to work through the load. Greed is the issue. Now it is biting them in the bum they have ostrich syndrome. I hope everyone gets the balls to complain about them.:o

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

I wonder how many solicitors got greedy thinking that this was an easy ride and take on as many clients as they could. I know that was the case with one of mine. They took on another solicitor to try to work through the load. Greed is the issue. Now it is biting them in the bum they have ostrich syndrome. I hope everyone gets the balls to complain about them.:o

But they never worked through ANY of the load did they so I cannot get my head around that one as it was the solicitors that paid the first part of the fee over to loancheck so you think they would at least work through "some" of the load. Why are they not taking cases to court now then? That is what I cannot understand? Who passed all these cases over to the solicitors and did they get paid for it? If they did and the cases are not going anywhere then would these agents have to also pay back their profit from passing the cases on?

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

But they never worked through ANY of the load did they so I cannot get my head around that one as it was the solicitors that paid the first part of the fee over to loancheck so you think they would at least work through "some" of the load. Why are they not taking cases to court now then? That is what I cannot understand? Who passed all these cases over to the solicitors and did they get paid for it? If they did and the cases are not going anywhere then would these agents have to also pay back their profit from passing the cases on?

The solicitors relied on Loancheck to tell them they had a case.

Loancheck got paid by the solicitors for assessing a positive case.

Solicitors realised eventually that no case to answer and Loancheck information incorrect.

Solicitors then asked Loancheck for the money back but Loancheck do not have it.

Hmmmm

If you replace the words Solicitors with Clients and Loancheck with Cartel..........

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

The solicitors relied on Loancheck to tell them they had a case.

Loancheck got paid by the solicitors for assessing a positive case.

Solicitors realised eventually that no case to answer and Loancheck information incorrect.

Solicitors then asked Loancheck for the money back but Loancheck do not have it.

Hmmmm

If you replace the words Solicitors with Clients and Loancheck with Cartel..........

That is what I was saying a few posts back. So the solicitors are now a lot of money down with no way of actually getting it back or can they sue Loancheck IF the information loancheck gave was proved incorrect and there is one loancheck company still active isn't there? I must admit though that I would think being solicitors they would have checked and not relied on Loancheck TBH as Loancheck were not legal bods were they??? Still a mess and still very much like Cartel from posts on here but seems that instead of clients being ripped off it was investors/solicitors. I wonder if they have done this before with the old loancheck companies that went bump.

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

That is what I was saying a few posts back. So the solicitors are now a lot of money down with no way of actually getting it back or can they sue Loancheck IF the information loancheck gave was proved incorrect and there is one loancheck company still active isn't there? I must admit though that I would think being solicitors they would have checked and not relied on Loancheck TBH as Loancheck were not legal bods were they??? Still a mess and still very much like Cartel from posts on here but seems that instead of clients being ripped off it was investors/solicitors. I wonder if they have done this before with the old loancheck companies that went bump.

Loancheck did have in house barrister so it looked impressive.

Cartel Client Review also introduced cases to Loancheck

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Loancheck did have in house barrister so it looked impressive.

So did this in house barrister have anything to do with passing the cases to solicitors? Did the solicitors rely upon their judgement? If they did then although Loancheck are not legal bods then could this be classed as negligent by loancheck?

marshallka

OMG. Just seen your post above about Cartel. So Cartel and Loancheck are linked??? Surely then MOJ will get into this then during their investigations.

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

OMG. Just seen your post above about Cartel. So Cartel and Loancheck are linked??? Surely then MOJ will get into this then during their investigations.

That's a real possibility