Loancheck/Watsons Solicitors

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

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?

I am sure that the Loancheck solicitors won't be too happy

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

I am sure that the Loancheck solicitors won't be too happy

Why won't Loancheck solicitors be too happy??? I don't understand you there. Who are loanchecks solicitors, do you mean watsons etc??? If you do then they would not be too happy cause up to yet they have been ripped off seemingly.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

That's a real possibility

It may help some on here then if this were to happen. Although lots have stopped posting now for some reason so maybe happy bunnies again!!

moo_cow

Originally Posted by 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.




Cartel & Loancheck linked? WOW! In many respects if the MOJ get into this then is it possible that this could be a positive? At least people would know where they stand and maybe at last have an end to this whole sorry mess. I have a feeling that the many people that were posting on here have maybe given up. I also think that people are worried about being billed. I know it concerns me.
And okay, even if Watson's are somehow also a victim in all this, It's still no excuse for leaving clients dangling without communication.
I'm determined to see this through to the bitter end like MAXDP. If we give up we could end up losing so much more than just a reclaim. We could end up with a big fat bill too.

If anyone else out there has still gotten nowhere, PLEASE go to the next step and officially COMPLAIN. MAXDP & MARSHALLKA have posted info everywhere showing you the way to go. If you do nothing then these people just pick themselves up and carry on and spread more misery. It has to stop!

marshallka

moo_cow wrote: »

Originally Posted by 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.




Cartel & Loancheck linked? WOW! In many respects if the MOJ get into this then is it possible that this could be a positive? At least people would know where they stand and maybe at last have an end to this whole sorry mess. I have a feeling that the many people that were posting on here have maybe given up. I also think that people are worried about being billed. I know it concerns me.
And okay, even if Watson's are somehow also a victim in all this, It's still no excuse for leaving clients dangling without communication.
I'm determined to see this through to the bitter end like MAXDP. If we give up we could end up losing so much more than just a reclaim. We could end up with a big fat bill too.

If anyone else out there has still gotten nowhere, PLEASE go to the next step and officially COMPLAIN. MAXDP & MARSHALLKA have posted info everywhere showing you the way to go. If you do nothing then these people just pick themselves up and carry on and spread more misery. It has to stop!

From how it looks from the outside looking in Watsons do appear to be victims in all of this too if they stand to lose out on their audit fees.

What I cannot understand is why people are at threat of legal fees IF their contract says otherwise. I am not on about what the sales person told you (as they are only wanting your signature) but if the contract says for definate that there are no fees at all and all fees/everything is covered by the insurance etc then how can they now say they charge???

What do these contracts actually say about fees? Do they say "you could be" charged a fee? I remember someone posting what their contract said and I will try and find it.

maxdp

Wonder if that may have been why the last thread was deleted then Marshallka because there may be a link.

Moo Cow you are right we do need to complain otherwise nothing ever happens.

It is the usual thing really people moan and groan in the background but are not willing to take it further. What is there to lose really?

Had a thought if the Solicitors took out loans to fund the cases, some through barclays, I was told that they would not take on any cases against Barclays cause that was who was a funder. Would the Solicitors now be able to take barclays to court for unenforceable documentation.LOL

marshallka

Just found a post here from Lesley

"the audit reports will enable my firm to assess the merits of your claim. loancheck require you to pay a fee of £3600.00 for this audit service. my firm will pay the audit fee on your behalf. loancheck will only be appointed to provide the audit reports on your claim once you have signed this letter and any conditional fee agreement with my firm. you are liable to reimburse my firm for the full amount of the audit fee, irrespective of whether you are able to recover the audit fee from the defendant if your claim is succesful or from the insurer, if your claim does not succeed."

"ideally your claim needs to be in excess of £5000.00 so that you can bring a claim in the county court fast track scheme. this would entitle you, if successful, to recover all your costs. if the claim is valued at less than £5000.00, then it would be allocated to the small claims track and usually you would not be entitled to recover your legal costs. this does then expose you to winning the case but not recovering your costs and disbursements. any monies that you recover would then effectively be wiped out as you would be liable to repay us the loancheck audit fee as mentioned and in addition we would be entitled to claim from you our reasonable costs"

Does this throw any light on the contracts you signed? This was posted by Lesley on the other thread.

moo_cow

[QUOTE=marshallka;30994095]From how it looks from the outside looking in Watsons do appear to be victims in all of this too if they stand to lose out on their audit fees.

What I cannot understand is why people are at threat of legal fees IF their contract says otherwise. I am not on about what the sales person told you (as they are only wanting your signature) but if the contract says for definate that there are no fees at all and all fees/everything is covered by the insurance etc then how can they now say they charge???

What do these contracts actually say about fees? Do they say "you could be" charged a fee? I remember someone posting what their contract said and I will try and find it.[/QUOTE]

Info from my contract

what do I pay if I lose?
if you lose, you pay your opponents charges and disbursements. You may be able to take out an insurance policy against this risk. (I was told this was being done on my behalf) If you lose, you do not pay our charges but we may require you to pay our disbursements.


The insurance policy.
It is my considered opinion that at this stage there is no requirement for an insurance policy to be incepted as there is no risk on costs until proceedings are issued. therefore, prior to the point of issue or at any given time, an appropriate contract of insurance will be put in place to cover your opponent's charges and disbursements in case you lose.
This is because;
We need to establish that you do not have an existing or satisfactory insurance that would cover the cost of making this claim, following which;

The insurance will cover;
(a) the costs of the other party in the event that the claim fails, to a maximum of £25,000;
(b) all your disbursements if your claim fails.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

That's a real possibility

Seems ORC over at the Cartel solicitors thread has said that MOJ would not intervene on Loancheck without high volumes of complaints. From posts on here they are not going to have high volumes of complaints cause MOST people were discouraging complaining (allowing the loancheck companies to wrap up nicely and quietly!!) and telling people to hang on and not complain yet!!

Makes me wonder now about some posters motives!!!

moo_cow

It then goes on to say:
As with the costs in general, you remain ulimately responsible for paying our success fee.
You agree to pay into a designated account any cheque recieved by you or by us from your opponent and made payable to you. Out of the money, you agree to let us take the balance of the basic charges; success fee; insurance premium; our remaining disbursements; and VAT.
you take the rest.
We are allowed to keep any interest your opponent pays on the charges.

Barristers who do not have a conditional fee agreement with us

If you win, then you will normally be entitled to recover all or part of their fee from your opponent. If you lose, then you must pay their fee.

Another section which leaps out at me

we can end this agreement early if we believe you are unlikely to win. If this happens, you will only have to pay our disbursements.These will include barristers' fees if the barrister does not have a conditional fee agreement with us.