Loancheck/Watsons Solicitors

marshallka

kate705 wrote: »

That is exactly what I have been thinking, was it in the autumn when a big case was lost regarding all the unfair bank charges? Were a lot of the cases connected to charges for commission etc? Sorry haven't kept up with the law...does anyone know?

This may be something. Not too sure but would think it would make some complaints no longer valid perhaps?? Not 100% though?

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/consultations/OFT1175con.pdf

kate705

marshallka wrote: »

This may be something. Not too sure but would think it would make some complaints no longer valid perhaps?? Not 100% though?

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/consultations/OFT1175con.pdf

Hi, link doesn't seem to work!

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

But one poster says that Watsons do not want this type of work anymore. If this is the case then I wonder why when it was such a money making scheme? If they have paid loancheck and have to get the money back then surely they would be insured for these things? I wonder what their contract said with Loancheck for these types of things happening? Also weren't ALL cases risk assessed by loancheck before passing onto solicitors so they should all be good cases TBH with good chances of winning or have they found out otherwise perhaps? Has something happened in law to make this change perhaps?

Just looking through my agreement with Solicitor

"I am obliged to advise you that as you are aware, your case has been referred to us from

---

Full details of this arrangement are available upon request if so required. This arrangement does not compromise our integrity to act in your best interest."

They have not stated who referred.

We are required by the Solicitors Introduction and Referral Code to inform you of any financial arrangements concerning the referral of your claim to this firm. As a member of the panel of Solicitors approved by Severn Administration Limited, we are not required to pay a fee to any agent who introduced your claim to us, we are obliged to pay a fee to Severn Administration for the preparation of an audit report on the grounds for your claim.

We are not authorised by the FSA however we are included on the register maintained by the FSA so that we can carry on insurance mediation activity, which is broadly the advising on, selling and administration of insurance contracts. The part of our business including arrangmeent for complaints or redress if anything goes wrong is regulated by the Law Society. The register can e accessed via the FSA website at www.fsa.gov.uk/register

Obviously that is not the whole document just paragraphs I have picked out.

maxdp

kate705 wrote: »

I took a complaint to the FO before re this case and unfortunately it was not upheld. It was on a completely different point of law. The reclaiming of the PPI is totally separate so guess I can take it to them if my complaint isn't dealt with by the lenders. I will have to start from scratch and just reclaim myself direct from either the lender or FO if they will not repay.
Hope this makes sense...

Yes as Marshallka says you could always claim against the insurer. Think she has been successful doing that after being turned down by the FOS. I know this is going to take a while if it goes through the FOS but you may be successful directly with the insurer and not have to go through the FOS.

maxdp

I had one case cancelled about a year ago because it was risk assessed as not a good chance of winning. Was a tiny loan my Business Partner had taken out many moons ago. I asked for all paperwork to be returned and Watsons did this. It says in their terms and conditions that they will return all paperwork to you as long as there is no outstanding fees. Take that as you will!

maxdp

Have written letter and it will be going recorded at lunch time. They have until next tuesday and if I do not get the information I require I shall be going to the Law Society. Also seeing as they are on the FSA register plus a complaint there as well.

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

Yes as Marshallka says you could always claim against the insurer. Think she has been successful doing that after being turned down by the FOS. I know this is going to take a while if it goes through the FOS but you may be successful directly with the insurer and not have to go through the FOS.

I went through FOS maxdp against the insurer for the REBATE, not for the misselling. I argued this time and time again for OTHERS not myself that they should try to widen jurisidictions against insurers and make them responsible if brokers/lenders are not within their netting.

My rebate complaint was ALWAYS within jurisdiction if the rebate can be proved to be unfair. Not every rebate is unfair though.

maxdp

Have today rung up the Administrators and spoken to a very nice lady there. I have been asked to e mail her all info I have on Watsons and my other case plus all information on the Data Protection side. e.g. Who I send the information to etc. I will ask lots of questions and hope that she may be able to give me some information.

unlucky45

Just for everyones information

The lady that runs Stokes & Co is a former watsons employee that worked out of the loancheck office near shrewsbury.

She ran the legal team at loancheck along with a barrister they had allthough i cant remember his name

I believe she was then poached by black knight to create a new solicitors practice in telford, and occupies or did occupy the office that black knight used to trade from as i received literiture from them at this address about being and introducer of cases to black knight (not a chance)

I believe from my research and speaking to the people on the ground that Stokes and Co was set-up and funded by black knight as somewhere for them to put all the cases they have, most of which are some 2 years down the line still having not been placed with solicitors.

I would consider all of this before you think that your cases being transfered from one firm to the next is a positve step in the right direction.

Good Luck

maxdp

Hi There

Think that fact is coming clearer and clearer at the moment.