CCLS - Consumer Credit Litigation solicitors - Burleys Solicitors CLOSED

Alpine_Star

According to the MOJ they are supposed to break even on the costs of regulation versus the fees they charge.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/latest-updates/claims-mgt-regulation-fees-determination.htm

https://www.claimsregulation.gov.uk/...pdate_2009.pdf

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Not so much "applauding" but more passive acceptance.

I'm sure that they have had many complaints before now about Cartel

A few years worth I think!! So have they been building up the pot first before looking into companies. (regardless of what has been happening). Allowing it for personal gain. Who regulates MOJ???


But they are regulators and should regulate for the consumer shouldn't they or am I barking up the wrong tree. I thought their job was to look into the best interests for consumers and not themselves? I obviously do not understand what they are about? Totally confusing.

THOMAS123

Alpine_Star wrote: »

According to the MOJ they are supposed to break even on the costs of regulation versus the fees they charge.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/latest-updates/claims-mgt-regulation-fees-determination.htm

https://www.claimsregulation.gov.uk/...pdate_2009.pdf

Of course, but the lower the income, the lower the headcount.

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

A few years worth I think!! So have they been building up the pot first before looking into companies. (regardless of what has been happening). Allowing it for personal gain. Who regulates MOJ???


But they are regulators and should regulate for the consumer shouldn't they or am I barking up the wrong tree. I thought their job was to look into the best interests for consumers and not themselves? I obviously do not understand what they are about? Totally confusing.

They regulate for the consumer to make sure that they are not taken for a ride (honestly).

In reality, it would be better if the MOJ section dealing with CMC's and the SRA joined forces as CMC's could not exist without solicitors to take their work forward.

By the time the SRA gets involved the consumers are already a long way down the path and often out of pocket.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

They regulate for the consumer to make sure that they are not taken for a ride (honestly).

In reality, it would be better if the MOJ section dealing with CMC's and the SRA joined forces as CMC's could not exist without solicitors to take their work forward.

By the time the SRA gets involved the consumers are already a long way down the path and often out of pocket.

Perhaps then people should start a petition up to get MOJ thorougly investigated as they are not doing their job according to this site on "lots" of companies. Not just certain ones as there are lots that are ripping off consumers and MOJ are turning a blind eye after receiving numerous compaints. I blame them more than anyone TBH cause they have had complaints ages ago and let this carry on.

I wonder if the likes of Cartel actually knew of any complaints against them. Perhaps if MOJ never let them know then they always thought that people were happy with them. If a regulator allowed them to work for so long why should they change their business tactics. If it was good enough then then perhaps its good enough now... its gone on for this long so if MOJ were making a profit from claims management companies income then perhaps they also have a complaint. Seems to me every regulator is out for themselves and not the consumers they were set up for.

THOMAS123

marshallka wrote: »

Perhaps then people should start a petition up to get MOJ thorougly investigated as they are not doing their job according to this site on "lots" of companies. Not just certain ones as there are lots that are ripping off consumers and MOJ are turning a blind eye after receiving numerous compaints. I blame them more than anyone TBH cause they have had complaints ages ago and let this carry on.

I wonder if the likes of Cartel actually knew of any complaints against them. Perhaps if MOJ never let them know then they always thought that people were happy with them. If a regulator allowed them to work for so long why should they change their business tactics. If it was good enough then then perhaps its good enough now... its gone on for this long so if MOJ were making a profit from claims management companies income then perhaps they also have a complaint. Seems to me every regulator is out for themselves and not the consumers they were set up for.

Remeber the MOJ have put out several press releases warning consumers about upfront fees and the SRA have also warned solicitors.

Unfortunately there seems to have been little co-ordination and many of the consumer complaints on here and scam.com seem to follow the same pattern i.e. with consumers complaining about the CMC's and then the solicitors.

The truth of the matter is that CMC's and Solicitors work very closely together- so closely that it is often difficult to see the difference.

marshallka

THOMAS123 wrote: »

Remeber the MOJ have put out several press releases warning consumers about upfront fees and the SRA have also warned solicitors.

Unfortunately there seems to have been little co-ordination and many of the consumer complaints on here and scam.com seem to follow the same pattern i.e. with consumers complaining about the CMC's and then the solicitors.

The truth of the matter is that CMC's and Solicitors work very closely together- so closely that it is often difficult to see the difference.

Yes, two of the same from reading on other forums. At least the SRA have done a job. Have yet to see if MOJ do theirs also.

esmerellda

https://www.claimsregulation.gov.uk/userfiles/file/CMR_Impact_Update_2009.pdf

A useful read - Impact of Regulation – Assessment – Update 2009 July

21. The collective response from the various regulators has so far not been sufficient. This partly stems from the number of regulators and other agencies involved. The succession of warnings by the Claims Management Regulator, the Office of Fair Trading and the Solicitors Regulation Authority have served a useful purpose but those engaged in serious malpractice are less likely to be influenced by warnings, but rather are influenced by enforcement action.

22. This issue needs to be tacked more urgently and to do so is likely to require significant additional resources, and in relation to the Claims Management Regulator beyond what is currently available. The SRA and the OFT both have a direct responsibility in this area. Solicitors are not only handling claims passed on by claims management businesses but are also seeking claims directly, and the OFT has responsibility for regulating consumer credit and debt counselling and for consumer protection generally. A joint approach by these three bodies, with one clearly in the lead, accountable and providing the necessary resources, is needed.

25. When claims management regulation was conceived it was seen as being a minor regulatory function dealing predominantly with personal injury and endowment claims and designed to fill the gaps between other regulators. It was also seen as an interim solution pending the establishment of the Legal Services Board, the working assumption being that the Board would assume responsibility for claims management in due course. The situation that now exists is rather different from that had been envisaged, in particular the number of businesses being authorised is much higher than anticipated and most of the major problem areas are where other regulators are also involved. It will soon be necessary to review the scope and structure of regulation, including whether a significant regulatory regime can continue to be run from within a government department.

ALSO Page 41 on....

J_D_3

THOMAS123 wrote: »

The MOJ have a great deal of power over CMC's and can ultimately remove their license to trade.

There is now apparently far more initial due diligence investigation into new applicants than there was in the past.

So there's no chance of a phoenix-from-the-ashes company getting authorised by the MoJ?

It appears I can't post links being a new boy Just google grassrootsfinancial

esmerellda

Grass Roots Financial was authorised last year but yes is intended, it seems, to be the parachute company Cartel also recently (november last year) gained MOJ authorisation on personal injury etc claims with Cartel Claims Ltd.

Lets see what happens Tuesday.