help please with Universal Wealth preservation Trust

Peripatetic

I did email Shivani@kleymansolicitors.com sometime ago but didn't get a reply. Could you tell me whether there were a lot of people at this meeting and perhaps some information as to what solutions to our problems they provided

Doc_N

IanManc wrote: »

There have been repeated references to another firm of solicitors on this thread, including contact details, so perhaps others could reasonably conclude that there wasn't a problem in their joining in.

Not all solicitors are bent ambulance chasers. They do help people and they undergo extensive training so that they're capable of doing so.

And no, I don't have any connexion with either firm of solicitors mentioned in this thread, or any knowledge of them.

Couldn't agree more - there are some excellent solicitors around, as well as some hopeless ones and some thoroughly corrupt ones.

There is a protocol, though, for posts from businesses, and the post above clearly breaches it. The other posts to which you refer are almost entirely from ordinary MSE members (apparently) and not from the firms themselves. There is one exception, and that firm has MSE approval to post.

MSE is not a place for firms to sell their wares, and that includes solicitors.

Not_out_running

Earlier this month we discovered that our parents had put their property in a Steven Long trust. They now have a solicitor acting for them, starting with trying to change the named trustees.

We would like to know how the other people who started sooner with similar processes are getting on, as so far their solicitor has had attempts to make contact with Mr Long or his companies rebuffed, and they don't have access to their full Trust documentation.

From wandering around the internet I've seen at least four firms of solicitors boasting that they can help their clients get out of Universal Wealth trust problems - but are there really any happy ex-Universal Wealth victims yet, or are solicitors just hoovering up collections of clients?

Malthusian

Not_out_running wrote: »

From wandering around the internet I've seen at least four firms of solicitors boasting that they can help their clients get out of Universal Wealth trust problems - but are there really any happy ex-Universal Wealth victims yet, or are solicitors just hoovering up collections of clients?

The first sign that Universal Wealth clients had sought professional legal advice and that legal action was in hand came just under two months ago. [STRIKE]My understanding is that removing the Longs or Universal Wealth as trustees from these trusts will require court action and a ruling from a judge. It's likely to take several months just to get a court date. If Steven Long decides to string it out, it could take years before Universal Wealth is removed as trustees. So no, I think it is extremely unlikely that there are any happy ex-Universal victims yet.[/STRIKE] *edit*: See the post from Barker Gotelee below who is in a much better position than me.

The short version of this story is that the Universal Wealth victims gave away an asset (to a trust controlled by Universal Wealth / Steve Long) and now regret doing so and want it back. That will always be an uphill struggle if the recipient chooses not to co-operate.

le_loup

Malthusian wrote: »

The short version of this story is that the Universal Wealth victims gave away an asset ……………

…………. so that I could pay for their care costs rather than their children!

Doc_N

le_loup wrote: »

…………. so that I could pay for their care costs rather than their children!

.........except that the scheme didn't work anyway because it was marketed as a scheme to avoid care home fees, which ipso facto made it fail under the deprivation of assets rules applied by local councils.

Glen_Clark

le_loup wrote: »

…………. so that I could pay for their care costs rather than their children!

all of whom claim it was done without their knowlege......
But whoever the biggest crooks are I would still like to see the money paid back.
So their mums and dads can go in nice care homes of their own choice, and I don't have to pay for them

Glen_Clark

Doc_N wrote: »

.........except that the scheme didn't work anyway because it was marketed as a scheme to avoid care home fees, which ipso facto made it fail under the deprivation of assets rules applied by local councils.

So whoever gave their money to these scammers is not the sharpest tool in the shed and is going to need our help to get it back. Otherwise we will be losers too if we end up paying their care home fees

Malthusian

le_loup wrote: »

…………. so that I could pay for their care costs rather than their children!

Rather than they themselves, you mean. Children don't pay for their parents' care costs unless they choose to.

If money you are due to inherit is used to buy something, it is not a cost to you. No more than any other money which someone could give to you but chooses not to.

Barker_Gotelee

Not_out_running wrote: »

We would like to know how the other people who started sooner with similar processes are getting on, as so far their solicitor has had attempts to make contact with Mr Long or his companies rebuffed, and they don't have access to their full Trust documentation.

Malthusian wrote: »

My understanding is that removing the Longs or Universal Wealth as trustees from these trusts will require court action and a ruling from a judge. It's likely to take several months just to get a court date. If Steven Long decides to string it out, it could take years before Universal Wealth is removed as trustees. So no, I think it is extremely unlikely that there are any happy ex-Universal victims yet.

Hi All

In the majority of cases, removing Universal/Steven and Melanie Long should be relatively straightforward. We as a firm have successfully done this for a number of clients and have advised other solicitors on the best way forward. We have not needed to make contact with Universal or Steven and Melanie Long, however this will depend on the terms of your trust deeds.

Updating the land registry is the next step and we have applications pending. I understand that others have already been successful.

Some clients have found the trusts have been very beneficial to them and others have chosen not to keep the trusts. It really depends on why they were set up, the advice that was received at the time and the circumstances. There are many reasons why people may set up trusts like this.

In regards to 'happy' Universal clients, I suspect that no clients are going to be truly happy as they have had to incur extra expense in removing the trustees, however yes, some have successfully done this at relatively low cost and some have gained benefits from the trusts they set up.

The first step is to seek advice directly from a legal professional. I would recommend taking unregulated firms with a pinch of salt and making sure that your solicitor is confident they can advise you properly.

On a related note, I have heard reference to firms encouraging class actions to recover original documents held at Universal's former premises, Dencora House, including reference to a court order to gain forced entry to the building. For the avoidance of doubt, those of us in contact with Suffolk Police will know that the documents are no long held at Dencora House; this was a rented building which the landlord would clearly have required back after the rent stopped being paid. The documents which were in Dencora House have been secured and works are underway to determine how best to proceed with these. Please note that we do not hold your documents at this time.

A solicitor with experience regarding trusts and property will be able to advise you on the best way to proceed without access to the original documents. So far, we have experienced few difficulties as a result of not being able to obtain the original documents.

Kind regards

Becky