Right Hassle PoPLA Adjudications

dazster

bod1467 wrote: »

I don't know if you came up with that, but I like it.

No, I can't claim the credit!

Zero_Gravitas

Any chance of seeing a WH adjudication, please?

Thanks in advance!

dazster

The one I have seen was in confidence, neither the appellant nor the person who showed it to me has indicated that they are willing for it to be published.

Zero_Gravitas

No problem - I understand. Would be interesting to see one at some point, though.

pappa_golf

dazster wrote: »

The Legal Ombudsman, however, is a different matter: WH has to pay the Ombudsman £400 for every complaint investigated, regardless of the outcome.

However, the Ombudsman will only investigate complaints regarding legal services provided to the complainant, it will not investigate complaints about legal services provided to someone else. So, is Wright Hassall proving legal services to the appellant? I would argue that they are (of course!), but I'll bet that WH will argue otherwise and say that their client is the BPA.

and with a staff of 120 , I somehow think that might have been discussed when signing the contract , the ISPA , have covered their butts with the statement:




"The role of the ISPA Board is to independently oversee the decision making process to ensure that it
is fair and independent. ISPA is not responsible for the operation of the appeals scheme and is
therefore not involved in, or responsible for, the appointment of the appeal service provider."


see how the ranks close


no one will be responsible for this fiasco

beamerguy

pappa_golf wrote: »

in 2020 the SRA will reply
"we have looked into your complaints regarding WH and find no wrong doings , however we will hold your complaint on file.

after 100s of complaints about swarts , it took them 3 yrs to say he had to work for a company rather than be self employed , therefor legitimising the £50 fee

The SRA are the typical "private club" or "the old boys network"
Don't expect that they will be remotely interested
They should be with this expanding scam, don't hold your breath.

Everyone has the right to reject Wright Hassall if their appeal fails.
Who are Wright Hassall anyway, just a firm of solicitors but in reality a simple bunch of "nobody's"

I still cannot see where they have the legal right to adjudicate for 3,500 plus people, apart from the ridiculous appointment by the even more ridiculous BPA
The Wright Hassall scandal will explode in their faces and also the infamous BPA

Herzlos

beamerguy wrote: »

The Prankster states "The third problem is that the WH assessor is not named...most likely for reasons which will become obvious."
Being appointed by the BPA is not exactly official.

It's official, in that it's part of the appeals process in the Code Of Practice being followed.

Plus, 3,500 plus people showed willing in the first place and they were let down. Therefore, there is every reason to reject everything that Wright Hassall do with poor adjudication.

True, but then will it look better to go to court against WH, armed with a sheet of legal clangers supplied to WH, or to just ignore them?

Of course, after the initial rejection (and it'll be interesting to see if they publish a rejection rate), you can tie up a lot of WH/BPA/MP time complaining about the appeal.

beamerguy

pappa_golf wrote: »

"The role of the ISPA Board is to independently oversee the decision making process to ensure that it
is fair and independent.

THEY FAILED THEN ??

Maybe the ISPA board did not know of Wright Hassall's other hat:rotfl:

beamerguy

Herzlos wrote: »

It's official, in that it's part of the appeals process in the Code Of Practice being followed.

True, but then will it look better to go to court against WH, armed with a sheet of legal clangers supplied to WH, or to just ignore them?

Of course, after the initial rejection (and it'll be interesting to see if they publish a rejection rate), you can tie up a lot of WH/BPA/MP time complaining about the appeal.

I am all for going to court with Wright Hassall, there is now enough damning information about them.
Trouble is, most people would rather pay up than go to court and the scammers know that

Yes, agree that complaints to WH/BPA/MP will indeed tie up their time and as I said in a previous post, this is going to cost WH a lot of money, a lot more than it's worth.

I really cannot blame WH for taking on what they thought was an easy money maker, the blame is the appointment of WH by the BPA who clearly knew there was a confliction of interests ?

Guess very shortly, WH will be after more money from the BPA just to handle all the complaints. Watch this space, in this world it's dog eats dog

Umkomaas

bod1467 wrote: »

I don't know if you came up with that, but I like it.

Moi!

It helps separate the bad from the ugly! :cool: