Complaint management companies - what authority do they need to represent you?

BooJewels

I have successfully complained about my own PPI some time ago, but am currently managing the affairs of an elderly relative, under the terms of an LPA.

He/I (his mail is forwarded to me) received in the post today a cheque in respect of a PPI settlement amount from an organisation I had filed away as not active and not of concern to me. Until I register the LPA with them, I can't get full details and the letter was incredibly brief with no account number or details. It was therefore my immediate assumption that it must have been handled by a complaint management company, as no paperwork has come to light in respect of making a complaint himself. The organisation, in veiled general terms, suggested I was thinking along the right lines.

As I've been opening his mail for some months now, initially with him at home and more recently on his behalf, as he's in care, I haven't seen any paperwork about any such complaint, other than a few speculative ones telling him to act quickly as the deadline was approaching, but nothing about any specific account or complaint.

I'm not trying to worm out of paying any fee due on his behalf, if it was properly set up, but what do these management companies need in order to act on your behalf - what gives them authority to act and justify their fee - do you need to sign an agreement, fill in a form etc. etc. I'll ask to see evidence, but there must be a legal minimum if they're regulated?

I haven't yet seen anything that would suggest that there was a formal arrangement in place and the financial organisation expressed some concern when I described the circumstances, that he may have agreed to something under duress and without understanding what he was agreeing to, which may be a matter for the FCA.

What sort of time scale might this have been active over, as I know how long I've been monitoring his affairs and it's entirely possible that it was before this time and done with his full understanding at the time, in which case, their fee will be paid appropriately, once I'm satisfied that it was all proper. The financial organisation were a bit surprised that I hadn't already seen a bill, as she said they are usually very prompt in doing so, invoices often arriving before the funds.

I'd appreciate some pointers please - if only of the right questions to ask to satisfy myself, on his behalf, that it's all been done properly. Thank you!

[Deleted User]

Ask to see a signed agreement.

BooJewels

Deleted_User wrote: »

Ask to see a signed agreement.

Thanks, so there would need to be one then?

The_squirrell

Hope that this helps....

1. (1) 1CMCOB 2.1.10R prohibits a firm from taking a payment from a customer before the customer has signed an agreement with the firm. It is not sufficient for the firm to enter into an agreement with the customer orally for this purpose: the agreement should be signed.
2. (2) The signature should be on a hard copy of the agreement which may be given or posted to the firm, else sent by fax, or scanned or photographed and sent electronically. Alternatively, the customer could insert a digital image of their handwritten signature into an electronic copy of the agreement before returning the agreement to the firm by email.
3. (3) The FCA would not view an agreement as having been signed for the purposes of CMCOB 2.1.10R where the customer does no more to indicate their acceptance of the firm’s terms and conditions than to send a text message or email or to tick a box on a website or web-based form.
4. (4) The firm will also need to have complied with the requirements of CMCOB 4 (Pre-contractual requirements), including the requirement to take reasonable steps to ensure that the customer understands the agreement (see CMCOB 4.3.1R(3)). Where an agreement is entered into electronically, those steps should include the firm satisfying itself that the customer has had the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the contract.

BooJewels

The_squirrell wrote: »

Hope that this helps....
[snipped all the good stuff]

Thank you, it most certainly does. I probably could have found the right answer, but in laziness I knew if I asked here someone would know - or at least point me in the right direction.

So a speculative phone call asking "have you ever had PPI, have you complained about it, would you like us to look into it for you" . . . "yes please, there's nothing to lose" would, I assume, therefore not suffice.

That was my concern - that he'd got a phone call and been bamboozled into something. The very day of the last pretty catastrophic incident that saw him leave his home for the last time and end up in care, he'd returned a phone call to a hang up or odd message and incurred about 15 quid in phone charges to a premium line, so he was vulnerable to that sort of confusing telephone incident. It's also entirely possible that he signed something without understanding it - there have been similar examples of those too - so I'll just have to take it on the chin if he did.

It's annoying as I told him about my own successes and asked if he'd ever had PPI and did he want me to look at it for him and he said he'd never had any, so not worth bothering.

BooJewels

I also note, following your links, that

CMCOB 2.1.2R01/04/2019
A firm must establish and implement clear, effective and appropriate policies and procedures to identify and protect vulnerable customers.

I think the gentleman in question probably qualified. The organisation that have sent the cheque (I've since found a credit card with a 0 balance in my safe, that I'd locked away when a new one arrived in the post, so it must be this) were concerned about this aspect of it, hence I want to get the LPA to them so that we can talk in more detail. They seemed keen to work with me if I felt it hadn't been appropriately handled.

The_squirrell

The regulations came into effect from April this year, so if its before that it will be a bit tougher.

If you have LPA then you would be able to submit a Subject Access Request on his behalf. The claims company would then need to provide all personal information they have on your relative, including any authority given.

BooJewels

The_squirrell wrote: »

The regulations came into effect from April this year, so if its before that it will be a bit tougher.

Ah, that's a blow - if he did agree to something, it would have been before this time, as I've been doing his admin and opened almost all of his mail since the end of January.

If you have LPA then you would be able to submit a Subject Access Request on his behalf. The claims company would then need to provide all personal information they have on your relative, including any authority given.

Thanks, I think that will be the route I'll be going - I've done SARs for other matters. As of now, I don't even know who it might be with as I haven't heard from anyone.

As I said earlier, there has been post from the same company on many occasions that sounded very speculative about deadlines and needing information, but it didn't sound as though they were handling a specific claim (and I've had exactly the same docs myself) and I had a shredding session at the weekend, so don't have any copies to check their name. I'll just have to wait and see what appears.

Thanks for your help, much appreciated.

SonOf

Whilst these firms became regulated with the FCA in April they were still regulated previously. Albeit with a lower quality body, the ministry of justice. Firms still needed a letter of authority/contract to be signed.

Be aware that some CMCs will bill against a change of mind by the provider when they have no right to. e.g. a complaint that failed a couple of years ago but the provider, by themselves, has reviewed the case and changed their mind and is now paying out. CMCs should not be billing on those but many do.

BooJewels

Thanks for the clarification and heads up SonOf. I'm going to have to wait and see what appears and then ask them for clarification - probably via a SAR.

I don't mind paying a legitimately earned bill, but having discussed it with him and told him how easily it could be followed up and offering to do so for him, I can't help feeling a little resentful that he might have to pay out for something that was entirely avoidable. My fee would have been a fish supper. But I'm perhaps more concerned that he undertook this course of action without fully understanding it, or what it might cost.

I'm visiting his property this week, so I'll dig a bit more carefully through paperwork and see if I've missed anything. It might be in the file for the financial organisation itself, which I barely looked at as it wasn't of active interest.

BooJewels

If I may ask a supplementary question - looking at the CMCOB pages that @The_Squirrel kindly referenced, there's a section on fee capping. It looks like [since April?] there's a fee cap of '20% of the amount recovered'.

Was this the case before April, had he signed up before then? Which he surely must have, as he was very unlikely to have opportunity to do since January. There are also all sorts of pre-contractual requirements in the CMCOB included in which is how the fees should be outlined (in a durable format), with illustrative examples required where percentages are discussed etc.

I had it in mind that these CMCs were charging much higher fees than 20%, hence my initial concerns, but 20% is a more acceptable figure than I was envisioning. Not that I'm that thrilled about paying anything, when it was wholly avoidable.