Quanta Law - Misold interest only

ngtf

Same as Stolenmerc above, I have "signed up" and am now worried that I am in for thousands, any help please?

The_squirrell

ngtf said:

Same as Stolenmerc above, I have "signed up" and am now worried that I am in for thousands, any help please?

When did you sign the agreement? If it was within fourteen days then you will be able to cancel

ngtf

Unfortunately it was in March of this year!

The_squirrell

ngtf said:

Unfortunately it was in March of this year!

That's a shame as you are now stuck with their (worthless) agreement. You can cancel at any time, but will be liable to fees, so the only thing you can do is ask them what these would be at this stage. In theory the sooner you cancel, the less you will have to pay. If the fees are ridiculous, then you can complain to Quanta themselves and then to the Legal Ombudsman if you are not happy with their response.

12kvision

 Once you are beyond the cooling off period you are committed to upholding the terms of your agreement with the law firm. It is always better to carefully consider the terms and your commitment to the claim before proceeding for future reference. However the idea you will be held responsible financially in the event you are unsuccessful is completely untrue. So any advice you should back out and "take the hit now" is incredibly poor, you are gambling on speculative, random advice being accurate rather than the legal document you are party to. My advice is sit it out and relax. Chase updates as little or as often as you wish but don't hit the panic button because you've received random internet advice.

1) The idea these claims are completely speculative is not true. All the claims are vetted and the criteria is extremely narrow. Many many more claims are rejected than taken on, so it is not a case of random punts. A lot of time is spent on every single claim before it reaches funding. And they do reach funding, more on that in a sec...

2) Claims have been successful, I have seen them with my own eyes. I'm not going further into this for now but it is not as unlikely as being made out. The likelihood of success of a random mortgage post 2004 is extremely low, and this is why people see it as this impossibility as much has been said online. The likelihood of success for a claim that has reached your stage is much higher due to the way the claims are vetted and the stage you have reached. No guarantees and can take a long time.

3) The insurance fraud idea is completely fanciful. The law firm in question has a number of funding avenues for different types of claims. The idea there is no investor willing to back them and no genuine ATE insurance in place is scare mongering nonsense. Pay no heed to it.

12kvision

I can't speak to what all firms are doing.

Regarding compensation figures, these are not random inflated figures, however I think they can be poorly explained. Initial figures are an approximation and if the clients are given access to these at a preliminary stage then that would be a definite mistake. However what happens is further information comes to light, often from the client themselves or the broker. Every claim is considered by an expert witness once the overall merit of a case is sufficient. Furthermore, these claims don't operate in a vacuum, FSCS and FOS have their own view. So I can understand the frustration but there is no attempt to mislead on compensation. It is similar to any type of claim, the situation is dynamic and there are a lot of things that can impact compensation.

[Deleted User]

Curious you seem to know a lot about this situation, are you perchance posting as a representative of the company without prior authorisation from the site?

12kvision

I'm not a representative or current employee. But I have experience of the processes. I don't think I should need to go further than that on this point as it's frankly not very important in comparison to good advice being offered.

 I thought I'd offer an opposing view to many given thus far to be helpful to those that are concerned with their claim and are probably made even more so by some of the information given.

The_squirrell

Now this is interesting 12kvision. Thank you for joining and contributing some very interesting and very well informed views on the subject. I must say that they differ wildly from my own direct experience of these types of claims and I would be very happy to discuss and debate your side of the issue in more detail. I agree, that the more information that any prospective clients have would be beneficial to them and help them to make an informed decision. For full transparency, Quanta have on occasions have cased referred to them by Trusted Mortgage Claims. This FCA warning from last week would suggest that clients are wary. https://www.fca.org.uk/news/warnings/trusted-mortgage-claims

brettcta

The_squirrell said:

Now this is interesting 12kvision. Thank you for joining and contributing some very interesting and very well informed views on the subject. I must say that they differ wildly from my own direct experience of these types of claims and I would be very happy to discuss and debate your side of the issue in more detail. I agree, that the more information that any prospective clients have would be beneficial to them and help them to make an informed decision. For full transparency, Quanta have on occasions have cased referred to them by Trusted Mortgage Claims. This FCA warning from last week would suggest that clients are wary. https://www.fca.org.uk/news/warnings/trusted-mortgage-claims

Re trusted, they’ve been taken over now by Barings Solicitors and the FCA warning appears to have been removed.