HL Woodford Fund Class Action

JudgeDekker

eastmidsaver said:

so i have just signed up to this....

my main worry was that i don't want to be asked for any fees whatsoever.

however,  my understanding is as follows:

1.       That there is absolutely no risk to the claimant? Therefore if they lose the Woodford case, they will not be asking the claimants to make any payments towards the defendants cost?

2.       The case is on a no win, no fee, basis?

3.       Maximum fee they will charge the claimant if they win is 30% inclusive of VAT. This fee includes all costs, including the insurance policies they have taken out?

4.       Contract notes will be needed to prove you were invested in the fund and at time of suspension.

5.       This case is only vs Link  (not Hargreaves Lansdown too) ?

Would appreciate if someone can confirm that my understanding on this is correct.... essentially, i just don't want to be getting any bills at any point.

Thanks.

I don't think it's quite as simple as that. If nothing goes wrong, sure there's nothing to pay. But.....If the class action suit is lost, the applicants will have to pay the defendants legal costs. That's what the insurance is for, but we all know what insurance is like. If the total cost incurred by the defendants is more than the amount insured, or if the insurance company goes bust, or if you drop out halfway through, or if you fail to abide by some condition in the small print, then the insurance may not pay out. So you'll probably be OK, but it's definitely not the case that the claimant will under no circumstances have to shell out.

bostonerimus

The only crimes I saw H&L and Woodford commit were hubris, greed and ignorance. Those crimes continue to be committed every day by financial firms and fund managers, so where's the laws suit. Take the loss, learn and move on.

crisisinchina

The wheels seem to be turning very slowly. Although there are 4 firms pursuing Link i assume if/when we get there, there will only be one hearing and not four?

eastmidsaver

from Leigh Day's update.... it seems the litigation firms will collaborate with each other,   but unsure if this means one hearing or more.... also got to remember some are taking on HL too.

gizz_10

Looks like we may all get something back, even if we didnt sign up to a litigation / class action?  Am I reading this right?

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-11204599/Woodford-Equity-Income-Fund-savers-set-300m-redress.html

Malthusian

gizz_10 said:

Looks like we may all get something back, even if we didnt sign up to a litigation / class action?  Am I reading this right?

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-11204599/Woodford-Equity-Income-Fund-savers-set-300m-redress.html

In regards to the bit after the comma, this is correct. The fine / order for redress was made by the FCA and has nothing to do with the various group litigation claims. 
There are still quite a few ifs and buts: 

• Link could appeal the fine
• Link may not have the money, and the proposed takeover bid may collapse if the prospective buyer refuses to stump up 

I'd be interested to know whether the members of the group actions will have to pay 30% (or whatever) of any compensation to Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Runne even though they had nothing to do with it.

masonic

gizz_10 said:

Looks like we may all get something back, even if we didnt sign up to a litigation / class action?  Am I reading this right?

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-11204599/Woodford-Equity-Income-Fund-savers-set-300m-redress.html

You will probably still need to lodge a complaint in order to receive a redress payment. I don't think it is particularly helpful to refer to those investing in this fund as "savers". Savers would have walked off with FSCS compensation a long time ago.

Pete_at_WFB

Any investors in Woodford that lost money due to its mismanagement and collapse might wish to join the recently launched Facebook Group called "Woodford Campaign Group". This group is sharing the latest information and answering many questions as most members are in the same situation seeking compensation.

Prism

I hope that most of those Woodford investors can move on and forget about compensation. They made a poor decision and are probably best learning from that and investing in something more mainstream next time. 

Pete_at_WFB

Prism said:

I hope that most of those Woodford investors can move on and forget about compensation. They made a poor decision and are probably best learning from that and investing in something more mainstream next time. 

I have to strongly disagree and your comment suggests you haven't a clue about the facts.

Woodford was the star fund manager endorsed by financial firms like Hargreaves Lansdown.

Woodford broke the rules under the eyes of the regulator and deviated far from the portfolio so investors were totally unaware of how the fund was diversifying into extremely high risk illiquid zones.

Many investors lost large sums of money and cannot move on.

There are class actions appearing in the High Court now and the legal firms behind these actions have done their groundwork so it isn't "moving on" ; it is about fighting for justice and obtaining proper compensation".

Have a look at the Panorama documentary about the Blackmore Bond, although not directly relevant, it illustrates the failures of the FCA and other bodies that are supposed to protect investors.

This isn't about backing the wrong horse and moaning if the favourite loses - this is serious and about irregularities and mismanagement. Claims run into billions !!