SSB Law - failed cavity wall insulation claims - anyone in the same boat?

kobayashi135

JMR are acting very shifty when you phone them they give you some info without going through security clearance..that is a red flag for me...they are not pursuing compensation payouts for former SSB clients, but they are 'reviewing' the files. I would say they are on the side of the debt collectors.. JMR (and the rest) have no other way of getting any money out of this.

Snaptin

Are JMR based in Manchester? They will deal with the open files if they have bought them from SSB. I would be surprised if they will sue SSB for professional negligence.

Deb555

kobayashi135 said:

My claim was shut down by SSB in November 2023 & originally bankrupted Seth Lovis  in 2019, my CWI reports were not even completed by SSB..my older Claim as others was likely there to prop up the investors for the new cases where they understated the value thus creating fraudulent docs to reduce the court fees.😱  The final position letter from the litigator @SSB states 'If we do not receive any further instructions from you by 09/11/2023, we will close your file of papers. We will not take any further steps to progress your claim. This will bring your claim @SSB to an end and mean that you will not get any compensation but it also means that you will have no adverse costs exposure'' the same letter asked for £25k upfront to carry on outside of 'no win no fee' 🤣 It looks like however the file has been passed on to a JMR who are not re-opening the closed cases but they are auditing them.. Surely the SRA & financial conduct authority/ ombudsman/ BBC etc.. should be all over this especially if for those receiving CCJs. We were mis sold the CWI to start with (government backed scheme etc) then 'mis sold' the claims process. It's an outrageous situation

My father received the same letter shutting down his case on 26 October 2023. He then received a letter on 2 January 2024 saying "SSB will shortly cease to undertake any further legal work and will therefore no longer be able to act for you in relation to your matter. To ensure this does not impact your Claim, we have put in place arrangements to transfer your Claim to another specialist firm of lawyers who are accustomed to successfully dealing with claims of this nature. This means that you can be assured that your Claim will continue to be handled in the best way possible. We are aware that costs may have been incurred on your CWI claim which the defendant may be seeking to recover from you directly. The new firm of solicitors will be provided with your complete file of papers and all pertinent information so that they can advise you directly about this."

It goes on to say: "You can of course choose to instruct a different firm of solicitors to represent you. If this is your preference, SSB Law will arrange for your files and the conduct of your Claim to be assigned to the firm of your choice upon receipt of a written request from that firm. ..... You should be aware that you will need to enter into a new, separate agreement with them as to their fees, which may be different from the agreement you have with us. You may also be responsible for the costs that we have incurred to date on your behalf."

I saw the Facebook Group and have applied to join: SSB Law "No Win No Fee" Victims 

Thank you for posting in this thread, it helps more victims to become aware of the scam. I did a google search and found this thread. Let's stick together and share our experiences and what advice we receive. 

Snaptin

Be careful who you listen to. The SSB Law " no win no fee" victims refers to a liability for SSB costs. That is incorrect. If your case was issued at Court and you discontinue (or otherwise lose your case)  your proceedings then you are liable for the Defendants costs.  It is known as "adverse costs". Usually the ATE insurer will pay those costs. You need advice on whether they will not pay because of SSB negligence and if you have a claim against SSB. Get independent legal advice.

StoicPeople

I thought it may be useful to provide a brief note to assist people given the position as I've noted it in the recent judgments involving SSB such as Din & Bashir v Aran Services & Jagger v AXA and the likely remedies available.

By way of background for anyone who does not know how legal costs work. There is a general principle in litigation that the loser pays the winners costs in claims above the small claims limit of £10k (there are exceptions which are not relevant here). Claims management companies or CMCs are constantly looking for claims worth over £10k as solicitors will pay referral fees for them. Many solicitors (but not all) will also be on the lookout for these claims as if they are instructed directly they can avoid paying a referral fee. It seems clear that various CMCs and solicitors including SSB have identified CWI claims as a potential way of getting standard costs and have signed people up on "no win, no fee agreements".

No win, no fee agreements apply to your own solicitors costs e.g. if you do not win they will not charge you. If you win the loser pays your/their costs. However, this cuts both ways and if you lose you, not your solicitor, have to pay the winner's costs. It is these costs that many of you now seem to owe. It is common that an ATE (after the event) insurance policy is obtained to cover the other side's costs (adverse costs) if you lose. However, ATE cover will be withdrawn if you or your solicitors mislead or fail to update that insurer. It is also possible that ATE insurers will try to avoid paying even when they should provide cover.

Given the criticism of SSB and the claimants' experts in recent judgments it appears many of you will have strong (see below for my concerns) professional negligence claims. For this reason you are likely to be targeted by CMCs and/or solicitors seeking to represent you in those claims in the same way that you were targeted as CWI claimants. I have seen extracts from webpages trying to get you to sign up within this thread. I do not mean to suggest that the solicitors who prepared those pages are disreputable in the same way SSB seem to have been or do not have legitimate expertise (I don't know those firms) but, your experience with SSB should teach you that all solicitors are not the same and you should take care who you instruct.

There are well known guides used to identify law firms with expertise in a specific area (google Chambers UK Guide). You can search for firms ranked for Professional Negligence (Mainly Claimant). This guide is useful any lay person looking to instruct solicitors for anything more complex than residential conveyancing (sorry conveyancers). You can search by locality but most firms will operate nationwide. There are other similar guides such as Legal 500.

You could also google The Lawyer top 200 UK law firms (this year may be behind a paywall but previous years won't be and they don't change much beyond occasional mergers), any firm on this list is likely to be well established, quite stable (likely 10s of years old, possibly 100s) and will likely have dedicated departments the types of work they do (you do not want to instruct someone who does not have appropriate experience even if they are trying their best).

For the avoidance of doubt there are some truly excellent small firms but they are more difficult for the lay person to identify (for example you could ask about reported cases that lawyer has dealt with which concern solicitor's negligence).

Going forward you have several issues to consider:

1. Applications to prevent or delay enforcement - I have seen several people faced with enforcement orders suggesting an application (presumably to suspend enforcement). At best this is likely to achieve a few months breathing room and in many cases will fail outright and increase the costs owed. If the basis of your application is that your solicitors have misrepresented or misled you the Court is unlikely to penalise the other side (who are not at fault) by denying them the opportunity to enforce their costs (particularly as the Court does not know if any allegations that SSB have misrepresented you are true). Unlike you the other side had no basis to claim against SSB; you are effectively asking the court to deprive them of their costs with no remedy.

At most you can delay enforcement and if you want to do this you need to consider why. To gather funds? To make a professional negligence claim? It would, quite frankly, be daft to make an application to the court which potentially involves significant costs to delay enforcement unless you know why. If you have a plan you should not make an application unless you have attempted to get the other side's agreement. They may be willing to agree to suspend enforcement and its cheaper to ask than to apply to the court. Understandably solicitors often view applications made without any attempt to agree before as an aggressive move and they are likely to respond aggressively. You may consider they have been aggressive in seeking to enforce costs against you but remember this was likely done after chasing your solicitor for payment for weeks or months. They will believe you are aware of the debt and are avoiding payment.

2. Professional negligence - A professional negligence claim in this context is likely to be for one or two things and could be against several people (CMC, expert, solicitor):

a. Loss of Chance - You had a viable claim which was mismanaged and you lost the chance to claim. This would be determined on a case by case basis but, from what I have seen it few CWI claims had any prospects of success. A loss of chance claim would necessarily involve expert evidence to determine if your original claim had merit, this would make the professional negligence claim more expensive and, in some circumstances riskier.

b. Adverse Costs - You could also claim for the adverse costs you have ended up owing on the basis that they have been incurred due to SSB or your expert's negligence. The aforementioned judgments (Din & Bashir, Jagger) suggest that this claim would have excellent prospects (its for this reason many solicitors will now target you). While these claims are likely to be successful against SSB or your expert they would cover your debt and costs only (you would be unlikely to receive more than you already owe).

In short a professional negligence claim is likely to succeed and involve very little risk provided you choose your solicitor carefully but, in many cases, will only cover the amount you currently owe.

I would note that SSB are now in administration and there is likely no money to pay out if a claim succeeds. As solicitors SSB were required to have a professional negligence policy while trading. This will not be renewed now they are in administration and will probably only cover claims made before cover ends. e.g. If the policy covered 15/03/2023 to 14/03/2024 you would need to notify your claim before 14/03/2024 or the policy would not respond. I obviously do not know the actual cover dates for SSB and it may be that you have already missed your chance (e.g. if the policy ran to 09/01/2024). In short investigate quickly or not at all.

3. Regulatory complaints - The SRA has oversight over solicitors. RICS has oversight over surveyors and the Financial Conduct Authority oversees some CMCs. You can and should make reports to these organisations to ensure the people responsible are identified and, as far as possible, stopped from doing similar things in future. You may be awarded some damages but they are unlikely to cover the adverse costs you currently owe.

4. ATE Insurance - You likely have an ATE policy which is refusing to pay out. If you instruct a professional negligence solicitor they are likely to be able to advise you on that policy as well. SSB's administrator should be able to tell you who your ATE insurer is. In any event I would request payment of any costs order from the ATE insurer and, if and when they refuse, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service who will determine if they are permitted to deny cover and make them pay out if they are not. It will cost you nothing and may assist a great deal.

You do not have to choose one option and probably should do all of these things at once and without delay.

Sorry this is long but I hope it is helpful.

Snaptin

As I said, you need to take advice from a properly experienced proff neg lawyer. Solicitor 's negligence insurance cover is on a claims made basis. That is the date the claim is nade.  Solicitor's are required to have 6 years run off insurance if they go bust. If SsB do not then the Sra will take that into consideration  about intervening (closing down the firm). 

Kab78

Legaltrouble said:

I just rang Arif Qadri at MRH Solicitors , very helpful, depends on your individual circumstances and also whether you have already paid the charges. 

how were they helpful in what way?

jcrooke

StoicPeople said:

I thought it may be useful to provide a brief note to assist people given the position as I've noted it in the recent judgments involving SSB such as Din & Bashir v Aran Services & Jagger v AXA and the likely remedies available.

By way of background for anyone who does not know how legal costs work. There is a general principle in litigation that the loser pays the winners costs in claims above the small claims limit of £10k (there are exceptions which are not relevant here). Claims management companies or CMCs are constantly looking for claims worth over £10k as solicitors will pay referral fees for them. Many solicitors (but not all) will also be on the lookout for these claims as if they are instructed directly they can avoid paying a referral fee. It seems clear that various CMCs and solicitors including SSB have identified CWI claims as a potential way of getting standard costs and have signed people up on "no win, no fee agreements".

No win, no fee agreements apply to your own solicitors costs e.g. if you do not win they will not charge you. If you win the loser pays your/their costs. However, this cuts both ways and if you lose you, not your solicitor, have to pay the winner's costs. It is these costs that many of you now seem to owe. It is common that an ATE (after the event) insurance policy is obtained to cover the other side's costs (adverse costs) if you lose. However, ATE cover will be withdrawn if you or your solicitors mislead or fail to update that insurer. It is also possible that ATE insurers will try to avoid paying even when they should provide cover.

Given the criticism of SSB and the claimants' experts in recent judgments it appears many of you will have strong (see below for my concerns) professional negligence claims. For this reason you are likely to be targeted by CMCs and/or solicitors seeking to represent you in those claims in the same way that you were targeted as CWI claimants. I have seen extracts from webpages trying to get you to sign up within this thread. I do not mean to suggest that the solicitors who prepared those pages are disreputable in the same way SSB seem to have been or do not have legitimate expertise (I don't know those firms) but, your experience with SSB should teach you that all solicitors are not the same and you should take care who you instruct.

There are well known guides used to identify law firms with expertise in a specific area (google Chambers UK Guide). You can search for firms ranked for Professional Negligence (Mainly Claimant). This guide is useful any lay person looking to instruct solicitors for anything more complex than residential conveyancing (sorry conveyancers). You can search by locality but most firms will operate nationwide. There are other similar guides such as Legal 500.

You could also google The Lawyer top 200 UK law firms (this year may be behind a paywall but previous years won't be and they don't change much beyond occasional mergers), any firm on this list is likely to be well established, quite stable (likely 10s of years old, possibly 100s) and will likely have dedicated departments the types of work they do (you do not want to instruct someone who does not have appropriate experience even if they are trying their best).

For the avoidance of doubt there are some truly excellent small firms but they are more difficult for the lay person to identify (for example you could ask about reported cases that lawyer has dealt with which concern solicitor's negligence).

Going forward you have several issues to consider:

1. Applications to prevent or delay enforcement - I have seen several people faced with enforcement orders suggesting an application (presumably to suspend enforcement). At best this is likely to achieve a few months breathing room and in many cases will fail outright and increase the costs owed. If the basis of your application is that your solicitors have misrepresented or misled you the Court is unlikely to penalise the other side (who are not at fault) by denying them the opportunity to enforce their costs (particularly as the Court does not know if any allegations that SSB have misrepresented you are true). Unlike you the other side had no basis to claim against SSB; you are effectively asking the court to deprive them of their costs with no remedy.

At most you can delay enforcement and if you want to do this you need to consider why. To gather funds? To make a professional negligence claim? It would, quite frankly, be daft to make an application to the court which potentially involves significant costs to delay enforcement unless you know why. If you have a plan you should not make an application unless you have attempted to get the other side's agreement. They may be willing to agree to suspend enforcement and its cheaper to ask than to apply to the court. Understandably solicitors often view applications made without any attempt to agree before as an aggressive move and they are likely to respond aggressively. You may consider they have been aggressive in seeking to enforce costs against you but remember this was likely done after chasing your solicitor for payment for weeks or months. They will believe you are aware of the debt and are avoiding payment.

2. Professional negligence - A professional negligence claim in this context is likely to be for one or two things and could be against several people (CMC, expert, solicitor):

a. Loss of Chance - You had a viable claim which was mismanaged and you lost the chance to claim. This would be determined on a case by case basis but, from what I have seen it few CWI claims had any prospects of success. A loss of chance claim would necessarily involve expert evidence to determine if your original claim had merit, this would make the professional negligence claim more expensive and, in some circumstances riskier.

b. Adverse Costs - You could also claim for the adverse costs you have ended up owing on the basis that they have been incurred due to SSB or your expert's negligence. The aforementioned judgments (Din & Bashir, Jagger) suggest that this claim would have excellent prospects (its for this reason many solicitors will now target you). While these claims are likely to be successful against SSB or your expert they would cover your debt and costs only (you would be unlikely to receive more than you already owe).

In short a professional negligence claim is likely to succeed and involve very little risk provided you choose your solicitor carefully but, in many cases, will only cover the amount you currently owe.

I would note that SSB are now in administration and there is likely no money to pay out if a claim succeeds. As solicitors SSB were required to have a professional negligence policy while trading. This will not be renewed now they are in administration and will probably only cover claims made before cover ends. e.g. If the policy covered 15/03/2023 to 14/03/2024 you would need to notify your claim before 14/03/2024 or the policy would not respond. I obviously do not know the actual cover dates for SSB and it may be that you have already missed your chance (e.g. if the policy ran to 09/01/2024). In short investigate quickly or not at all.

3. Regulatory complaints - The SRA has oversight over solicitors. RICS has oversight over surveyors and the Financial Conduct Authority oversees some CMCs. You can and should make reports to these organisations to ensure the people responsible are identified and, as far as possible, stopped from doing similar things in future. You may be awarded some damages but they are unlikely to cover the adverse costs you currently owe.

4. ATE Insurance - You likely have an ATE policy which is refusing to pay out. If you instruct a professional negligence solicitor they are likely to be able to advise you on that policy as well. SSB's administrator should be able to tell you who your ATE insurer is. In any event I would request payment of any costs order from the ATE insurer and, if and when they refuse, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service who will determine if they are permitted to deny cover and make them pay out if they are not. It will cost you nothing and may assist a great deal.

You do not have to choose one option and probably should do all of these things at once and without delay.

Sorry this is long but I hope it is helpful.

Excellent advice to all tied up in this. Best thing to do if you do have adverse costs orders coming through (and sure will be more to follow) is to speak to a good solicitor about your options this is a great summary and likely the best course of action for all. I am sure you can speak to the companies who are pursing the money too as they are likely to be more amiable if you have dialogue with them.

OldPunk

Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! I've been so bogged down with work that I've completely neglected this thread. QurrahAhmed (who has contributed to this thread so hopefully can be found that way) was the initiator of the WhatsApp group and she will add anyone who wishes to join. We are currently speaking to a top rated firm of solicitors wit a view to a group action claim for professional negligence against SSB and are awaiting the outcome of discussions among the group as to where we proceed from here in our search for a solution to this whole sorry mess.

Farah123786

OldPunk said:

SSB Law of Sheffield filed for administration on Monday 27/11/23 with debts of £48m arising from borrowing hugely to fund a failed gamble into taking up cases for homeowner compensation for damp problems resulting from incorrectly installed cavity wall insulation, with the big sell to sign up being that this was guaranteed to be on the basis of  'no win, no fee'. In our case, after 3 years of surveyor visits, inspections, innumerable 'please sign this form and return it to us' type emails, in March of this year, we were informed that my mother's case was being dropped as it wasn't strong enough to take to court with a realistic chance of a win and that that was the end of the matter. This certainly isn't proving the case as there are now 1000s of claimants who have been issued with Notices of Enforcement (after SSB Law failed to pay what they owed to insurers by the given deadline) and are now facing demands for £1000s with threats of bailiff visits. In the case of my 77 year old mother who has never owed a penny to anyone in her life, she was landed last week with a Notice of Enforcement for £18000 to be paid by 30/11/23. Today I completed a N244 form which, if approved, buys her 'breathing space' as the case is set aside for 60 days, though of course that's no solution, merely a deferral. 
I have contacted my local MP over this and have become a member of a WhatsApp group of people in the same position as my mother. This case really needs to be brought to the attention of ANYONE who will listen as there are a lot of people not only feeling immense stress and anxiety over this, but also potentially financial ruin. If anyone has any ideas where to turn in order to get the story of this disgraceful situation caused by SSB Law given the exposure it deserves it would be much appreciated and needless to say, any advice on how to best deal with this would be highly welcome.

Hi can u tell me whtbwas thebout come