Woodford compensation and No Win No Fee fees

talexuser

BungalowBliss123 said:

What if no compensation has been paid? 

If no compensation had been paid then in a no win/no pay arrangement you would not have to pay them anything. It is the fact that some compensation has been paid that enables them to claim a fee based on the contract you signed.

I would suggest that the way to avoid paying is to publicise their fee as much as possible as a group to shame them to publicly justify these charges with a great deal of embarrassment to their reputation in the press and tv. It worked with the post office....... eventually!!!

MapsterUK

My problem with them is that they advertise that they only charge a fee if they win. An unconnected award should not count as them winning. Indeed they bombarded us with phonecalls asking us NOT to accept the offer. 

I do agree that causing a media stink is the best way to get them to back off. And also encouraging more people to this forum to see that the are not alone. There are thousands of people that would have received that email and a lot will be angry. 

Also another litigator RGL has dropped all claims to costs stating that Woodford Investors had been through enough.

BungalowBliss123

Hopefully it would only take a slot by Martin Lewis in his programme to get Harcus Parker to back off from people who have already been through enough.  Hopefully it doesn’t end up like the Post Office scandal

masonic

MapsterUK said:

My problem with them is that they advertise that they only charge a fee if they win. An unconnected award should not count as them winning. Indeed they bombarded us with phonecalls asking us NOT to accept the offer. 

An out of court settlement is a win. It's the best kind of win. There was nothing on offer at all prior to the class action. On the balance of probabilities Link caved in owing to the strength of the case that was built against them.

When you sign up for legal representation, then of course you will receive advice as to whether or not to accept a settlement offer. They are probably better placed to judge whether the offer is a fair one than anyone commenting here. It doesn't seem like popular opinion was that it was a good offer, but clearly it was good enough to be accepted.

brewerdave

masonic said:

MapsterUK said:

My problem with them is that they advertise that they only charge a fee if they win. An unconnected award should not count as them winning. Indeed they bombarded us with phonecalls asking us NOT to accept the offer. 

An out of court settlement is a win. It's the best kind of win. There was nothing on offer at all prior to the class action. On the balance of probabilities Link caved in owing to the strength of the case that was built against them.

When you sign up for legal representation, then of course you will receive advice as to whether or not to accept a settlement offer. They are probably better placed to judge whether the offer is a fair one than anyone commenting here. It doesn't seem like popular opinion was that it was a good offer, but clearly it was good enough to be accepted.

The offer was clearly not the best one - but looking at the voting numbers to accept, it is clear that the major players who held Woodford in their collective funds various eg HL, took anything as a win without consultation with  their individual fund investors  just to "close the books".
I believe there were at least 15,000 signed up to Harcus Parker-we don't deserve such shameful treatment - talk about kicking a horse when it's down .....

masonic

brewerdave said:

masonic said:

MapsterUK said:

My problem with them is that they advertise that they only charge a fee if they win. An unconnected award should not count as them winning. Indeed they bombarded us with phonecalls asking us NOT to accept the offer. 

An out of court settlement is a win. It's the best kind of win. There was nothing on offer at all prior to the class action. On the balance of probabilities Link caved in owing to the strength of the case that was built against them.

When you sign up for legal representation, then of course you will receive advice as to whether or not to accept a settlement offer. They are probably better placed to judge whether the offer is a fair one than anyone commenting here. It doesn't seem like popular opinion was that it was a good offer, but clearly it was good enough to be accepted.

The offer was clearly not the best one - but looking at the voting numbers to accept, it is clear that the major players who held Woodford in their collective funds various eg HL, took anything as a win without consultation with  their individual fund investors  just to "close the books".
I believe there were at least 15,000 signed up to Harcus Parker-we don't deserve such shameful treatment - talk about kicking a horse when it's down .....

It's a fair point that even if you all voted against the settlement it probably wouldn't have been enough to sink it.

Hopefully the lesson not to engage with ambulance chasers can be learned without them chasing you. I've seen enough of this from my early P2P lending exploits to know no good ever comes of it.

thetrainengineer

I'm in the same boat here but with a lot less than others. Signed up and they won nothing for me.
Looking through the small print of what we signed up for it does mention something like 'we can claim from you regardless of how any compensation is received'.

For me around £2000 was paid into my share accounts and now they want 70% including costs of VAT & ins.
I haven't paid and am waiting to see what happens and what others do here, bearing in mind what they said to the Times in 2024. But I am loathe to write to them which would acknowledge receipt of their demand. Just playing dumb at the moment to see what they do.
Incidentally, Jeff Pestridge of the daily mail did something on this back in 2024 so is it worth writing to him?

BungalowBliss123

It shouldn’t do any harm bringing all of what’s happening to the attention of journalists.  Personally, I’ve received no compensation.  There’s a link in an email from Harcus Parker where they want the amount of original funds held in the Woodford fund entered.  Are they seriously expecting a huge percentage of what our original funds were, regardless of whether or not compensation has been paid?

brewerdave

BungalowBliss123 said:

It shouldn’t do any harm bringing all of what’s happening to the attention of journalists.  Personally, I’ve received no compensation.  There’s a link in an email from Harcus Parker where they want the amount of original funds held in the Woodford fund entered.  Are they seriously expecting a huge percentage of what our original funds were, regardless of whether or not compensation has been paid?

Are you sure you haven't received something ? I got relatively small amounts into two ISAs ,one with HL and one with Charles Stanley plus another amount back in my SIPP. . For example ,the "compensation" was listed as "Scheme Proceeds CF Woodford Eq " in April 2024 on my Charles Stanley statement.
And ,yes ,they are asking for ~ 64% of my received amounts!!

BungalowBliss123

brewerdave said:

BungalowBliss123 said:

It shouldn’t do any harm bringing all of what’s happening to the attention of journalists.  Personally, I’ve received no compensation.  There’s a link in an email from Harcus Parker where they want the amount of original funds held in the Woodford fund entered.  Are they seriously expecting a huge percentage of what our original funds were, regardless of whether or not compensation has been paid?

Are you sure you haven't received something ? I got relatively small amounts into two ISAs ,one with HL and one with Charles Stanley plus another amount back in my SIPP. . For example ,the "compensation" was listed as "Scheme Proceeds CF Woodford Eq " in April 2024 on my Charles Stanley statement.
And ,yes ,they are asking for ~ 64% of my received amounts!!

They wouldn’t have known where to pay it into as they didn’t have any account details