Woodford compensation and No Win No Fee fees

MapsterUK

adesshimane said:

Re postings on this subject:

I received an HP invoice via their email  about Sep 23rd

In response I sent them the following email:

I refer to the Summary of share holding(s) & proforma invoice on my online HP account in particular the following statement :

'As we have explained in earlier emails, as you have received compensation in settlement of your claim, this would represent a “win” under our No-win-No-fee terms. This means that Harcus Parker is entitled to charge you a fee, in accordance with our terms, subject to a cap of 35% of any compensation you receive (+VAT)'.

I am unable to locate this earlier email that explains the above. 

However, by reference to the clauses in the Client Engagement Letter, Schedule 4 DBA,

Section 5.3 If Win will pay ..35% plus VAT ...etc

Section 5.2 Win -if awarded Claim Proceeds

Section 5.1 Claim Proceeds-sum recovered in respect of the Claim

Section 4.2 Claim =work done by HP in respect of the Claim....

Yet Link Fund Solutions Limited (LFSL) entered into a scheme of arrangement to wind itself up. By doing so the 
amount of "compensation" was self determined.

The Link scheme of arrangement was approved by a High Court judge and the HP Claim was completely rejected by the Judge.

So how does this constitute a 'win' in terms of the Client Engagement, as there were no 'Claim Proceeds' by 'Claim=work done by HP' per the terms in the Client Engagement letter .

Please explain your basis, and/or provide the above mentioned earlier email if it explains this.

I would appreciate your clarifications/explanations before I proceed any further '


To date apart from auto email acknowledgement of receipt, I have not received any reply from HP.

Nb I am newbie to this Forum so as yet unable or not authorised to upload copy of the HP Client Engagement Letter (20 odd pages long) that specifies the terms and conditions defining  charging/win/lose etc.I quoted from above.

When/if I get HP reply or ability to upload I will post again.

Thanks for this great piece of work. It makes a clear journey of what Win means, what Claim Proceeds means and what Claim means. Am very interested in their response. I am still awaiting the advices of my financial advisor and legal advisor before contacting them directly.

dcs34

RL11 said:

Back in December 2020 I got an email from Harcus Parker (Damon Parker) stating:
"Our records indicate that you started but did not submit a registration to join the litigation. Please click on 'Begin Survey' below if you would like to register your claim."

I responded:
"I thought I had mistakenly joined the litigation but am glad to hear that I have not, so as per my subsequent emails, I do not wish to proceed and am confirming again that I do not want to be involved. Please can you confirm that I am not taking part in the claim and that you have removed any of my personal information from your records."

They (Samuel Wilson) responded:
"I can confirm that I have removed you from our contact list. For your reference only, I have attached our terms and conditions."

Forward to September 2025, completely out of the blue, I get an email asking for payment of their invoice!

I forwarded the above info to woodford@harcusparker.co.uk and got no response

October I get an email saying I had not responded and they require payment of the invoice!

I sent another email to info@harcusparker.co.uk asking if they were aware of a scam purporting to be from Harcus Parker asking for money - no response yet.

Obviously I have no intention of clicking the link or paying anything

Feels like there is some sort of GDPR/ICO red flags here.

It's clear they're working through anyone they've got as a possible Woodford holder and trying their luck with invoicing people in the expectation they just pay it by fear / ignorance.

Conrad02

The above guide at 4.2 mentions any work done by HP from 01/july/2019. I did not contact HP until 2021, and I believe there case started in 22`

initially they stated their intention: 

September 2020: 

Harcus Parker issued a pre-action letter to Link Fund Solutions, formally beginning the litigation process on behalf of a single investor, 

June 2022: 

Leigh Day and Harcus Parker filed a joint application for a Group Litigation Order at the High Court, uniting their claims against Link

. Could anyone who has received an invoice please clarify if the invoice is for amounts paid after the LINK payout, or the total amount paid at any time after suspension, I received 70% of my investment in late 2019 early 2020.

Seems a massive scam to include payments prior to them even starting a claim.

AliBee16

Conrad02 said:

The above guide at 4.2 mentions any work done by HP from 01/july/2019. I did not contact HP until 2021, and I believe there case started in 22`

initially they stated their intention: 

September 2020: 

Harcus Parker issued a pre-action letter to Link Fund Solutions, formally beginning the litigation process on behalf of a single investor, 

June 2022: 

Leigh Day and Harcus Parker filed a joint application for a Group Litigation Order at the High Court, uniting their claims against Link

. Could anyone who has received an invoice please clarify if the invoice is for amounts paid after the LINK payout, or the total amount paid at any time after suspension, I received 70% of my investment in late 2019 early 2020.

Seems a massive scam to include payments prior to them even starting a claim.

I can confirm that the invoice is for the amounts paid after the LINK payout. I initially had 38500 shares and received a lot back through LINK. The calculated compensation is £1973  and amount they are asking for is £1176. The LINK payments back into my SIPP pension were all in different names etc and a faff for my IFA to work out exactly what I had received initially and impossible for me to track back on my SIPP website. I wish I hadnt bothered but hindsight is a fine thing

jimjames

atypical said:

The Harcus Parker claim was very much part of this Scheme.  Harcus Parker objected to the Scheme on several grounds (through the KC / barrister they instructed), all of which were rejected by the judge.

If HP objected to the scheme then it could be difficult for them to argue that it was what they had worked to achieve.

masonic

jimjames said:

atypical said:

The Harcus Parker claim was very much part of this Scheme.  Harcus Parker objected to the Scheme on several grounds (through the KC / barrister they instructed), all of which were rejected by the judge.

If HP objected to the scheme then it could be difficult for them to argue that it was what they had worked to achieve.

What matters is what the parties agreed in the contract and the contractual wording was shared earlier in the thread. It does not place any such constraints on the monies to be considered when calculating the fee.

But in a more standard claim, the claimant can receive a settlement offer and be advised not to accept it. If they choose to accept it against legal advice, then there would be no doubt it had came about as a consequence of the legal action, even when it was not the desired outcome of the legal team.

RL11

dcs34 said:

RL11 said:

Back in December 2020 I got an email from Harcus Parker (Damon Parker) stating:
"Our records indicate that you started but did not submit a registration to join the litigation. Please click on 'Begin Survey' below if you would like to register your claim."

I responded:
"I thought I had mistakenly joined the litigation but am glad to hear that I have not, so as per my subsequent emails, I do not wish to proceed and am confirming again that I do not want to be involved. Please can you confirm that I am not taking part in the claim and that you have removed any of my personal information from your records."

They (Samuel Wilson) responded:
"I can confirm that I have removed you from our contact list. For your reference only, I have attached our terms and conditions."

Forward to September 2025, completely out of the blue, I get an email asking for payment of their invoice!

I forwarded the above info to woodford@harcusparker.co.uk and got no response

October I get an email saying I had not responded and they require payment of the invoice!

I sent another email to info@harcusparker.co.uk asking if they were aware of a scam purporting to be from Harcus Parker asking for money - no response yet.

Obviously I have no intention of clicking the link or paying anything

Feels like there is some sort of GDPR/ICO red flags here.

It's clear they're working through anyone they've got as a possible Woodford holder and trying their luck with invoicing people in the expectation they just pay it by fear / ignorance.

Just got an email from HP:

"I can now confirm that your registration and invoice with Harcus Parker have been cancelled and you will not receive any further requests for payment or communications from us."

adesshimane

Previously to my earlier posting I said when/if I get HP reply or ability to upload I will post again.

Yesterday Oct 27th I received reply to my email to HP on Sept 23rd, posting as follows;

"Harcus Parker launched its claim against Link Fund Solutions in August 2020 and were the first firm to do so. To date, the claim has been financed by Augusta, a third-party litigation funder which has invested over £4m in the claim thus far. ‘After the event’ insurance (otherwise referred to as ATE insurance) was also taken out to protect claimants from ‘adverse costs’, in the event we lost the claim. This is because in litigation, the typical rule is that the losing party pays the costs of the winning party, known as ‘adverse costs’. Part of the cost of the ATE insurance was on a deferred and contingent basis which meant that the insurer would be due a fee at the end of the claim if it was successful (successful meaning that our client received compensation and was not ordered to pay Link’s costs). With the funding and insurance in place, this has allowed us to investigate, formulate and advance a claim against Link, including making representations against the Scheme of Arrangement at both the convening and sanctions hearing, while managing the risk of costs in doing so. At these hearings, we instructed a barrister to appear on behalf of our clients and make a case against the implementation of the Scheme of Arrangement on the basis that the Scheme did not represent a good outcome for investors. 

The Scheme of Arrangement was set up and implemented by Link to settle all claims from investors of the LF Equity Income Fund (formerly known as the LF Woodford Equity Income Fund) who held shares in the Fund when it was suspended. Your agreement with Harcus Parker states that in the event of a win (which is defined to include sums received by way of a settlement), you will be liable for 35% + VAT, plus your share of the deferred and contingent insurance premium.  

 

The case has been financed by a third party, Augusta. Unfortunately, we have been unable to waive our entitlement to our fee without the third party funder’s consent, as they can only be paid through that fee. In this case, the fee payable will be used to repay Augusta for their initial investment in the case. Harcus Parker will not receive any of the sums.  

I should also add that we are not a party to the insurance: unlike other costs which we meet on your behalf, such as barristers’ fees, you have a direct contractual relationship with the insurers, implemented by the claimant committee on your behalf.  

Taking all of this in the round, the funder’s perspective is that it has spent considerable sums on behalf of the group and the Scheme of Arrangement does not represent a good outcome for them either, but they are not willing to give investors a free ride for the work that has been carried out since late 2020. The insurers have also expressed that, as they have carried the risk that if your claim had lost they would have paid Link’s costs on your behalf, that they have earned their fee as well. 

As such, unfortunately our fee remains payable. "