Has anyone been contractually tied in after a “quick eligibility check” with a claims firm?

ProfessorOakYellow

Hi all — looking to understand if anyone else has experienced something similar, either with Complex Law or other car finance claims firms.

I recently went through what was presented as a “quick eligibility check” for a potential car finance claim. At the time, it felt like a simple step just to see if I had a valid case.

However, this appears to have committed me into a formal agreement, which was not made clearly obvious at the time.

Some of the issues I’ve experienced:

• I was asked to sign early on, but it wasn’t clearly explained that this would act as a binding legal instruction
• I wasn’t provided with the full terms and conditions at the point of sign-up, these only came months later
• This meant I had no meaningful opportunity to review the agreement properly or make use of any cooling-off period
• Key details, including potential fees, were not clearly highlighted upfront

I tried multiple times to contact the firm for clarification — particularly as I was receiving repeated unsolicited requests for personal ID (passport/driving licence) — but didn’t receive any response.

Then more recently, I received a demand for £1,080 via a payment link, with no breakdown of how this figure had been calculated.

I was also included in a data breach in 2025 whereby Complex Law issued a mass communication to myself and other clients, revealing names and email addresses, which raised concerns for me around how personal data is being handled more generally.

My main question:

Has anyone else experienced a situation where what was presented as a “simple check” ended up binding you into a contract, and where fees were later pursued when you challenged it?

• How did you handle it?
• Were you able to exit without paying fees?
• Did you escalate to the Legal Ombudsman / SRA / elsewhere?

I’m trying to understand whether this is common practice across the industry or an isolated experience.

Appreciate any insight, particularly from anyone who has successfully challenged something similar.

born_again

Did you read the T?C when doing the check?

ProfessorOakYellow

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82014383#Comment_82014383

I did not, the way it was presented and advertised was as if they were checking if I was eligible for a claim. There was nothing clear and obvious, which is was industry standards advise to suggest anything formal was being entered.

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82014409#Comment_82014409

There are no standards for these companies. They are the lowest of the lows.

Which is why FOS is now investigating them.

ProfessorOakYellow

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82014414#Comment_82014414

I've reported them to the SRA, they're reviewing my complaint which after either the final response or 8 weeks from - I'll be escalating to the FOS. I'm sure they'll be pleased with the £600 FOS charge to review these sort of complaints.

Nasqueron

You don't go from SRA to FOS, the FOS does not regulate the behaviour of legal firms. After the SRA you would need to go to the legal ombudsman.

The FOS will not accept the complaint nor will the firm pay a £600 fee (and it's £900 iirc now)

https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/for-consumers/complaints-process/complaining-to-a-legal-service-provider/

ProfessorOakYellow

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82015506#Comment_82015506

My mistake, the legal ombudsmen. Appreciate your comment. Thank you.