Investment In Litigation Funding ?
Options
Comments
-
I didn't answer that question because I don't know the answer, all I know is there are offers to invest in the litigation so I guess the solicitors have a reason to believe there are cases out there0
-
I didn't answer that question because I don't know the answer, all I know is there are offers to invest in the litigation so I guess the solicitors have a reason to believe there are cases out there
So, if you accept that you are not sure about the insurance it follows that you cannot be sure about the opportunity?Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
If by some quirk I become so rich as to consider funding insurance underwriting, I would expect the place to learn more would be somewhere near Lloyds, not an accommodation address in Bermuda or the Isle of Man.
Until then, which is almost certainly never, I don't understand this scheme, and don't see any reason to. It isn't even clear whether the so-called investment here is going to the brokers or the underwriters or customers of these, or some other party.0 -
I didn't answer that question because I don't know the answer
Then I have no further questions. I'd like to invest a million pounds, please let me know where I should send your introducer fee.all I know is there are offers to invest in the litigation so I guess the solicitors have a reason to believe there are cases out there
Usually in "no win no fee" cases the risk of losing is transferred from the client to the solicitor. In this case, external investment is being solicited so the risk is transferred from the solicitor to the external investor. Only it isn't because apparently all the risk has been transferred from the investor to someone in a tin shack in Bermuda.0 -
Out of curiosity why would you say run for the hills without seeing the information in hand? i remember reading an article that had a interview with Mark Zuckerberg (CEO of facebook incase you are not aware) he was saying he invited 5 people to his room in harvard to discuss a business opportunity but only 2 people came, those 2 people are now billionaires, so my question to you is why would you discard the opportunity telling people to run away when you have not gone through it yourself?0
-
dealer_wins wrote: »If one day you are bored of having a lump sum of money, "invest" it in this scheme and wave it goodbye lol0
-
Out of curiosity why would you say run for the hills without seeing the information in hand? i remember reading an article that had a interview with Mark Zuckerberg (CEO of facebook incase you are not aware) he was saying he invited 5 people to his room in harvard to discuss a business opportunity but only 2 people came, those 2 people are now billionaires, so my question to you is why would you discard the opportunity telling people to run away when you
Oh look - another brand new poster has miraculously appeared to try to convince people to "invest" in this.
I'd be a bit more interested if they had the basic intelligence to come up with more convincing shills.0 -
Funny how John200 and TheNobel1 both have the same writing style (run-on sentences, under-use of capital letters, using post titles, posting in single paragraphs).0
-
-
Malthusian wrote: »Then I have no further questions. I'd like to invest a million pounds, please let me know where I should send your introducer fee.
All I know is that people are being persuaded by unregulated introducers to hand over potentially millions of pounds to Allansons and a company called Mortgage Audit Services so that they can arrange for people to sue their lender. This means it is of no interest to the solicitors whether people have a case or not. Whether the case is of any merit or not they still get to spend the investors' money pursuing the case, and if it doesn't go anywhere, apparently someone in a tin shack on a beach in Bermuda is going to return all the investors' money.
Usually in "no win no fee" cases the risk of losing is transferred from the client to the solicitor. In this case, external investment is being solicited so the risk is transferred from the solicitor to the external investor. Only it isn't because apparently all the risk has been transferred from the investor to someone in a tin shack in Bermuda.
After reading the information i have come to the conclusion that most the replies on this forum is of uneducated people in relation to the actual opportunity. They mention "This means it is of no interest to the solicitors whether people have a case or not" well obviously these cases have to come from somewhere and are also independently assessed by a separate barrister (as with most litigation cases) then they mention "Only it isn't because apparently all the risk has been transferred from the investor to someone in a tin shack in Bermuda" a lot of insurance companies are based in regions that have tax advantages even some in the Lloyds of London market so that statement alone is ridiculas.
They then go on to mention " in "no win no fee" cases the risk of losing is transferred from the client to the solicitor. In this case, external investment is being solicited so the risk is transferred from the solicitor to the external investor" they are indicating the risk is on the funder i would imagine he means because of the Law of champerty which basically means if a stranger funds the cases and looses then they will become liable for the cost! however my understanding of the opportunity is funders and claimees are kept private meaning this law does not come in to play and clients are secure? i may be wrong but i would suggest doing your own research before listening to peoples opinions about somthing they know nothing about
"Only it isn't because apparently all the risk has been transferred from the investor to someone in a tin shack in Bermuda" i actually thought similar when first reading but a lot of companies are baseed away from the Uk for tax reasons plus if you take the time to read the info and look at the ATE signed paperwork you will notice box legal are the FCA regulated broker and are intrusted with doing the correct checks and advising allansons correctly because of this if the insurance does not pay out then under the regulations of FCA advice a funder is actually covered under the FSCS up to 90% of funded value.
This reminds me of bitcoins and cryptocurrency debates the only people who slate it are the people who haven't made any money from it or the people who cant be bothered to do the research to understand it.
Lots of scams out their people but also lots of things that are not do you own research and make up your own mind rather then listening to peoples opinions about something they haven't even looked at0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.9K Spending & Discounts
- 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards