Cartel using Burleys solicitors ? NOT ANY MORE :-D

[Tools]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Using the 30% calculation, if the amount of debt to be written off is £2500 or above (which most are), that would leave you owing them at least £750 in "fees".

This amount is the trigger for being able to issue a Statutory Demand (SD) if you are unable to pay them.

For anyone who isn't familiar with a SD here are some of the extreme consequences of having a SD enforced against you and a better explaination than I could give. Please read it in full and ask yourself, is it really worth paying someone to "write off your debt" ?

http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/...ory_demand.php

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

they couldn't take it on without me going through Cartel.

9.03 Referrals to third parties

• <LI id=r9-03-1 tabIndex=-1>..............
• (2) You must not enter into any agreement or association which would restrict your freedom to recommend any particular firm, agency or business.

http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/cod...ct/219.article read Guidance to rule 9 - Referrals of business
and possibly http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/code-of-conduct/206.article - ( www.sra.org.uk/rule19 ) Independence

It also prevents you from entering into any restrictive arrangements in connection with regulated activities that could constrain the advice you give to clients or the referrals that you make. However, it would not prevent you from regularly introducing clients to a particular broker, provided that you have not entered into any arrangement which could constrain you to use that broker.

Just wondering re the arrangement between CCLS and Cartel (ie CCLS saying that to go with them you must go through Cartel)

[Pouring Rain]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

9.03 Referrals to third parties

• <LI id=r9-03-1 tabIndex=-1>..............
• (2) You must not enter into any agreement or association which would restrict your freedom to recommend any particular firm, agency or business.

http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/cod...ct/219.article read Guidance to rule 9 - Referrals of business
and possibly http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/code-of-conduct/206.article - ( www.sra.org.uk/rule19 ) Independence
[B]







Just wondering re the arrangement between CCLS and Cartel (ie CCLS saying that to go with them you must go through Cartel)

Amethyst I think you have something there.

When I mentioned to Simon Abbott that Burley's had told me I had to go through Cartel he was really shocked, so shocked he had to repeat it back to me to make sure that was what I had been told. He said something to the effect that how could they give a potential client advice that would be not in the client's interest - given that Cartel charges so much, and also that it would appear to breach the solicitor's independence of being able to accept clients directly ... that is what I understood from his expression of shock that Burley's would do that. He did then temper it by saying he doesn't know if Burley's has a reasonable explanation for how they choose to do that, but it's certainly something he would never do.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Amethyst, what did you think of Stephensons? You are the only person I know who has experience of them.


Also has anyone ever heard of Callen Jones? They say they look at your agreements for free and will do no win no fee - but I've done a search and can't really find anything about them.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Stephensons - I only know them through undertaking a CCA training course with them ( Andrew Leakey) and through the saynotoyes car credit people. They talked a lot about mistated amount of credit so I don't think your assessment from their website that they will only deal with missing prescribed terms is necessarily correct. Can only give them a call. Bradley Say recommended them to you and you've discounted Burleys due to their insistence you go through Cartel, so giving them a buzz seems the obvious next step.

Not heard of Callen Jones before at all - Callen Jones Solicitors LLP are a niche litigation law firm specializing in consumer credit rights.

[righty]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Mark Bowden has left apparently:tinysmile_aha_t:
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
PS most 'consumer' advocates are sticking to handling mis selling of PPI & won't advise challenging the enforceability of the agreement overall because they fear such an argument will raise the stakes to at least fast track with all of the implications that has for costs

[LuggerBugs]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

These feckers are advertising on my local radio station now!!!!

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Using the 30% calculation, if the amount of debt to be written off is £2500 or above (which most are), that would leave you owing them at least £750 in "fees".

This amount is the trigger for being able to issue a Statutory Demand (SD) if you are unable to pay them.

For anyone who isn't familiar with a SD here are some of the extreme consequences of having a SD enforced against you and a better explaination than I could give. Please read it in full and ask yourself, is it really worth paying someone to "write off your debt" ?

http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/...ory_demand.php

To show this DOES happen with claims companies heres a quote from a concerned bank-smart custoer who's post i have taken from MsE. This is about a bogus £100 charge.

They have now contacted me by telephone and are threatening legal proceedings if i do not pay. I received an email yesterday stating that the amount had that day increased by £150 and would carry on increasing until it reached the £750 threshold for bankruptcy, whereupon said action would commence.

full thread Bank-smart now charging me! - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums and post is on the bank-smart thread in this forum.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Pasting because we don't seem to have it on here as yet

ASA Adjudications

Cartel Client Review Ltd Building 7 Exchange Quay Manchester M5 3EP

Number of complaints: 1 Date: 14 January 2009 Media: Radio Sector: Financial










Ad
A radio ad for a credit card compensation company stated "How much do you owe on your credit card? Is it still your flexible friend? Probably not. Did you know that if you took your credit card out before April 2007 your outstanding balance could be completely written off? Cartel Client Review can check your credit cards to see if you can claim to have your balance completely cleared. To find out more visit cartelclientreview.co.uk or call 0845 XXX XXXX, 0845 XXX XXXX. Terms and conditions apply".

Issue
One listener challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied that a person had a good chance of having their credit card debts written off if they had taken the credit card out before April 2007, because they believed the circumstances in which that was possible were limited.
BCAP Radio Advertising Code: 2 - 3 (old)
Response
Cartel Client Review Ltd (Cartel Client Review) submitted a document that explained how a credit card agreement becomes unenforceable. They submitted a link to a TV programme, which they said showed that lenders were being forced to wipe the balances off credit card agreements.

The Radio Advertising Clearance Centre (RACC) said they understood that, since April 2007, the courts were more willing to write off or reduce credit card debt. They said they were satisfied that there was a legal basis for the claim, and they pointed out that the ad carefully stated that listeners "could" have their credit card debts written off. The RACC said they were reviewing their policy on these types of claims in light of the current economic climate.

The RACC submitted a link to a radio programme about unenforceable loans and an article in The Times from February 2007 on the same subject. They also provided three letters, from a firm of solicitors and two banks, which they said showed that consumers had been successful in having their credit card debts written off.

Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted the information provided by the advertiser and the RACC. We also noted that the radio programme and newspaper article referred to unsecured personal loans and not to credit card debt, and that only one of the three letters related to the writing off of a consumer's credit card debt. We acknowledged that one of the legal representatives interviewed in the TV programme stated that his firm had managed to have the credit card and loan debts of around 1000 clients written off, but we also noted that it was not clear what proportion of those debts were from credit cards and that consumers needed to be able to demonstrate that serious prejudice had occurred in drawing up their credit agreement. Notwithstanding that, we considered that we had not seen evidence that demonstrated the number of Cartel Client Review's clients that had successfully won their claim to have their credit card debts written off, or that showed what proportion of their total client base the successful clients represented.

We understood from the information provided by Cartel Client Review and the RACC that the advertised service for clearing an outstanding credit card debt involved legal proceedings, which we also understood could be a potentially lengthy and complex process. We considered that the ad implied that the key factor in determining whether a consumer's credit card balance could be cleared was the date of issue of the card. We also considered that we had not seen evidence that demonstrated that that was the case, or that demonstrated that significant numbers of consumers had had their credit card debts written off in that way. We therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

The ad breached CAP (Broadcast) Radio Advertising Standards Code section 2-3 (Misleadingness).

Action
The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)

Cartel Group Holdings Plc and Cartel Holdings Plc

[LuggerBugs]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

I'll have to try and record the ad next time I hear it. It was on yesterday, and seemed awfully familiar in content.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

lol, they now say MAY a few times and bobs yer uncle. It was back in January this adjudication but for such a massive company with over 3000 representatives, you'd have thought they'd have been able to show more than two letters from banks wiping off debt (I could probably show more evidence than that!), one from a solicitor, a link to an article in the times and a link to panorama ! Not inferring anything mind.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Cartel Client Review Consumer Credit Litigation SOlicitors

please email: davidjack@stokenorthlibdems.com

David Jack = The Association of Mortgage Victims Staffordshire

[helpmeclaim]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

CONSUMER CREDIT LITIGATION SOLICITORS
Floor 5, Building 5,
Universal Square,
Devonshire Street,
Manchester,
M12 6JH
Tel: 0845 026 2599
Fax: 0845 675 2605
Partners: Richard J. Burley and Karl A. Berry.
483311


as you are aware the above Solicitors are basicly Client Cartel and Burleys they have set this firm up together as you do not need to be a Solicitor to part own a Solicitors firm now but you do need a Solicitor as a partner.

Big scam as you all know and i bet Burleys will get a hidding if they both go bust. Also as far as i am aware there may be conflicts of interest as they are basicaly passing cases over to the next desk and then charging a fee for it they should be closed down and burley struck off as he is not acting in the best interest of the client which he is bound by under the SRA's rules

Will be interested to see what happens

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

helpmeclaim - did you read Legal Beagles - View Single Post - Cartel using Burleys solicitors ? and Legal Beagles - View Single Post - Cartel using Burleys solicitors ? I am wondering if there are grounds now for a complaint rather than waiting and seeing ? What do you think ?

[helpmeclaim]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Yes,

Most defiantly. The Solicitor should not be saying you have to go through CCR he is not acting in the best interest of the client he is acting in HIS best interests. He should not inform the client he can not act for them he is breaking SRA rules on 1 hand he says i can't act for you and on the other hand he says i can if you go through CCR.

So it is clear he can act for the client.

If a client goes to CCR first no rules broken (well thats prob not correct)
But if the client goes direct to the Solicitor and they deal with UCA's how can he say we can't act for you?? he can't as they do deal with UCA's SRA rules broken!!

As far as i am aware Consumer Litigation Solicitors work on the same floor as CCR i know a Solicitor who went for an interview several months ago at CCR office's but she didn't take the Job.

The directors of CCR and Burley set this firm up and will be on a 50/50 split of profits Burley obviously just wanted to keep it separate from his own firm for when and if it goes pop.

On Burleys website http://www.burleyslaw.co.uk/consumer-credit.php

ExpertConsumer Credit Solicitors in Nottingham

Reclaim Mis-sold PPI with our specialist Solicitor team offering “No Win, No Fee” in Nottingham and across the UK.

We do not charge any fees for reviewing your agreements. We will tell you for free if you have a claim and proceed with any claim on a “No Win, No Fee” basis.

It would be interesting to obtain information from company’s house as to who is named as owners/directors

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/10062fbd1d0722a3db654526dc9cb8ce/compdetails

To report them to the SRA i think it would be better if you had telephone recordings you would need to inform them you are recording the message and then ask if they deal with UCA's. I think they would deny saying what they said to the SRA but they may do some mystery shopping calls on them.

My opinion is they set this firm up as a front!!

They deal with 1,000's of cases a month so they need a home for them. THEY COULD NOT pass this many cases onto panel firms most firms would take a max of around 25-50 a month so they would need 100's of firms on their panel and not that many firms deal with UCA case's.

So set up a firm of Sols with a Solicitor and bingo they can generate 1,000's of case's a month take the money from the clients pass them through to the Sols and look like they are doing something. This gives them a lot bigger window to take as much money as they can if it all goes wrong wind down the company and the Sols.

Without the Sols after a few months they would struggle still taking money as all the cases would be sat in the office not going anywhere clients calling to see why nothing is happening giving them a short period to make what they can.

In my eyes i think its a front they sat down and worked all this out first it has given them the chance to generate 100's of thousands of claims and look like they are doing something. Without Consumer Litigation Solicitors i don't think they could have done what they have done.

The SRA may hopefully do something about it as i think the MOJ just care about taking the £400 license fee if you look at the companys they have suspended its around 10 not to good for the governing body who is supposed to be regulating CMC's
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
[/FONT]

[Amethyst]

Re: Cartel using Burleys solicitors ?

Okay we have an idea on that score which I won't post.


A guy from Ratio on the 'other site' has said Ratio have 100's of firms as panel solicitors. So scans Cartel would too.