Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

A lot of the less respectable CMCs don't want to use the court system, it costs them money upfront in court fees, plus is a lot more effort, and many don't even have solicitors they can use, a FOS form is free and with an 81% uphold rate gives a nice rate of return for very little outlay, no risk, and a nice upfront fee ANDd backend fee from the customer.

Which is your CMC/Solicitors then NLP ? I presume they are a 'PPI specialist' ?

NO CMC

They do come independantly!!!

A solicitors is not always connected to a CMC, they hate them as much as us!

[Amethyst]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Sorry I meant '/' to mean 'or' rather than 'and'

[marshallka]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

I have a feeling a point is being missed by all the anti-cmc/sols mob.

A CMC does have to be paid somehow.. but a solicitor can recover costs from the losing party, therefore, the consumer does not suffer a penny!

e.g I have a 4K claims with Lloyds, my solicitors fund my case (meaning i have not paid one single penny to them) and take action against Lloyds through the court system. Lloyds bottle it, as the norm, and settle out of court.

They pay me my 4K in full

They pay the sols his X amount in legal fees/costs

Me the consumer, paid 0 upfront and got 100% of the refund.

There were a few claims companies from posts over at MSE (highly promoted too) that passed claims over to solicitors and told clients that any charges would be levied onto the bank... (CFA and ATE insurance...... anyway 2 years down the line and people were still waiting and NOTHING had been done by the solicitors whatsoever.

People were having to make complaints against these solicitors to get their files back!! They said they would work wonders but things did not work out as planned. Look at Cartel clients who had work passed over to solicitors? No insurance was put in place and some were at threat of legal fees which took thousands more than their original claim....you do have to be wary of solicitors.

This will take away the need for CMC's though perhaps
http://www.legalservicesboard.org.uk...ss_release.pdf



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8050990.stm

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

btw the FOS are currnetly taking 12-18 months to uphold, then the bank reject and it takes another 12 months for the ombudsman.. and as you can read from posts on here and other fourms... the banks take no notice some of the time.

hit the ankers through the legal system, hit them for legal fees, and hit them hard and fast where they cannot abuse the system as they do with the FOS.

we all know this.

i spoke of conspiracies, well we will shall see soon won't we?

lets see what the FSA do.. as we have all worked out the banks are legally on thin ice by freezing all claims.

so surely the FSA will steam right in.. right?
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

There were a few claims companies from posts over at MSE (highly promoted too) that passed claims over to solicitors and told clients that any charges would be levied onto the bank... (CFA and ATE insurance...... anyway 2 years down the line and people were still waiting and NOTHING had been done by the solicitors whatsoever.

People were having to make complaints against these solicitors to get their files back!! They said they would work wonders but things did not work out as planned. Look at Cartel clients who had work passed over to solicitors? No insurance was put in place and some were at threat of legal fees which took thousands more than their original claim....you do have to be wary of solicitors.

I believe you are talking about unenforceable claims as opposed to PPI claims

Think you know we are talking abot two VERY VERY VERY different types of cases.

Banks don't have a leg to stand on with PPI

[Amethyst]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Havent kept up on the old Loancheck, and the vast number of sols and offshoot cmcs involved, threads over there for a while ? Are people getting things sorted now ?

There were a few claims companies over at MSE (highly promoted too) that passed claims over to solicitors and told clients that any charges would be levied onto the bank... (CFA and ATE insurance...... anyway 2 years down the line and people were still waiting and NOTHING had been done by the solicitors whatsoever.

People were having to make complaints against these solicitors to get their files back!! They said they would work wonders but things did not work out as planned. Look at Cartel clients who had work passed over to solicitors? No insurance was put in place and some were at threat of legal fees which took thousands more than their original claim....you do have to be wary of solicitors.

One of those involved was a 'PPI' ''specialist'' rather than UEA claims, theres threads and threads about them on MSE, and on here so I won't go into names.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Havent kept up on the old Loancheck, and the vast number of sols and offshoot cmcs involved, threads over there for a while ? Are people getting things sorted now ?

Are you talking PPI or Uneforcables?

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

btw the FOS are currnetly taking 12-18 months to uphold, then the bank reject and it takes another 12 months for the ombudsman.. and as you can read from posts on here and other fourms... the banks take no notice some of the time.

hit the ankers through the legal system, hit them for legal fees, and hit them hard and fast where they cannot abuse the system as they do with the FOS.

we all know this.

i spoke of conspiracies, well we will shall see soon won't we?

lets see what the FSA do.. as we have all worked out the banks are legally on thin ice by freezing all claims.

so surely the FSA will steam right in.. right?
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


I believe you are talking about unenforceable claims as opposed to PPI claims

Think you know we are talking abot two VERY VERY VERY different types of cases.

Banks don't have a leg to stand on with PPI

Can someone just explain to me the legal argument?
Ta muchly....

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Can someone just explain to me the legal argument?
Ta muchly....

I am not a solicitor so don't know the ins and outs, but something to do with the DSIP handbook and unconnnection of frozen claims to the JR.

[Amethyst]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Sadly both, but yes mainly UEA. I think some early days PPI concentrative sols and CMCs got caught up in the money making prospects (alongside bank chagres claims etc) before the FOS stepped in with their easy to use forms etc. I think FOs is a good option to begin with and if you get nowhere and the banks are being obtrusive then court is a decent way to get your missold (truely missold) premiums returned.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Sadly both, but yes mainly UEA. I think some early days PPI sols and CMCs got caught up in the money making prospects before the FOS stepped in with their easy to use forms etc. I think FOs is a good option to begin with and if you get nowhere and the banks are being obtrusive then court is a decent way to get your missold (truely missold) premiums returned.

A lot is going to change soon, if the FSA don't take action within the next 10 days or so, then the FOS will have something like a 2 year backlog.

I could not wait 2/3 years when i could get a solicitor to hit the bank today!

Just my feelings, we are all entitled to act how we see best!

We should encourage these sols aswell, as it will cost banks far more and they may unfreeze claims!

[Amethyst]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Ref the legal argument I tried to explain it earlierto the best of my knowledge - the new rules FSA want to bring in bring in an element of retrospectivity - so in over simplistic terms, it tries to impose rules which werent in existence when the policies were sold on the sales of those policies.

thats what the JR is about, ruling on whether the FSA can impose rules retrospectively like that.

But theres nothing to stop banks and the FOs etc looking at claims on the basis of the rules that WERE in place when the policy was sold (eg. ICOB in 2005 or ICOBS in 2008).

So the hold on claims is flawed as by holding claims it means bascially the banks are contesting the jurisdiction of the FSA to impose ANY rules.


Legally the sols will be looking at unfair relationships etc.

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

I am not a solicitor so don't know the ins and outs, but something to do with the DSIP handbook and unconnnection of frozen claims to the JR.

With respect, it was open for all to respond but the DISP handbook is NOT a legal argument but merely regulatory.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Ref the legal argument I tried to explain it earlierto the best of my knowledge - the new rules FSA want to bring in bring in an element of retrospectivity - so in over simplistic terms, it tries to impose rules which werent in existence when the policies were sold on the sales of those policies.

thats what the JR is about, ruling on whether the FSA can impose rules retrospectively like that.

But theres nothing to stop banks and the FOs etc looking at claims on the basis of the rules that WERE in place when the policy was sold (eg. ICOB in 2005 or ICOBS in 2008).

So the hold on claims is flawed as by holding claims it means bascially the banks are contesting the jurisdiction of the FSA to impose ANY rules.

You really are class.

Brilliantly put!

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

To clarify, the legal argument that a solicitor can use to reclaim PPI rather than the JR.....

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

With respect, it was open for all to respond but the DISP handbook is NOT a legal argument but merely regulatory.

Correct, therefore if the FSA wishes, they can take action against the banks by means of an injunction (legal, i think) to force them to follow DSIP.