Red Hawk Legal

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Yes was cold called and paid up front fees by credit card , this i have claimed back ,

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Ultimate Law should never have taken on your case as there are strict rules which forbid solicitors taking on claims that were procured from cold calls - see page 2 of the attached PDF.

In my view you should complain to Ultimate about it if they attempt to deduct Redhawk's fees from your compensation.

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Thank you , you have been really helpful just wished i found this site before i took out this PPI claim, do you think i will get a letter from my card company telling me that my claim has been up held, is there anyway i can find out that the offer i have been told is correct, i have been offered my total payments back + interest

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

As a client you absolutely have the right to ask Ultimate to give you a breakdown of the offer. As your solicitor they cannot refuse to.

You could try asking Lloyds yourself but they may say that they'll only deal with your solicitors.

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Got a phone call to day from Ultimate law , telling me a break down of the offer, was still a bit confused as they said they were out of pocket by £800 due to the court cost, think they are having me on or there not very good at their job . Ive asked for a full statement including cost to be sent to me,

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Ok good.

Just so you're aware Ultimate Law have a long, close and in my view unhealthy relationship with Client Connection and Redhawk (who are essentially the same people with a different legal identity).

Ultimate Law were Client Connection's agent but also Client Connection were Ultimate Law's client - so no conflict of interest there then. Ultimate Law acted for Client Connection in a High Court trade mark dispute with Martin Lewis in which evidence was heard that Client Connection made half a million cold calls flogging PPI reclaim services in one sales campaign alone. Of course many of the claims would knowingly be referred to Ultimate Law in clear breach of MOJ and SRA rules. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2011/1627.html

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Hi i sent a letter of complaint to Red Hawk legal telling them that my contract was with lifestyle claims and since life style had gone into administrator and i was on the list of creditors i didnt have a contract with Red hawk legal, I asked them for a copy of my contract with Red Hawk legal and they have sent me a copy of of authority which i signed with Life style claims. The letter also states that the rights of my contract which was held by client connection ltd were sold to red hawk legal by the administrator shama and co and took place under the insolvency act 1986 and the fees i owe to Red Hawk legal are due under the contract i held with client connections, if payment is not received within 7 days your debt will be referred to a debt collection agency, in the event that this is necessary it is likey that further cost will be added to your debt your credit rating may be affected.Since i havent even been paid out i dont intend to pay . what should i do next

Rob

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

At some point you'll get a letter from Universal Collections who have sent letters to dozens of our members. Of those, 3 of our members received letters of claim from their solicitors, Temple & Co to whom we responded on our members' behalf and to date no further action has been taken. We'd be happy to do the same for you.

We firmly believe that the assignments of the customer contracts by Sharma to Redhawk were unlawful as Sharma were not authorized by the MOJ to conduct claims management activity - and the selling of claims for money is defined as claims management activity in law. And this is why I'm sure that Redhawk/Universal/Temple will not risk issuing court proceedings.

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

This is a simple summary of the legal advice we took on the validity of the contract assignments:


''Under s.4(1) of the Compensation Act 2006 "A person may not provide regulated claims management services unless— (a) he is an authorised person;" which is a point that you are already well aware of. However, as a result of s.4(2)(b) of the 2006 Act “claims management services” means advice or other services in relation to the making of a claim, and under s.4(2)(e) "services are regulated if they are— (i) of a kind prescribed by order of the Secretary of State, or (ii) provided in cases or circumstances of a kind prescribed by order of the Secretary of State."

This effectively allowed the Secretary of State to give a more refined definition of 'regulated services' under The Compensation (Regulated Claims Management Services) Order 2006. In that 2006 Order, the Secretary of State defined 'regulated services' in Regulation 4(2)(c) as "referring details of a claim or claimant, or a cause of action or potential claimant, to another person, including a person having the right to conduct litigation;".

As becomes immediately obvious, if you refer details of a claim or a claimant to another person for business purposes, then immediately you are governed by both the Order and the Act, and if you are not authorised, then this means you are committing a criminal offence.

My current view is that in order to validly assign the benefit of the contract, including details of a claim or claimant, to another person, the assignor must be authorised. From our conversations, and the emails you sent to me, it appears that the administrator for Client Connection was not authorised by the MoJ to refer details of a claim or claimant to another person.

This, in my view, gives rise to strong grounds for challenging any assignment as being unlawful, and therefore unenforceable, since it is requires the commission of a criminal offence (in particular, s.7 of the 2006 Act). As a result, as soon as a company loses its authorisation, for whatever reason, it cannot lawfully refer the details of any claims or claimants to another person, including by way of assignment.''

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

hello, so your advice would be to wait till i get contacted by the debt collectors and then pass it on to yourself, should i contact Red Hawk legal and tell them i will not be paying them anything as i feel they have no legal right to the fees they are asking for.

Rob

[TUTTSI]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

It is not like you feel that you don't owe them anything. The Legal opinion that you have received strongly advises that you do not owe them anything.

hello, so your advice would be to wait till i get contacted by the debt collectors and then pass it on to yourself, should i contact Red Hawk legal and tell them i will not be paying them anything as i feel they have no legal right to the fees they are asking for.

Rob

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

hello, so your advice would be to wait till i get contacted by the debt collectors and then pass it on to yourself, should i contact Red Hawk legal and tell them i will not be paying them anything as i feel they have no legal right to the fees they are asking for.

Rob

Yes just wait for Universal and get back to us when they contact you.

By all means contact Redhawk and tell them that you believe your legal position is that they have no rights to your contract with Lifestyle.

[flakey1965]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

Yes just wait for Universal and get back to us when they contact you.

By all means contact Redhawk and tell them that you believe your legal position is that they have no rights to your contract with Lifestyle.

Thank you for all your help i will wait till i receive a letter from the debt collector and contact you again

Rob

[Katie1913]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

How did this work out in the end, or has "Flakey 1965" heard nothing as yet?

I had a contract with Lifestyle Claims. I refused to sign any documentation from Red Hawk Legal and each time they called I told them that I didn't wish to deal with them and I put all information that they posted into the bin.

Today I have received TWO threatening letters from them. I have emailed their complaints department, their customer care department and also the ppi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk and consumer@claimsregulation.gov.uk

Is there anything else that you believe I am required to do? I am concerned about the fact that they are threatening to send the Bailiff's in and also affect my credit rating.



Here is the email that I have sent to Red Hawk Legal, copying in the Ombudsman and the MOJ today:
With regard to two FINAL NOTICE letters received from you today.

Your Reference: XXXXX
Account: MINT XXXXXXXXXXX

You tell me that you are about to put this account into thehands of a Debt Collection Company in order to recover the outstanding balance.

Firstly, the invoice was sent from Lifestyle Claims on July10^th 2012 and was paid by my Mastercard on 14^th August2012. This was for the amount of £99.66. I suggest you update yourrecords before sending me a threatening letter in regard to this amount.

Secondly, a letter, your reference: XXXXXXX
Account: BARLCLAYCARD XXXXXXXXXXXX

I had a call on Wednesday October 24^th 2012 fromRed Hawk Legal telling me that they had taken over the accounts of LifestyleClaims. I told them – and have repeated to them on many subsequent phonecalls – that I did not wish to deal with Red Hawk Legal and I refused to signany paperwork relating to this company. I explained that I had paidLifestyle Claims a sum of £3,599.80 to pursue my claims, with the understandingthat this money would be returned to me when the claim was successfullyupheld. This was made up of a payment of £719.96 for a “fast-track” claimagainst MINT and the same amounts for “fast-track” claims against Barclaycard,Lloyds and Halifax and a final £719.96 for the remainder of the PPI claims (soFIVE amounts of £719.96, totalling £3599.80). When the MINT claim wasupheld for £276.83 I enquired about the return of the £719.96 “fast track”payment, only to be told that all the “fast-track” amounts would be returned tome when all the claims had been dealt with. This didn’t happen – andthen, surprisingly enough, Lifestyle Claims went into administration (howconvenient).

I had a few discussions with Red Hawk Legal and was assuredon more than one occasion that I did not have to pay the Barclaycard invoice (sent to me by Lifestyle Claims before they went into Administration) asit was an unfair practice that had been undertaken by my up-front payments toLifestyle Claims. I also contacted Sharma & Co (theAdministrator for Lifestyle Claims) in order to attempt to get my up-frontpayments returned to me after Lifestyle Claims went into Administration, butthis is clearly a pointless endeavour.

On 6^th February 2013 a gentleman called me fromRed Hawk Legal (telephone number 01792 762382) at 10.46am – I suggest youcheck the telephone records that you always emphasise are recorded and kept for“training purposes” – it was 6^TH FEBRUARY 2013 at 10.46AM (I repeat it andhighlight it in order to ensure no misunderstanding). This was acompletely unsolicited phone call and he told me that he had good newsfor me and that Red Hawk Legal, whom he represented, had written off myoutstanding "Lifestyle Claims" Barclaycard invoice. I told him that this had been agreedin December of 2012, but I was happy to have a call from him confirming this. Please replay yourrecordings and you will hear the conversation for yourselves.

I have copied the Financial Ombudsman and the ClaimsRegulation (part of the Ministry of Justice) into this email as I believe thatyou should not be sending letters threatening a Debt Collection Company whenthese matters have been settled many months ago. I believe this issharp-practice and I think that your trading practices should be put underscrutiny by the Financial Ombudsman and The Ministry of Justice.

AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED I HAVE PAID ONE BILL ASREQUIRED, AND AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REACHED (AND CONFIRMED BY PHONE CALL FROMYOURSELVES) IN RELATION TO THE SECOND LETTER/DEMAND FOR MONEY.

I am absolutely furious about this and, as you are clearly acompany whose word is not to be trusted, I would now like to receive a letterfrom you confirming that the MINT payment was made on 14^th August2012 and that you do not intend to attempt to pursue the Barclaycard amountwhich YOU have CONFIRMED to have “written off” – inyour own words. You cannot make a call like that on 6^thFebruary 2013 – and I strongly suggest that you check your records - andthen write me a threatening letter on 12^th November 2013. Itis completely inappropriate and bad practice.

[EXC]

Re: Red Hawk Legal

The Financial Ombudsman Service don't cover Claims Management companies but you're right to contact MOJ.

Just so we're clear can you confirm the following:

1) How much are Redhawk invoicing you for?

2) Is that amount related to the £99.66 you paid Lifestyle?

3) I assume you were never refunded the upfront fees you paid Lifestyle but have you tried making a claim to your credit card company?

4) Does your name appear in the list of creditors on the attached document, the ones that are listed sideways further down? Look carefully as they're not in alphabetical order.