Put it this way - the guy paid £2600 for services (make no mistake about it - he paid from his rightful winnings, not the bank). If he had instead hired a solicitor, he would have paid £45 for each of three letters (four if a DSAR was necessary), and probably another £50-100 for dealing with the claim. Whichever way you look at it, it would be cheaper to get professional, qualified help, than to hire cowboys that are extolling the virtues of their operations here.

 

As I said, since you are not a qualified and insured solicitor, you have warned your clients about countersuits, yes?

Meagain, I've read your long winded arguments on other threads, I'm not about to get in to a protracted debate with you. You have strong opinions on the issue, I disagree with you. End of discussion.

And that's a fair price to pay for sending a couple of letters and filing a court claim?!

 

Incidentally was the contractual interest your idea? I notice you didn't post that up anywhere? If so how is this not just profiting from the work of others by offering a very, VERY poor level of value? And how is this a good thing? I mean, 2 letters plus filing a claim earns you £2400? And you claim to have automated much of this? Seems you clients would have a reasonable claim against you under the sale of goods and services act for charging a price that is neither fair nor reasonable!

 

I pity the ones who don't find the info for free and happen accross you first. They must kick themselves when they realise they spent £2400 on 2 first class stamps and the bus fare to the court.

As I have pointed out already, many of our customers are aware they can do this for free.

Its worth noting that at 20% we are one of the cheapest. One of the main players charges 40%

Tell me why that justifies a 70% cut of the profits?

70% ?

Its less than 50% of the interest but only 20% of the whole claim. You're playing with numbers Meagain. As I've already said, its unlikely the customer would have claimed contractual interest even if they had claimed themselves. Of course most claims are around the £3000 mark and our fee in that case is only £600.

And didn't you say you had devised a system to automate the process? Hmmm ever thought of a career in banking?

Hang on, its the banks money I have taken, not his. I think in the example I quoted the customer has done quite well out of it, don't you?

The guy just got £9600 back, money he waived goodbye to a long time ago, he's over the moon. The chances are if he had even bothered to do this himself, he would have only claimed statutory interest. Its the banks that are paying, not him! Of course not many claims are this large, it was just an example.

why over 12 months old? plus some interest? how much?

 

not very transparent, when you don't mention figures...

 

indeed it has been a good debate.

Because we charge contractual interest, if the charges are older than 12 months then our fee is less than the interest. For example if there is a claim for £7k plus £5k in interest, our fee would be £2400, they would get all their charges back plus £2600 in interest.

Anyway folks, I have been procrastinating way too long this afternoon. Its been good chewing the fat with you.

I hope I can prove you wrong by offering an honest and ethical service that benefits real people.

I guess only time will tell.

the issue, is the fact you are taking your cut, or charge a fee, no win no fee types. very cleverly worded to confuse joe public into thinking its a free service but it's clearly not.

We quite clearly offer people examples (as required in the Compensations act incidentally) As long as the majority of charges are over 12 months old then they will get all their charges back plus some interest. I'm not in to confusing people, I believe in keeping things simple and explaining things in plain English. People aren't stupid.

To be honest, I try my best not to be cynical. I don't believe there is a terrorist and pedophile around every corner, I don't believe there are loads of people wanting to go through my rubbish to steal my identity. I believe that essentially most people are honest and good and not everyone is out to con you.

I'm a nice guy, if you met me you'd like me honest

full settlement? or did you take your 'cut' ???

 

 

nothing to do with that persons hard work, or people on this site, or the banks giving in, as they do.

 

all down to your 'feedback' yes. aren't you great!

Oh I give up

yes I can, and I can cut and paste too, wonderful thing universities.

 

 

 

So what you mean is, you sent the prelim letter for your own claims then rewrote one of your own to use for your 'clients', or perhaps you wrote your own before posting this back in March?

Yes I did write my own before I knew anything about this site.

Can you only copy and paste in Universities ;-)

my point was the public will see you as an authority on the matter and will give you trust, do you state in your advertising and any correspondence with your customers that you in fact have no legal authority are not qualified to offer any legal advice. and that they should be seeking a qualified professional !?

I make it quite clear that I have no legal qualifications. I've not had a single person be put off by this. As I say, personal recommendation is a powerful marketing tool. There is no reason not to trust us, we will get their money back.

I think there is room for both free and fee paying services. I understand your objections to our service however surely the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If they get their money back (in most cases they get all their charges plus interest) what's the problem with that?

banks don't offer a good service, nor do the post office, yet they are still used! millions of times a day, because there is nothing else convienient or available. indeed though some company's are useless and they end up losing business because of it. but it doesn't apply in everycase!

 

slightly off topic, i apologise

The difference here is there is an excellent FREE resource available. The fact that people still choose to use a fee based service shows that there is demand for such a service. People have lots of options, thats the difference.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/yorkshire-bank-clydesdale-bank/53562-anyone-having-difficulty-contacting.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank/52984-halifax-rolling-over.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/47210-bailiffs-agreement-pay.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland-bank/39443-cca-claim.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-stores/32229-link-coverplan.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/holiday-companies/29868-change-airport.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/10548-what-happened-stevens-case.html

 

Yes I suppose I am, for someone who knows enough to charge others to provide this service, you appear to have asked a lot of questions

Well done, you can use a search facility.

Have I used material from this site, ie letter templates in the course of my business? No. I have never said I have not asked questions. I could of course come on to this thread under a different username but I'm really not trying to hide anything. You will notice that the other day on the Halifax thread that a user got a settlement simply because I posted some feedback, not a big deal but every little helps.

Bet that inspires confidence in your customers

No, what inspires confidence is when they get a big old cheque from their bank. If a company does not offer a good service, customers won't use them. I would say that each customer recommends us to on average 4 other people. :-p

he is a qualified pilot actually, although probably not when he started his business, but he did and does employ qualified pilots to do their jobs.

 

are you hiring qualified solicitors to work for you?

Well I have a firm of solicitors that I use to advise us on various issues, but no they are not directly employed by me, hopefully in 6 months time we will be in a position to hire one full time if we felt it necessary. Again, I fail to see why this is relevant. The law is quite clear on penalty charges, its not like there are complex legal issues involved here that are open to interpretation or debate. When a situation arises that we are unsure about, we ask for advice from our solicitors. To be honest the process of claiming back charges is just a business process that needs a degree of automation when you are dealing with large numbers of claims. There is a financial risk on our behalf, while we haven't invested £100k, we have invested a significant amount of money, something we stand to lose if this doesn't all pan out. I know some people will say that we have jumped on the band waggon, but setting up this business has not been a trivial matter or especially easy. Both my partner and I are in IT and have developed quite a sophisticated system for handling this business, this piece of software is probably worth quite a sum in and of itself.

In summary, we are not a bunch of chancers that are out to make a quick buck from the vulnerable, I consider myself to be diligent and ethical, and it does matter to me that our customers get an honest and fair service.

Probably not but then I don't think he used BA's planes to do it either.

I'm sorry, are you suggesting that I have used the material on here in my business? I worked as an engineer for various IT firms, I now use that knowledge, built up over 10 years to run my own Computer consultancy firm. I'm not however using their car, tools or customers to do it. I first made a claim against my bank in December 05, and I believe I joined here in February 06.

As and when I have useful info to pass on, I will of course do so.

sorry i am not aware of any question you have asked me.

 

if you were a qualified to degree level and have a LLB in Law then i wouldn't have any problems with what you are doing, but by your response i again assume you don't.

 

ask what you like.... i have nothing to hide.

We've covered this already haven't we? You asked me earlier what qualifications I have, I told you I have no legal qualifications. Nor do I feel I need them (although I am considering training as its something that interests me). I'm a claims manager not a solicitor, but as I have already said I have a solicitor that advises me. I have run a successful business in IT for over 7 years though, I think that qualifies me in running a business.

I asked you what qualifications Richard Branson had? Was he a qualified pilot when he set up Virgin Atlantic?

Been trying to call them for 2 days, just keep getting engaged tone.

i assume therefore you are not part of the administration staff?

 

what qualifications do you have?

I'm sorry, that's none of your business is it? I answered your question about staff out of courtesy, you didn't get the answer you wanted so you moved on to something else. It doesn't matter what string of qualifications I came out with, it wouldn't satisfy you, you have already made your mind up on this issue. I have asked you various questions, which you have chosen to ignore, why should I continue to answer yours?

I've already stated that I don't want this thread to turn in to a personal battle between me and everyone else, it really isn't going to get us anywhere is it?

Lets just agree to disagree shall we?

"i make a little money"

 

surely your business does, how many of you are there? is this a one man show?

When posting on a forum I always fluctuate between we and I. No its not just me, there are 2 directors and 3 admin staff.

eeerm, yeah, sure, but shouldn't you pay us a fee for our help?

 

 

 

Really? Do we?

Yep, nobody is going to order the banks to repay £18 billion. The OFT may make a ruling about bank charges but let me predict the future here, they will reduce their fees to £12 and there will be no order for them to repay the unlawful charges they have already taken over the last 6 years. Am I mistaken or have the credit card companies repaid all the unlawful charges they have taken over the last 6 years?

You're assuming again. First, you assumed that a regulated industry would mean my automatic approval, and you were wrong. Now you assume that whether the state of mind of people out to make money out of other people's misery concerns me. Wrong. Again.

 

Not interested in turning this into a personal argument, however. I have posted the relevant information, and people can act on it any way they like. That's as far as my involvement goes.

I didn't assume anything, I asked a question. You brought up the Compensations Act and said I needed to worry.

I think you have assumed that everyone reclaiming bank charges are in misery. Yes some are, a lot aren't. I wasn't in misery, I had just let the banks take a lot of money off me, I wasn't struggling to make ends meet, I wasn't a victim. I would say that the majority of our customers are what I would describe as middle England, they are not on the breadline and unable to make ends meet. Some are of course, I have helped them, and let me tell you they are very appreciative, its tremendously satisfying to help people who really need it. They get their charges back, I make a little money. Yes they could have done it for free themselves but they have chosen not to, you should respect that choice, if they are happy, I'm happy.

Look, I'm quite open to being wrong. If someone wants to point me to the section that they think is going to cause us a problem I will take a look at it. From what I can see, the bill basically sets out the introduction of a regulator and that to offer a claims management service you need to be regulated. To be regulated you must fulfill a number of criteria. The only ambiguous part is the the section about being an 'authorised person'. It says that the regulator needs to decide if you are a competent person to offer such a service but lays down no criteria for that.

Regulation is a good thing, but we have all seen that in practice many companies and organisations ignore the regulator, bailiffs and banks being a prime example.

I think companies like mine can only help raise the profile of unlawful bank charges, the more of us that are out there will mean more people are claiming. As popular as this site is, its only dealing with a handful of those affected by bank charges and while in an ideal world everyone would come here and reclaim their charges thats just not the reality. Of course this could all be solved tomorrow if the banks were ordered to stop levying these unlawful charges and told to refund anyone who asked but we all know that's not going to happen.

I have read it and I'm not worried. Sorry to disappoint you Bookworm.