Validity of claims management companies? Moved from "Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice"

[angry cat]

by ML:

 

"Sadly, discussion in the forum is limited on this one as claims handlers are a litigious bunch, and the risk of handing them a juicy libel claim from some flippant comment sadly means discussion needs to be put on hold until we’re fully ready to publish."

 

No doubt one will be in a more enlightened position, once the list is published.

 

AC

[yourbank]

by ML:

 

"Sadly, discussion in the forum is limited on this one as claims handlers are a litigious bunch, and the risk of handing them a juicy libel claim from some flippant comment sadly means discussion needs to be put on hold until we’re fully ready to publish."

 

No doubt one will be in a more enlightened position, once the list is published.

 

AC

 

That's what I was thinking when I read that this morning.

[vjohn82]

What an outburst!

I simply posted up the Martin Lewis view...

 

Furthermore, I believe that the following sentiment is appropriate:

 

I know AC,

 

it wasnt aimed at you, but it gets me going when i hear the holier than thou arguments such as youve borrowed it pay it back stuff.

 

the claims management companies out there who are reputable are helping people they are not some diseased creature that needs to be kept away from and it annoys me to hear some of the comments coming out of the likes of Martin when it seems to say that these claims management companies are something to be avoided

 

the company i work with does not charge, they are fully reputable and they as i said before hold a consumer credit licence and are extremely ethical

 

they dont even touch any compensation thats awarded( if there is any)

 

With all due respect I would not expect you to be on ML's side being someone who works for a CMC type business... the bias is clear to see.

 

But what he has said is right... it is bringing genuine claims into disrepute. I'm no keeper of high morals... but if you borrow money you should really pay it back unless you genuinely have no way to honour it and I believe, in the main, that the CCA defence type argument should be used to DEFEND creditor action and not to make a "claim".

 

I have also seen NO company stating they do not charge money for attempting to challenge credit agreements so your company must be the exception ;-)

[Tricky Dickie]

by ML:

 

"Sadly, discussion in the forum is limited on this one as claims handlers are a litigious bunch, and the risk of handing them a juicy libel claim from some flippant comment sadly means discussion needs to be put on hold until we’re fully ready to publish."

 

No doubt one will be in a more enlightened position, once the list is published.

 

AC

 

Don't hold your breath, for a consumer champion Martin seems to have

been surprisingly reticent to get involved in any way with the whole issue of challenging credit agreements despite the act it ha sben discussed here for years.

The excuse about possible libel claims is very convenient, a bit like claims companies being unable to show written evidence of debts wiped out due to confidentiality and the data protection act.

The truth is that however he started out Martin is now very much a product of the media and as such he has to toe the line like all the media do and blowing the lid on this would not be at all a good idea for him

[vjohn82]

 

Don't hold your breath, for a consumer champion Martin seems to have

been surprisingly reticent to get involved in any way with the whole issue of challenging credit agreements despite the act it ha sben discussed here for years.

The excuse about possible libel claims is very convenient, a bit like claims companies being unable to show written evidence of debts wiped out due to confidentiality and the data protection act.

The truth is that however he started out Martin is now very much a product of the media and as such he has to toe the line like all the media do and blowing the lid on this would not be at all a good idea for him

 

Just out of curiousity, have you been genuinely threatened with court action by your creditors? Such as being served a stat demand/CCJ or suchlike?

[Tricky Dickie]

 

With all due respect I would not expect you to be on ML's side being someone who works for a CMC type business... the bias is clear to see.

 

But what he has said is right... it is bringing genuine claims into disrepute. I'm no keeper of high morals... but if you borrow money you should really pay it back unless you genuinely have no way to honour it and I believe, in the main, that the CCA defence type argument should be used to DEFEND creditor action and not to make a "claim".

 

I have also seen NO company stating they do not charge money for attempting to challenge credit agreements so your company must be the exception ;-)

 

Lets say that when you took out a loan for 10k you expected to pay back 10k plus agreed interest and the lender expected the same thing.

Further down the line it transpired that you had messed something up and the lender was now entitled to 20k plus interest -do you really thing they would say no no you just pay us 10k plus interest and we will be happy with that .

Yeah right

[car2403]

 

Just out of curiousity, have you been genuinely threatened with court action by your creditors? Such as being served a stat demand/CCJ or suchlike?

 

This isn't normal practise, as they know where they are going if they do.

 

Usually, the debt is passed on to a reticent DCA that doesn't give up and makes your life a misery until the debt is repaid out of pure desperation. (Usually by those who don't know their rights)

 

The whole reason these types of threads come around is the consumer backlash. It's time we all stood together to be counted and made the change.

 

(Anyone for a revolt?)

[Tricky Dickie]

 

Just out of curiousity, have you been genuinely threatened with court action by your creditors? Such as being served a stat demand/CCJ or suchlike?

 

I don't see what difference it makes but yes I have several ongoing at the moment,written evidence available on request along with a copy of my latest bank statement showing my parlous financial position

[Tricky Dickie]

 

This isn't normal practise, as they know where they are going if they do.

 

Usually, the debt is passed on to a reticent DCA that doesn't give up and makes your life a misery until the debt is repaid out of pure desperation. (Usually by those who don't know their rights)

 

The whole reason these types of threads come around is the consumer backlash. It's time we all stood together to be counted and made the change.

 

(Anyone for a revolt?)

 

Maybe its not normal practice but I have 2 with MBNA and they have issued on both despite me telling them that their agreement did not include all the prescribed terms.

[tinkerbell20]

 

Don't hold your breath, for a consumer champion Martin seems to have

been surprisingly reticent to get involved in any way with the whole issue of challenging credit agreements despite the act it ha sben discussed here for years.

The excuse about possible libel claims is very convenient, a bit like claims companies being unable to show written evidence of debts wiped out due to confidentiality and the data protection act.

The truth is that however he started out Martin is now very much a product of the media and as such he has to toe the line like all the media do and blowing the lid on this would not be at all a good idea for him

 

 

Well his website is full of all sorts of offers & loans from credit card companies and banks so I guess he is probably not as unbiased as CAG in this area.

[angry cat]

 

With all due respect I would not expect you to be on ML's side being someone who works for a CMC type business... the bias is clear to see.

 

But what he has said is right... it is bringing genuine claims into disrepute. I'm no keeper of high morals... but if you borrow money you should really pay it back unless you genuinely have no way to honour it and I believe, in the main, that the CCA defence type argument should be used to DEFEND creditor action and not to make a "claim".

 

I have also seen NO company stating they do not charge money for attempting to challenge credit agreements so your company must be the exception ;-)

 

Err vjohn, pt did not say that he works for a CMC business, he actually stated that, he works with one. I would presume that whichever firm this is, they work on a; no win no fee basis.

 

Many consumers have valid reasons to challenge their consumer credit agreements such as myself. I personally, do not wish to be tarred with the same brush as some, who just wish to get out of paying.

 

I agree, that it is often wiser to defend rather than to challenge. However, sometimes you have to stand up for your rights, particularly when your valid complaint(s) are continually ignored by the OC/DCA.

 

It is a worry though, that via all the media and TV advertising by CMC's, some naieve consumers will be drawn into something that they do not understand and as a consequence ending up with a large bill.

 

AC

Edited May 13, 2009 by angry cat
spelling

[Tricky Dickie]

Who was it who said that you know when you are asking the right questions because eveyone ignores them

[Tricky Dickie]

 

Err vjohn, pt did not say that he works for a CMC business, he actually stated that, he works with one. I would presume that whichever firm this is, they work on a; no win no fee basis.

 

Many consumers have valid reasons to challenge their consumer credit agreements such as myself. I personally, do not wish to be tarred with the same brush as some, who just wish to get out of paying.

 

I agree, that it is often wiser to defend rather than to challenge. However, sometimes you have to stand up for your rights, particularly when your valid complaint(s) are continually ignored by the OC/DCA.

 

It is a worry though, that via all the media and TV advertising by CMC's, some naieve consumers will be drawn into something that they do not understand and as a consequence ending up with a large bill.

 

AC

 

Glad that could never happen to somone following the advice on here

[yourbank]

 

 

Well his website is full of all sorts of offers & loans from credit card companies and banks so I guess he is probably not as unbiased as CAG in this area.

Martin Lewis' site is moneysavingexpert, if he didn't cover all sorts of moneysaving methods including loans and credit cards I would be surprised.

Furthermore, his forum is unmoderated which is not a dig at this forum but I think suggesting Martin Lewis is biased towards banks/loan companies is perhaps an unfortunate aspersion to make considering what his site is about and the varied people who use the forum.

[Tricky Dickie]

Who was it who said that you know when you are asking the right questions because eveyone ignores them

 

 

Post #206

[angry cat]

 

Glad that could never happen to somone following the advice on here

 

Not impossible!

 

AC

[Tricky Dickie]

Martin Lewis' site is moneysavingexpert, if he didn't cover all sorts of moneysaving methods including loans and credit cards I would be surprised.

Furthermore, his forum is unmoderated which is not a dig at this forum but I think suggesting Martin Lewis is biased towards banks/loan companies is perhaps an unfortunate aspersion to make considering what his site is about and the varied people who use the forum.

 

So presumably you have another reason in mind as to why Martin has not dealt with being able to claim against your lender as for sure thats a way of saving money.

[Tricky Dickie]

 

Not impossible!

 

AC

 

Quite

[yourbank]

 

So presumably you have another reason in mind as to why Martin has not dealt with being able to claim against your lender as for sure thats a way of saving money.

 

I think you need to email Martin Lewis and ask him the question because my name is not Martin Lewis and I don't think for him.

[Tricky Dickie]

 

I think you need to email Martin Lewis and ask him the question because my name is not Martin Lewis and I don't think for him.

 

 

Not much point he has already said he has has massive amounts of mail asking him to address this issue but its not had the desired effect yet so I guess we'll have to wait a few more years for the sage to pronounce

[yourbank]

 

 

Not much point he has already said he has has massive amounts of mail asking him to address this issue but its not had the desired effect yet so I guess we'll have to wait a few more years for the sage to pronounce

 

Have you emailed him? Have you emailed [email protected] or one of their site team?

I prefer to DO THINGS than shoot hot air out so email him or the team on MSE and ask the question you want of them and report back on the thread.

[vjohn82]

 

Err vjohn, pt did not say that he works for a CMC business, he actually stated that, he works with one. I would presume that whichever firm this is, they work on a; no win no fee basis.

 

 

I said I imagine he works for a CMC type business... not actually within one. Either way his involvement is ambiguous and that's why I believe there is bias in his position on CMC's. This is a logical assumption. I do not work for a CMC and have seen ones which screw people over; therefore my bias is against them.

 

 

Many consumers have valid reasons to challenge their consumer credit agreements such as myself. I personally, do not wish to be tarred with the same brush as some, who just wish to get out of paying.

 

 

I've been quite careful to say that the majority of people have a genuine inability to pay... those who are proactively taking their creditors to court to claim money from them (compensation etc) in my opnion is slightly disconcerting. Creditors and DCA's are not always the same thing.

[I've got no money]

what a load of Bo!!ocks

 

the law does not seek to enforce morals, there is no such thing as a moral offence nor can you be tried for breaking the spirit of the law

 

is it moral for the lenders to give out money to people who cant afford it? NO

 

but on the same token , people seem to throw the moral argument that youve borrowed it so pay it back

 

 

this is what the Law Lords said on the "moral" issue

 

pah:mad:

 

I agree with that 100%

[Baggio]

Mr Lewis has some libel problems with the so called industry big dog (CMC wise)

 

rubbed the owner up the wrong way, ALLEGEDLEY

 

"litigous bunch" lol

 

hint hint, pop pop !!!

Edited May 13, 2009 by Baggio

[Wigeon]

The CMC's are charging from £99.00 to £799 as a charge for taking on a case. This allows some of them to give cases to solicitors to act etc. However they are also charging a backend fee at the same time some like Cartel are charging both and a fee to the solicitors and a fee back end from the solicitors. It's a business. Problem is the free or state alternative is to recovering the true amount owed to the borrower on these types of claims (Loans, credit cards, store cards, unenforceable agreements and PPI/ASU claims)

To be able to do this work for people you have to make a living but it is outrageous that the general public are being ripped off again by the lenders who will settle very quickly for a much smaller amount with FOS and the CMC's who make more that the claimant and the lawyers simply for putting the two together.

The CMC's are charging from £99.00 to £799 as a charge for taking on a case. This allows some of them to give cases to solicitors to act etc. However they are also charging a backend fee at the same time some like Cartel are charging both and a fee to the solicitors and a fee back end from the solicitors. It’s a business. Problem is the free or state alternative is to recovering the true amount owed to the borrower on these types of claims (Loans, credit cards, store cards, unenforceable agreements and PPI/ASU claims)

To be able to do this work for people you have to make a living but it is outrageous that the general public are being ripped off again by the lenders who will settle very quickly for a much smaller amount with FOS and the CMC's who make more that the claimant and the lawyers simply for putting the two together.