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

[JonCris]

JonCris,Can you please explain how you can technically still be liable for fees/costs if you have a CFA with a lawyer?

 

It's called the 'indemnity' principal - In other words if the claimant is not liable for costs then neither is the defendant - so in order to collect costs from the defendant the claimant needs to be 'technicaly' liable, insurance or not - If a firm is deducting 30% it's not a true CFA it's a 'contingency' agreement which are normaly only used in Employment Tribunals

 

Whichever way your case may be dealt with you should never pay up front except the SAR fee

Edited June 10, 2009 by JonCris

[pt2537]

It's called the 'indemnity' principal - In other words if the claimant is not liable for costs then neither is the defendant - so in order to collect costs from the defendant the claimant needs to be 'technicaly' liable, insurance or not - If a firm is deducting 30% it's not a true CFA it's a 'contigency' agreement which are normaly only used in Employment Tribunals

 

Whichever way you case may be dealt with you should never pay up front except the SAR fee

exactley, even though its no win no fee, there still needs to be a bill to be indemnified from

[Tricky Dickie]

Having understood the work the CMC i am using undertakes in terms of funding legal case, human audited agreement ( not using a computer checker sytem which most CMCs employ), insurance etc etc

 

not sure i would trust a firm to be competent for nowt up front, a sensible up front one off fee makes sense to me.[/quo

 

The upfront fee is peanuts and inconsequential compared to what it costs to take a case from start to finish,it barely covers the cost of the initial audit.

However the big money is when the case is settled and the CMC solicitor wins then claims all his costs back from the lender plus the success fee he is entitled to which can be up to 100% of his costs.

In the recent case of Mitchel v Halifax I mentioned earlier the success fee was £8000.

The solicitor then pays the CMC a previously agreed percentage of the success fee and its happy days all round.

The problem for many small companies of solicitors is that they have to fund themselves for up to 18 months before they win a case and get paid but the large well organised CMC's have solved this.

They offer the solicitor batches of cases(which the solicitors pay for) and specialist training(which they also pay for) and access to a top QC (guess what?)

In return the solicitors get access to a fund from which they can draw down interim payments to keep them going until they win some cases.

There are billions of pounds available in these funds and naturally there's a nice chunky rate of interest to pay.

[diddydicky]

the reason i asked how much he paid is because i have most CMCs clocked, and know just from their cost upfront how good, bad or ugly they are.

 

any that charge in the region of £495 need to be avoided like the plague

 

one mob who work in essex and advetise in the london metro daily charge 295 up front and then expect you to pay the solictor 150 a month for 6 months to fund the case LOL

 

hillarious

 

i have a case being dealt with by a CMC and all i paid was 288 day 1 and i had solictors fully funded and instructed working on my case there and then.

 

really happy with how my case is being dealt with and just feel sorry for those being ripped off by those cowboy merchants from up norf... you all know who i am talking about!!!

 

beats me why you would want to pay anything at all when its all on here for free ( and a donation)

[Baggio]

is the knowledge of a QC all on here?

 

no

 

288 for me buys me piece of mind.

[car2403]

is the knowledge of a QC all on here?

 

no

 

288 for me buys me piece of mind.

 

Actually, yes, we do have members of the site team that have taken advice from Counsel on various different matters, including UCA's.

 

£288 is a lot to pay for advice that is given for free on CAG (no donation is required, although we're very grateful if you do)

 

I don't really see the point in every debtor of, say, MBNA/Capital One and others, paying a company £288 to see if each agreement is enforceable - if the agreement "form" used is improperly executed and can't be enforced, who the debtor is, or is not, is irrelevant. (including whether they have access to Legal Counsel) After all, this is the Consumer Action Group...

[Tricky Dickie]

Actually, yes, we do have members of the site team that have taken advice from Counsel on various different matters, including UCA's.

 

£288 is a lot to pay for advice that is given for free on CAG (no donation is required, although we're very grateful if you do)

 

I don't really see the point in every debtor of, say, MBNA/Capital One and others, paying a company £288 to see if each agreement is enforceable - if the agreement "form" used is improperly executed and can't be enforced, who the debtor is, or is not, is irrelevant. (including whether they have access to Legal Counsel) After all, this is the Consumer Action Group...

 

 

There are 60 million people in this country who don't even believe that the unenforceability possibility is real ,they think its an urban myth like men never went to the moon etc due to the media brainwashing.

A few of those might pay a solicitor to look at their agreement and then take the case forward.

But the problem is that for 99% of the population thinking for themselves is just not an option ,they have been conditioned for too long to accept what they are told.

The general attitude of people on this forum is 'if someone can't be arsed doing it themselves then they will just have to suffer and keep on paying their debts ,get a ccj whatever' but I don't agree with that.

I do not agree that justice should just be for those who have the ability/free thinking attitude to do it for themselves it should be for everyone.

And for most people that means having someone else looking at their agreement.

I posted earlier there are companies now taking on cases for desperate people with no front end fees,don't all rush forward to say what a good thing that might be for all the people who have never heard of CAG or the 20 million in this country who don't even have access to the web

[henderson50]

I'm desperate, who assists with no fee? who is worth dealing with.

 

Nenderson50

[diddydicky]

Actually, yes, we do have members of the site team that have taken advice from Counsel on various different matters, including UCA's.

 

£288 is a lot to pay for advice that is given for free on CAG (no donation is required, although we're very grateful if you do)

 

I don't really see the point in every debtor of, say, MBNA/Capital One and others, paying a company £288 to see if each agreement is enforceable - if the agreement "form" used is improperly executed and can't be enforced, who the debtor is, or is not, is irrelevant. (including whether they have access to Legal Counsel) After all, this is the Consumer Action Group...

 

fully agree,

 

There do however seem to be people who although understanding the basic principles, are unsure or uneasy about dealing with their creditors and taking them on, checking agreements etc,

 

surely CAG would be an ideal forum to have in place a service for these people to hand over their cases.

 

say for example 50 quid to obtain and check an agreement (with a 50% discount on any other agreements at the same time) and then a no win no fee facility!

 

reasonable rates for those who would much rather let someone else do it- access to regular QC facilities for CAG

 

does that make sense?

[Stubie]

fully agree,

 

There do however seem to be people who although understanding the basic principles, are unsure or uneasy about dealing with their creditors and taking them on, checking agreements etc,

 

surely CAG would be an ideal forum to have in place a service for these people to hand over their cases.

 

say for example 50 quid to obtain and check an agreement (with a 50% discount on any other agreements at the same time) and then a no win no fee facility!

 

reasonable rates for those who would much rather let someone else do it- access to regular QC facilities for CAG

 

does that make sense?

 

An excellent idea in principle but how would this cover the cost where a case is lost. The CMCs have some sort of legal insurance scheme which would probably not be available to CAG unless they set up as a regulated body. All the CMCs should be regulated and I'm not sure how CAG would achieve this.

 

Not trying to be critical but we need to fully explore this is it is a serious intention.

 

Anyone else

[diddydicky]

An excellent idea in principle but how would this cover the cost where a case is lost. The CMCs have some sort of legal insurance scheme which would probably not be available to CAG unless they set up as a regulated body. All the CMCs should be regulated and I'm not sure how CAG would achieve this.

 

Not trying to be critical but we need to fully explore this is it is a serious intention.

 

Anyone else

 

well surely we could "get into bed" as an "introducer" to one of the more ethical CMC's

 

from their point of view look at the business we could introduce!

 

from our point of view - initial cca request and scan of agreements done by cagger staff at 50 quid a throw with a reducing sliding scale for multiple debts (would just need a debt counselling licence ) and then referal on to the in house CMC if the cagger does not want to go it alone.

 

useful legal info and update on latest court tactics

 

I'm in the job market and would seriously consider taking on part/ full time job with the first part of the process!

 

strangley i was working this out in my mind the other day - i think around 950 quid for the licence

[car2403]

There are 60 million people in this country who don't even believe that the unenforceability possibility is real ,they think its an urban myth like men never went to the moon etc due to the media brainwashing.

A few of those might pay a solicitor to look at their agreement and then take the case forward.

But the problem is that for 99% of the population thinking for themselves is just not an option ,they have been conditioned for too long to accept what they are told.

The general attitude of people on this forum is 'if someone can't be arsed doing it themselves then they will just have to suffer and keep on paying their debts ,get a ccj whatever' but I don't agree with that.

I do not agree that justice should just be for those who have the ability/free thinking attitude to do it for themselves it should be for everyone.

And for most people that means having someone else looking at their agreement.

I posted earlier there are companies now taking on cases for desperate people with no front end fees,don't all rush forward to say what a good thing that might be for all the people who have never heard of CAG or the 20 million in this country who don't even have access to the web

 

Yes, but this is a bit of a rant considering everyone reading this must know who/what CAG is and is aware of the opinions in both directions.

 

Don't forget that Consumer Groups campaign to bring this injustice to the masses - UCA's are just the new arm of that. I'm sorry, but anyone who hasn't reclaimed their Bank charges, despite the media coverage, just can't be helped - the same will happen with UCA's, as the pace gathers.

 

fully agree,

 

There do however seem to be people who although understanding the basic principles, are unsure or uneasy about dealing with their creditors and taking them on, checking agreements etc,

 

surely CAG would be an ideal forum to have in place a service for these people to hand over their cases.

 

say for example 50 quid to obtain and check an agreement (with a 50% discount on any other agreements at the same time) and then a no win no fee facility!

 

reasonable rates for those who would much rather let someone else do it- access to regular QC facilities for CAG

 

does that make sense?

 

It does, but this isn't what we're all about. CAG is a self-help forum - if you ain't helping yourself, CAG won't "do it for you". As has been pointed out, though, these CMC's are cottoning on to the best way to do business, so are changing to meet their targeted mass market. It won't be too long before you can get a decent service with no upfront fees - my point is, that, if you're prepared to do this yourself with support, CAG is here to make it happen.

 

I'm desperate, who assists with no fee? who is worth dealing with.

 

Nenderson50

 

I think I've answered this question above - CAG

[Tricky Dickie]

Yes, but this is a bit of a rant considering everyone reading this must know who/what CAG is and is aware of the opinions in both directions.

 

Don't forget that Consumer Groups campaign to bring this injustice to the masses - UCA's are just the new arm of that. I'm sorry, but anyone who hasn't reclaimed their Bank charges, despite the media coverage, just can't be helped - the same will happen with UCA's, as the pace gathers.

 

 

 

It does, but this isn't what we're all about. CAG is a self-help forum - if you ain't helping yourself, CAG won't "do it for you". As has been pointed out, though, these CMC's are cottoning on to the best way to do business, so are changing to meet their targeted mass market. It won't be too long before you can get a decent service with no upfront fees - my point is, that, if you're prepared to do this yourself with support, CAG is here to make it happen.

 

 

 

I think I've answered this question above - CAG

 

I'm glad we agree that there are/will be CMC's who offer a decent service with no upfront fee and there are definately people reading these forums who would like to be able to know which are reliable and up front as opposed to the undoubted majority who are [problematic].

Why is it not in consumers interests for these to be accurately identified so they can make informed decisions about whether to do it themselves or have someone offering a decent service?

If it is in consumers interests then surely CAG is the right place for that information to exist

[car2403]

I'm glad we agree that there are/will be CMC's who offer a decent service with no upfront fee and there are definately people reading these forums who would like to be able to know which are reliable and up front as opposed to the undoubted majority who are [problematic].

Why is it not in consumers interests for these to be accurately identified so they can make informed decisions about whether to do it themselves or have someone offering a decent service?

If it is in consumers interests then surely CAG is the right place for that information to exist

 

I'm happy to agree to disagree on this one... We'll let Site Admin decide whether to promote CMC's (fees or no fees) or continue to help those that want to help themselves. (I believe I already know what will happen )

[Tricky Dickie]

I'm happy to agree to disagree on this one... We'll let Site Admin decide whether to promote CMC's (fees or no fees) or continue to help those that want to help themselves. (I believe I already know what will happen )

 

We all know what will happen,like I said as far as CAG goes if you can't be arsed to do it yourself then you can just stew

[foolishgirl]

We all know what will happen,like I said as far as CAG goes if you can't be arsed to do it yourself then you can just stew

 

Perhaps if you can't be arsed to do it yourself, you're not that arsed on standing up for your own rights?

 

Do we really want a nanny CAG aswell as a nanny state?!

 

If you want someone to do the legwork for you, pay for it & employ a legal guy. That doesn't mean that I don't think the cowboys in these latest ambulance chasing get rich schemes shouldn't be outlawed but that's the job of government, not this forum.

[underdog13]

I can see both points of view here. This is, as has been previously stated the consumer action group, and understand that it cannot perform as a platform for individual businesses.

 

However everyone's circumstances and abilities differ. It may not be the case that people can't be bothered to do it themselves, but simply do not have the confidence to argue against a biased judge and opposing counsel. Not everyone who needs a solicitor can afford to pay for one - if they could, I doubt they would be having problems with debt in the first place.

[Tricky Dickie]

Perhaps if you can't be arsed to do it yourself, you're not that arsed on standing up for your own rights?

 

Do we really want a nanny CAG aswell as a nanny state?!

 

If you want someone to do the legwork for you, pay for it & employ a legal guy. That doesn't mean that I don't think the cowboys in these latest ambulance chasing get rich schemes shouldn't be outlawed but that's the job of government, not this forum.

 

 

Unfortunately for them there are many people who do not have the capability to deal with their debts themselves (many of them reading this forum from what I can gather)and can't afford to pay someone else so they are in the same boat as those that can't be arsed,where should they go for help?

As for the Government dealing with [problem] CMC's dont hold your breath it suits the banks and their new owners the Government for millions of people to get scammed by CMC's so they can say 'we told you,all this unenforceability nonsense is an urban myth,just keep on paying like we told you'

[diddydicky]

I can see both points of view here. This is, as has been previously stated the consumer action group, and understand that it cannot perform as a platform for individual businesses.

 

However everyone's circumstances and abilities differ. It may not be the case that people can't be bothered to do it themselves, but simply do not have the confidence to argue against a biased judge and opposing counsel. Not everyone who needs a solicitor can afford to pay for one - if they could, I doubt they would be having problems with debt in the first place.

 

well said

 

not being prepared to help those who would LIKE to help themselves but are afraid/nervous about doing the actual nitty gritty by advising which CMC's would help them ethically would seem to me to be an ego problem on the part of those who had this information to help people but not prepared to give it

[Tricky Dickie]

I can see both points of view here. This is, as has been previously stated the consumer action group, and understand that it cannot perform as a platform for individual businesses.

 

However everyone's circumstances and abilities differ. It may not be the case that people can't be bothered to do it themselves, but simply do not have the confidence to argue against a biased judge and opposing counsel. Not everyone who needs a solicitor can afford to pay for one - if they could, I doubt they would be having problems with debt in the first place.

 

Spot on,if a consumer does not feel comfortable doing the legal stuff themselves is there not another way the CAG can help them?

[Tricky Dickie]

well said

 

not being prepared to help those who would LIKE to help themselves but are afraid/nervous about doing the actual nitty gritty by advising which CMC's would help them ethically would seem to me to be an ego problem on the part of those who had this information to help people but not prepared to give it

 

Precisely

[Stubie]

Spot on,if a consumer does not feel comfortable doing the legal stuff themselves is there not another way the CAG can help them?

 

Spot on, got my vote

[Tricky Dickie]

I see we got Cagbotted

[car2403]

I see we got Cagbotted

 

Me, again.

 

The posts are more relevant here, as they talk about use of CMC's.

[Tricky Dickie]

There are obviously folks on here who would like more information about CMC's in order to make informed decisions,can we take a poll on how many would be interested?