Charging a fee for doing other peoples claims?

[Glenn UK]

Just a thought, secretaries have liabilities too, even freelance ones.

 

Get them to draft the work in their own handwriting then copy their drafts, if there are errors and you correct them, get them to initial the alterations on your copy.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

PS its funny how a small amount of money can turn freinds into enemies overnight.

[karens25]

hi tc

all id say as mother to mother.. your toddlers need you and you baby needs you too.. if you're helping people for a small fee for typing and they decide not to continue then you're less stressed (less work) if they agree to the £10 per hour fee and carry on .. result is you're less stressed as not being taken for granted anymore.. (sorry no legal stuff goin on here!)

k

[Number6]

 

PS its funny how a small amount of money can turn freinds into enemies overnight.

 

Yes, that's my major worry whether it's doing quasi-legal work or repairing a mates car; doing it as a favour is OK but as soon as money changes hands the mates relationship changes into customer-supplier mode! It's like going on holiday with your best friends and coming back as bitter enemies.

 

Pete

[bill-k]

I'm with Ozzywizard, myself, on this. The voluntary contribution idea seems to avoid the problems with contract & liability, etc. (...or does it, Glenn ?). Although as Pete says, it can strain a friendship when money changes hands, it seems to me that a contribution, by its' voluntary nature, exerts less strain. If you done good, then your mate's happy and (hopefully) crosses your palm with Sterling - HAVING BEEN MADE AWARE SEVERAL TIMES HOW MUCH THIS WOULD COST COMMERCIALLY. If you fouled up, then your gain is in the experience acquired.

 

Perhaps you might get a few non-payers, but if they were friends/rellies/hubbies workmates, then make them feel uncomfortable (NO - NOT the baseball bat !!). If you fall out over it, then you probably didn't need them as friends anyway. You might even benefit from the filtration process. As the comics used to say - a friend in need is a bloody nuisance.

 

But at the moment you gotta look after Number One - and by that I mean

Number 1A and 1B. Guess who's 1B ?

 

So throttle back for now, relax a bit (for 1A's sake), and later on you can keep mentioning to your friends in need how expensive kids are these days....

 

Pete - sorry about the numbers - don't go thumping the desk !!

[andrew1]

So what about debt collectors then? They charge a % to collect it and they threaten and take one to court. Is that illegal?

[bill-k]

Andrew1 - I think debt collectors are able to get away with it because they are chasing up a debt governed by a previously agreed contract between the lender & borrower (at whatever extortionate rate was agreed verbally on the doorstep). I think that's how loan sharks do it. It's totally immoral, and yet it's legal.

Loan sharks and (to a lesser degree, perhaps) debt collectors serve a legitimate purpose - namely - to reinforce the widely-held view that the Law is not just an ass, but that it really is an arse.

 

On the flip-side of the coin, though, the Law (Our Law) is still the envy of many. I believe it is a summation of what our civilization has accomplished over the millenia - for better, for worse. Yes - it IS flawed - because it involves people like us. But it is a positive attempt - as opposed to the negative 9/11 attempt - to arrive at a SOLUTION to our problems, instead of an avoidance thereof.

 

So when that nice - but odd - bloke with the cheap suit and the Number Two haircut turns up on your doorstep just busting to show you his brand new baseball bat, you show him your equally hard-earned statistics detailing the life expectancy of a debt-collector on the street of Peckham during a re-run of "Only Fools & Horses." Then you ask him "Do you enjoy your job?" - and "Good Prospects ?"

 

Eventually he will admit he's only getting away with it because the Law is an arse. Pour him a coffee, and grill him further. I bet you will find out that he, too, is reclaiming bank charges with the help of BAG. He was charged them because the Law is an arse. He's getting them back for the same reason.

 

It's an arse, but it's better than no law at all, which is what those that envy it would rather we had, it seems.

[trundlecat]

Sorry folks, I didn't mean to open up such a can of worms.

 

My £10 per hour typing strategy has worked, I've got rid of all the firend's cousins, dog groomers, nephews (& similar) who wanted me to do their claims. Funny how folk suddenly realise they CAN do it themselves

 

Husband & ongoing claimants in no uncertain terms now that help is only there on Wednesday evenings & if I don't feel like it then it'll have to wait until the following Wednesday. I have my life back

[bill-k]

HiYa TC...(as Benny used to say I think !!)

Glad you got to sort out a deal before Officer D®ibble came along.

Me & Andrew1 woz just exchanging views (as us alley cats do this time o' night)

Now, you jus' remember you can't be everybody's Mum. You're gonna be somebody special's Mum, soon, bless you. Go to it.

[Bookworm]

Good girl!

 

PS: I don't think you opened a can of worms at all, I'm sure plenty of others were thinking along the same line, so if anything, it has provided some needed answers ;-)

[Spiceskull]

I am certainly against charging people for helping them...if you like helping people then you do so. If you don't like helping, or can't help, then there are 70K+ people on the site who will help willingly. I think that it is getting into shady territory to start charging people for what they should and could be doing themselves...

[wobbler]

 

Personally, I'd go with the s*d off approach. Everything is available here for anyone to read, let them do their own claims.

 

P.

 

 

Exactly. The info is ALL here, for anyone to read. I've also been asked to help people out - but if they can read, and navigate a website, there is nothing I can do that they cant. If they cant be arsed to put in a little effort, then they obviously dont want their money back that badly, do they?

 

 

Put YOURSELF first (for a change ) - let them sort themselves out.

Lazy buggers - thats the trouble with some people, all too willing to get their charges back, but wont lift a finger themselves to do it.

[darling]

This is a most interesting thread, and raises many arguments etc.

Would a way forward be to have a Carefully worded disclaimer that you could get the friend/client etc before you start to 'act' on their behalf. Also could you then tell them that they would have to pay all the costs involved. And then when there is a 'win' and they are very happy say something like 'I dont accept monetary payment for doing this service, but I would appreciate some holiday/shopping vouchers etc in recompense, oh and also a generous donation for the CAG cause as well.

Am I being naive here or am I just bending the rules? Any thoughts anyone?

[Number6]

I am certainly against charging people for helping them...if you like helping people then you do so. If you don't like helping, or can't help, then there are 70K+ people on the site who will help willingly. I think that it is getting into shady territory to start charging people for what they should and could be doing themselves...

 

I disagree that there's anything intrinsically wrong with charging people for help or work done. There are people that are literally incapable of doing certain things, whether that's car maintenance, DIY or claiming bank charges.

 

I "help" people out by way of car maintenance and DIY but I still charge for that whether they're friends or complete strangers; I do a good job for them and they pay a lot less than if they took their car to the garage or hired in professional decorators etc so it's a win-win situation.

 

There are people that have been charged a lot of bank fees that, whilst they may understand that the fees are unlawful they are terrified of any form of "legal" work; would you rather these people were left to be ripped off or that they're helped by someone that knows their way around and charges a small fee? The fee is undoubtably less than a solicitor would charge so again it's a win-win situation.

 

Having said this I would not get involved, other than by way of this site whether for payment or not because I have no spare time and wouldn't be able to do a thorough job for people but should others that have the time not do this for a small consideration? Assuming that the liability issues can be sorted out of course.

 

Pete

[Glenn UK]

This is a most interesting thread, and raises many arguments etc.

Would a way forward be to have a Carefully worded disclaimer that you could get the friend/client etc before you start to 'act' on their behalf. Also could you then tell them that they would have to pay all the costs involved. And then when there is a 'win' and they are very happy say something like 'I dont accept monetary payment for doing this service, but I would appreciate some holiday/shopping vouchers etc in recompense, oh and also a generous donation for the CAG cause as well.

Am I being naive here or am I just bending the rules? Any thoughts anyone?

 

My view is that if you offer to provide a service for someone and theres some recompense then you are leaving youreself open to a claim if it all goes wrong.

 

At the moment the thought seems to be that someone would claim the charges back on someones behalf, job done.

 

However, the are are a whole range of scenarios that could arise, losing being the least troublesome.

 

What if as a result of a mistake by the 'helper' the claimant had costs of a few grand awarded against them?

 

I think that doing anything for a fee, even one that only gives rise to a voucher upon delivery, could possibly leave the helper open to a lot more aggravation than they had anticipated.

 

I believe that the only 'safe' way for anyone to help is by giving for nothing, bit like here.

 

Its a point worth thinking of that even those who give for free are not entirely free form duties and liabilites. Im a Chartered Engineer, even if i give advice for free and someone relies on it, and then suffers a loss i believe i could be held reponsilbe, likewise solicitors on here methinks.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[Spiceskull]

Its a poiint worht thinking of that even those who give for free are not entirely free form duties and liabilites. Im a Chartered Engineer, even if i give advice for free and someone relies on it, and then suffers a loss i believe i could be held reponsilbe, likewise solicitors on here methinks.

Good point - and the reason so many posters put a rider in their sig suggesting professional help if in any doubt.

 

For myself, I think charging people for helping them goes against the spirit of the site. I am not suggesting that you turn down a meal or something for your help, but anything you get should be an appreciative bonus, not an expectation...

[bill-k]

...Further to my previous comments on the asinine nature of the law - it is a pity that it makes it risky to even assist someone voluntarily. I agree with Pete No.6 & others who are of the opinion that it is morally OK to accept a consideration for helping. It would be perhaps nearer the ideal if we could all "barter" - so I get my brakes fixed by my less litigious mate for "fixing it for him." But in the end even that is still a "consideration," legally, I guess, so (as Glenn says) we're legally liable just for trying to help someone.

 

Presumably, the reasoning is that the law is there to protect us from each other's mistakes, as well as each other's malice. Without both sides, I suppose some thug could say he was just trying to help you out by brushing a wasp away from your face, and the fact that he did it too enthusiastically is just his mistake !!

 

If one is going to help people like this, then it seems best to post warnings/disclaimers (as Phoenix says), get anybody you help to sign one, and make it clear that any contributions or considerations accepted are purely voluntary and are expected to recompense, as opposed to enrich you.

 

It probably won't stop someone from suing you if you do foul up, but it might at least help your case - and offset any income tax liabilities. (Any wot - Del Boy ? )

 

N.B. - this is JMHM - and is issued subject to the conditions and regulations in Bill-k's Publications and Notices. The fact that you have read this far implies your acceptance !!

[meagain]

Remember that a solicitor is usually qualified and certified to offer such advice and perform these actions. They are also specifically insured for claims of negligence made against them. The law is their profession, they must be allowed to practise it.

 

When I have told people about this, I always make it perfectly clear what they would be getting themselves into, and that they must ultimately decide for themselves whether or not to go ahead.

[andrew1]

How about this scenario then - would this be legal anyone ( Bookworm?)

 

I am doing some consultancy work ( debt collection actually ) for a limited company through my own limited company business. As well as having collection and cashflow problems they have been whacked over £4k in bank charges due to a major contracting firm witholding payment for a pile of pathetic excuses over the quality of work, effectively so the subcontractor can sweat for it's money hoping it won't have the nouse to go legal.

 

Now, if I were to 'assist' in getting the bank charges sorted (CAG style:D ) for them and charged them a % would that in turn be illegal as defined by Bookworm above?

 

Thoughts please?? ....

[bill-k]

How about this scenario then - would this be legal anyone ( Bookworm?)

 

....

 

Thoughts please?? ....

 

Andrew1, until BW gets back to you here, it seems to me that you have a contract here already as a consultant/debt collector. I imagine there is some Public Liability insurance in force, here, too. So I reckon that charging for the collection of the "debt" owed to your client by the banks would be covered by this, and thus be legal (ie., NOT classed as Champerty). Perhaps charging a percentage, as opposed to a fixed amount, is illegal, but it seems to me that you are operating within your legal framework.

 

However, I speak as a Sole Proprietor with limited mental capacity, as opposed to a Consultant, with limited legal liability !!!

[andrew1]

Andrew1, , it seems to me that you have a contract here already as a consultant/debt collector.

 

Hi Bill and thanks, do you know how I must feel being on this site and being called a ' debt collector' eh? !

 

My only escape from prolonged damnation by 75,000 people is that I occasionally do this for business to business - I quite enjoy it in a professional sort of way because I can use my negotiating skills rather than the dark glasses and dog brigade and it's like a game and I can get paid for it I couldn't do consumer debt even if I was licensed, it may pay well but it's a rough old job and I'm too sensitive.

 

However, I had thought about the contract bit because it is a business bank a/c and therefore not involving things like the Data Protection Act it is purely a contractual issue between the business and the bank rather than a personal rip off ( just a business rip off! ) and me being one of these Armani dressed ' consultants ' can get away with charging a fee or in the case of the debt recovery a % ( and they could result in litigation too) I wondered what the take was on the % of the penalty refund in the eyes of the law as according to Bookworms philosophy.

 

I mean, I can word my invoice how I like to acheive the same result but I'd rather not break the law ( just a few legs collecting debt and that's when the 'Public Liability ' insurance comes in handy!) - I keep the Professional Indemnity policy handy for the business !

 

Oh I do love this site, it gets more informative every time I click on - better than school any day and that could be fun too!

 

Dave & Bankfodder deserve knighthoods for this - you can hardly buy them a box of choccies to say thanks can you? I wonder if they ever gave up their day jobs and how Vamp and her spreadsheets can hold down a job and do all this beats me or any of the others for that matter. My other half goes potty when i'm seen on-line during the day saying I ought to get a proper job ( I work from home! )

 

Love it !!!

 

Thanks and I hope your ventures are going well too.

[bill-k]

Sorry Andrew1, I've just realised my earlier comments about the bloke with the cheap suit & No.2 'aircut may have hurt a bit. I see you're more into "positive debt realisation." I'm just glad you've got a sense of humour !!!

 

Yes, you certainly need something more than just my simplistic opinion on your scenario. Where are you BW ?

 

I find myself taking out much more than I put in to this forum, and I think that's why I just motormouth - it's a guilt thing !! There's a thread in which people are adding their votes & messages of thanks to Dave & BF. A verbal box of chocs, at least. And, yes, all the others like Vamp deserve thanks & much respect from us.

 

I hope BW turns up soon on this, as I've got another scenario to put to her, or anybody who can help:-

My in-laws are hoping to get their penalties back, and I'm hoping to help them. Their claims could be quite large, as we're going back a long way with some stuff, and going for max contractual compounded. However, they are quite elderly, and are quite petrified of the prospect of having to go to the SCC personally. I have told them the chance is very tiny, but I would like to be able to tell them that I can act on their behalf. Can I be their legal representative or "litigation friend" - without having to get the sectioned under the Mental Health Act ? !!!

 

Another problem I have is that we both have IVA's (Trust Deeds) with 2 years left to run. Apparently any large sums I manage to secure will at present have to be paid over to our creditors through the Trustee. I originally thought that this would simply go toward paying off our Deeds, but apparently it does not - it is simply paid to our creditors in addition to our agreed schedule of payments. Bummer - real heavy, man. My own administrator seems to be saying that there is no way to pay off our Trust Deeds early, but I thought that, if I acquired a large enough lump sum to pay the amount left owing on our schedule, then that would discharge us. Does anybody know where I can find out more about Trust Deeds, as the online advice is quite minimal regarding paying in lump sums and/or paying off early. Is there a Trust Deed/IVA thread ?

 

If you haven't guessed the punchline, yet, then I'm considering dropping our claims temporarily, and getting my in-laws their money back first. Hopefully, if I drop enough hints, they'll lend us the cash to pay off our Trust Deeds. I can then resume our claims. Does my plan seem Champertous, or just wicked ??

 

Help....

 

Bill.

[andrew1]

WICKED !!!

 

 

 

Don't worry Bill I didn't find the suit and haircut bit in anyway hurtful - I love the banter on here and I laugh so much sometimes at some of the goings on anyway I don't wear Armani ( Gucci sometimes ) no mostly M &S and I don't have a lot of hair and I look like my Avatar!!

 

Idon't know how to answer your questions and BW will arrive soon I'm sure.

 

As for Dave & Bankfodder choccies will have to do verbal or otherwise but Vamp looks like she might like a big hug !

 

Keep at em !!

[Bookworm]

I wondered what the take was on the % of the penalty refund in the eyes of the law as according to Bookworms philosophy.

 

Ok, ok, I'm here! Jeez, can you guys play nicely without adult supervision for 5 mns???

 

It's not my philosophy, can I just say straight off, it's information gleaned a) off this site, b) off searching law websites by terms. I merely tell you what it says and what it means, in my opinion. (see my disclaimer at the bottom of my sig ;-))

 

For what it's worth, I, me, moi, personally, find it immoral to charge people who have already been clobbered and shafted every which way. On the other hand, people who have come across my less gentle postings will know that I don't do hand-patting, spoon-feeding. What I do is point people in the right direction, and answer them the best I can when the answers are not obviously there. But, and here is the reason for the above rambling, I expect people to do it for themselves. I will not pander to laziness or complacency, not even for a fee. The road to better financial help start here, by taking control. Call me puritanical like that.

 

I'll get off my well-worn soapbox now by saying that I don't know what the situation would be for a debt collector turned bank charges collector... Is it another form of debt collection? Maybe. Maybe your liability chap would be able to answer that better. I certainly would be interested in the answer. I have a feeling that charging a percentage in any case would be dodgy. I also know that the court form specifically state that you can reclaim the solicitors fees incurred in issuing claim, no mention of any other professional...

[callumsgran]

Bill yes you can go to court for your inlaws!

[Bookworm]

Sorry, these 2 yacked on and on so, I didn't see the query!

 

Yes, you can represent them. Make sure that you score out the right bits on the claim forms, though!