Jump to content


Trevor Munn Solicitors in the poo with ARC (Europe)


DonkeyB
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4135 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Oh dear. Trevor Munn, Solicitor for Rent, who acts for ARC Europe and Arrow, among others, has been fined £40,000 with £35,000 costs for being a bit of a naughty boy.

 

Munn entered into an ‘unlawful deal’ with ARC Europe ‘to send out thousands of threatening letters in his name, the tribunal heard today. ARC Europe acted for top companies including LA Fitness, Egg and David Lloyd, and used lawyer Trevor Munn to chase cash for their clients. Letters demanding repayment and threatened court action were sent out by the company on his letterheads, the Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal heard.’

 

The complaint goes back to 2010, I think, but has only just been resolved. It first came to public light last summer when the SRA announced the prosecution. This is what they published then:

 

Reasons/basis

 

This notification relates to a Decision to prosecute before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This is an independent Tribunal which will reach its own decision after considering all the evidence, including any evidence put forward by the Solicitor. The Tribunal has certified that there is a case to answer in respect of allegations which are or include that :-

 

He has compromised or impaired, or has acted in a way which was likely to compromise or impair :-

 

– his independence by virtue of his relationship with a Debt Recovery Company

– being party to an arrangement with a debt recovery company which facilitated the unlawful conduct of litigation and which permitted the recovery of fixed costs where they had no entitlement to claim such costs

– by preparing and/or permitting Letters Before Action to be sent on his letterhead to opposing parties which contained misleading and/or false statements

– by accepting instructions from a debt recovery company to act on behalf of third parties without checking that the third parties agreed with the instructions and/ or by failing to provide adequate information to clients in the form of client care letters

– He failed to ensure adequate, appropriate and effective systems for the supervision and/or management of all of his offices and/or to ensure that every office had at least one solicitor qualified to supervise for whom that office was his or her normal place of work

– He accepted referrals of clients from a debt recovery company in circumstances where his independence and/or his ability to act and advise in the nest interests of those clients was or was likely to be compromised

– He did not enter into any written referral agreement with the debt recovery company recording their financial arrangement and/ Or any written record of his agreement with the debt recovery company did not comply with the requirements of the applicable rules at any material time

– Failed to take any or any adequate steps to ensure that the clients introduced to him by the debt recovery company had not been acquired as a result of marketing or publicity which would if done by a person regulated by the SRA have been in breach of regulatory requirements

– The debt recovery company did not undertake to him to provide all relevant information concerning the referral to the client before it referred the client to him and he did not himself take any or any adequate steps to ensure that the debt recovery company provided that information before making a referral of any client to him

– He did not, before accepting instructions give clients in writing all relevant information concerning the referral.

The allegations are subject to a Hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and are as yet unproven.

 

 

I believe the fine is the result of these proceedings being finalised.

 

The odd thing is that I’m sure Munn was STILL sending out letters on behalf of ARC at least until last summer, maybe later. May still be for all I know.

 

Does anyone know if ARC Europe have faced any sanction for their behaviour? There’s certainly no record of anything on their OFT CCL file.

 

More info as I get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...