Jump to content


Wellington court financial services ltd not paying out on FOS final decision RE: +£58k Pension- help enforcing & using form N322A - court claim issued


Simmonds7
 Share

Recommended Posts

Morning,  I have done some research and thought I should check my reasoning is correct.  

 

From what I gather by the Solicitors reference to Bunney v Burns Anderson Plc [2007] EWHC 1240 (Ch).

Is that they are going to try and prove FOS decision should be squashed and that they could win their case.

 

Is it true that......

once an Ombudsman decision has been made (and accepted by the complainant) the only official route of appeal is via a Judicial Review (JR).

PART 54JUDICIAL REVIEW
Time limit for filing claim form
54.5—(1) The claim form must be filed—

(a)promptly; and

(b)in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose.

(2) The time limit in this rule may not be extended by agreement between the parties.

(3) This rule does not apply when any other enactment specifies a shorter time limit for making the claim for judicial review.

Mr Justice Teare’s decision makes clear that financial services firms seeking to challenge, in the courts, decisions made by the FOS are limited to judicial review. They will not be able to challenge such decisions using section 69 of the Act.

In Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration LLP v Charlton [2017] EWHC 2396 (Comm), the High Court held that a determination of the FOS was not an arbitral award and therefore cannot be appealed under section 69 Arbitration Act 1996 (the “Act”).

 

As I thought that could be our argument.

 

Thank you for your help

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Simmonds. I expect the legal guys will be around later to advise.

 

JR is expensive, I wonder if they mean that or if it's just an idle threat.

 

Please don't do this unless @Andyorch thinks it's a good idea but I noticed in the ramblings for the set aside that they're saying the FCA agree that Wellington were framed by GM. The FOS didn't seem to think so. But there's an article online talking about the FCA telling Wellington to stop advising on some or all pension transfers.

 

WWW.MONEYMARKETING.CO.UK

The FCA has stopped a firm involved in transfers out of a local government pension scheme from engaging in such activity. 

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is correct and the FCA also put an asset restriction on WCFS Ltd too.  Could I contact the FCA and ask them to confirm her statement that they agree that Wellington were framed by GM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't know if the FCA talk to members of the public about this kind of thing, especially as it was between them and Wellington, assuming it happened.

 

Andyorch should be along later, let's wait for him first. :)

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced judicial review of the ombudsman is going to help Wellington much either, from what I've read this morning. It seems to be more about process than the decision itself. But I looked at the FOS database earlier and Wellington had the best part of a dozen decisions against them last year, so they would have an interest in challenging the ombudsman.

 

But some of this might be early because they're only meant to be talking about a set aside. I wonder if all the stuff about JR and other cases is to confuse things for the judge or if Ms Lozinska always writes like this.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Simmonds,

 

I've been following your latest posts and it makes my blood boil.

 

There are many FOS decisions against WCFS. 

I have reported them to the FCA and as honeybee states they were struck off from giving pension advice a while ago.

Although they still have one active IFA.

 

Please join the [removed - dx] and post,  as there are others like you starting to receive the same FOS decisions against Wellington Court. 

 

I believe the person at Wellington that signed most of the pensions into the GM SIPP DC80 was Neil Pratt. 

 

Have you got the DSAR showing that Wellington were paid fees in relation to your pension transfer ?

Hartley Pensions will have this as they took over the GM failed SIPPs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

external link removed , please read our rules.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi   

Yes I have the bank transfer proof it was one of the main pieces of evidence against Wcfs.

 

Hi,  does anyone know if what I found out about the JR time limit being 3 months is correct.  Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you link us to where you saw that, please, Simmonds? I had a look too and did see three months mentioned, but nothing definitive. I've flagged the question for the site team in case someone knows.

 

Have you asked the FOS? Someone there must know, but you might have to be persistent to get to the right person.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part54

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

These Rules come into force on the same day as the majority of the Human Rights Act 1998. They add to the Civil Procedure...

 

 

 

 

I find FOS totally useless once final decision is excepted.  They really don't want to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that an ombudsman would think their involvement had finished. But they must have legal people who deal with JRs.

 

Good spot about the rules. I wonder if there's an updated version of them or if the 2000 ones still stand for JR.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andyorch just sent me this.

 

LUQMANITHOMPSON.COM

Let’s face it, we’re all guilty of putting things off. A "limitation period" is a legal mechanism which aims to prevent this, providing a deadline for...

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be a pain but someone pointed out that as WCFS are only in operation in Ireland now that my FOS ruling has no jurisdiction over there.  So if I win or lose this set aside will I still be able to enforce it in southern Ireland because of brexit?  

 

Any help is appreciated.  Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simmonds, Andyorch has sent this for you.

 

Cross-border enforcement of judgments between Ireland and the UK has until now also been governed by the Brussels Recast Regulation. This provides for enforcement of judgments essentially 'as of right' between EU member states.

 

While the Brussels Recast Regulation generally ceases to apply to enforcement of judgments in or from the UK on 31 December, in practice the transitional arrangements under the EU/UK Withdrawal Agreement mean that the existing regime will continue to apply to the enforcement of judgments between the UK and Ireland for some considerable time to come. This is because the Brussels Recast Regulation will continue to apply in cases where proceedings were commenced before 11pm on 31 December 2020.

 

For cases begun after that date enforcement will take place under a combination, again, of common law rules and Hague 2005. These rules do provide for enforcement of foreign judgments, both in the UK and Ireland, but the procedure is likely to be more costly and in some cases less reliable than under the Brussels Recast Regulation.

 

WWW.PINSENTMASONS.COM

Brexit will cause disputes related to trade between the UK and Ireland, and the Brexit process will make those disputes more complicated in three...

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you that brilliant.  Can I just check what it means by proceedings were commenced before 11pm on 31 December 2020.  Started with Fos in March 2020 but CCJ was 2021

Link to post
Share on other sites

Date of Brexit and change to enforcing judgments/ jurisdiction rules...so yours is post brexit....your judgment date is post.as per above post.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Andyorch changed the title to Wellington court financial services ltd not paying out on FOS final decision RE: +£58k Pension- help enforcing & using form N322A - court claim issued

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...