CMC that has piled up complaints named “in the public interest”

Print This Post

4 August 2016

PPI claim: customer abandoned

PPI claim: customer abandoned

The Legal Ombudsman (LeO) has exercised its “public interest” power under the Legal Services Act to name a claims management company (CMC) responsible for a series of complaints.

It is only the second time that the LeO’s board – the Office for Legal Complaints – has used the power. The first time was in 2014 in relation to barrister Tariq Rehman.

Swansea-based JAS Financial Advisory Services Limited – trading as Litchfield Price, Hampton Rae and NLC Solutions – generated 92 complaints in the first six months of 2016.

According to the CMC register, the company is also being investigated by the Claims Management Regulator on suspicion of unprofessional conduct.

In a statement, the LeO said: “We have been advised by a number of complainants that, in the initial sales call, JAS told them that their claims would be resolved quickly, and that the upfront fee was refundable in the event that all claims were ultimately unsuccessful.

“We are concerned that, by failing to adequately progress claims, JAS are delaying payment of fees where a refund may be due. As the majority of their customers pay their fees by credit card, and are expecting a swift resolution, they are being disadvantaged by additional credit card interest charges due to their claims taking longer than can be reasonably expected.”

The LeO said JAS repeatedly took upfront fees, but failed to adequately progress claims; and was failing to keep customers updated as to the progress of their claims.

“Furthermore, we have seen a pattern of behaviour which shows that JAS are failing to respond to consumers’ complaints within an eight-week period. Additionally, they are failing to comply with all of our requests for information. JAS appear to have a very inconsistent approach to co-operating with the Legal Ombudsman; in some instances providing comments to preliminary decisions and in others providing no evidence at all.”

It gave a detailed example of one case where JAS “essentially abandoned” a customer’s claim for mis-sold payment protection insurance after she paid an upfront fee of £495.

Earlier this week, the High Court issued a two-year civil restraint order to stem Mr Rehman’s challenges to disciplinary and LeO decisions.

We have received several requests for help from people who have had dealings with JAS. Please contact the Legal Ombudsman at first instance for advice – click here for its website.

9 Responses to “CMC that has piled up complaints named “in the public interest””

  1. Good morning, I too have paid money upfront and have heard nothing since …I will start making phone calls but fear it won’t make any difference.

  2. Mark Clarke on October 27th, 2016 at 10:50 am
  3. So far have rang 9 times left two messages sent 3 emails and have not had a response to my request for my refund next stop formal complaint, I fear this will be a long battle.

  4. P Courtney Clegg on October 31st, 2016 at 5:00 pm
  5. I am in the same position. Their customer service team has been on training for over a week and no calls are being answered. Their website is also unavailable. I think I’ve been had.

  6. Anni Donaldson on November 16th, 2016 at 11:01 am
  7. Does anyone have a phone number? Its no longer on the website and I cant find any correspondence, This has been going on since March!

  8. Jonathan Kinsley on November 17th, 2016 at 5:18 pm
  9. Also going through the same thing was promised money would be paid back in September, after many phone calls found out from the CAB that the company had gone into liquidation and I can only presume I will never see my money again

  10. Michelle clarke on November 18th, 2016 at 3:11 pm
  11. I was ib the same position as everyone else having started my ‘claim’ in April 2015. However, I have now received a refund from my credit card company even though well over a year has lapsed since paying the £495. Would recommend everyone to check with their card issuer if they used a credit card.

  12. Tracey Leach on November 30th, 2016 at 11:25 am
  13. I too am in the same position as all the above people. I am guilty too of being ” taken in” by what appeared to be a reputable company. I have called them many times only to be greeted by an ansaphone stating their customer service team were in training. They should be prosecuted.

  14. Susan Joyce on December 1st, 2016 at 3:31 pm
  15. I have also paid £495 and have been trying to contact then without success.

  16. Ron Budhram on December 2nd, 2016 at 4:47 pm
  17. I paid the £495 the company finished up with more than me i phoned them and they promised me they would refund the money but now im calling its saying there customer service is in training whent online to ask a question and a error came up no contact details available, something should be done !!!!

  18. Robert scott on December 6th, 2016 at 8:51 pm

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Are you ready to defend your firm’s reputation in the event of a cyber-attack?

Jonathan Hemus

With cyber-crime making the headlines more and more frequently, it is becoming increasingly important that law firms of all sizes understand how to handle such a situation professionally and keep their reputation intact. Here are some steps any law firm can take to help ensure that a cyber-attack or data breach doesn’t cost them their client base.

December 9th, 2016