MPs quiz banks over bogus law firms


Tyrie: we need to know the extent of this practice

The row over companies sending letters to customers in debt that falsely appear to be from independent solicitors’ firms, rather than their in-house lawyers, is set to rumble on after the Treasury select committee demanded information from the main high street banks about their activities.

Andrew Tyrie MP, who chairs the committee, has written to the bosses of RBS, Lloyds, Barclays and HSBC over reports that they have all used such tactics.

He has asked for details of how many letters were sent, to whom, and why they chose to send letters in this form, rather than marked clearly as being from the bank.

While seeking the banks’ views as to whether the letters were misleading, Mr Tyrie requested a copy of a typical letter sent out “so that the Treasury committee can form its own judgement on whether it is sufficiently clear”.

Mr Tyrie said: “We need to know the extent of this practice. Banks have repeatedly assured Parliament that they are raising standards and now have robust procedures in place to bring consumer detriment to an end. It would be extremely concerning if consumers had been routinely misled.”

RBS has already agreed to stop using solicitor-sounding names for letters, recognising that the practice can be confusing for consumers.

In a statement it said: “Our customers should never be in any doubt about who they are communicating with. We have reviewed our policies in this area and will stop the use of any solicitor or debt collection brand names in correspondence with our customers that could cause confusion.”

The furore began when for using bogus law firms. Last week the Solicitors Regulation Authority warned in-house solicitors that “attempts to mislead” debtors that external firms are taking steps against them could result in disciplinary action.

Tags:




Blog


When AI becomes a line on the client’s bill

On 23 June, Legora changed how it charges. The platform announced that its most capable product was moving away from a flat per-seat licence fee to consumption-based pricing


Which legal AI will still matter in 12 months?

Four years ago, when senior partners asked me which legal AI they should buy, I would have walked them through a vendor comparison. Now I tell them the question is wrong.


Supreme Court redraws line between member and employee in LLPs

For anyone advising professional services firms on LLP structuring, and of course for those in LLPs themselves, last week’s Supreme Court ruling is an essential read.


Loading animation