header-logo header-logo

18 February 2016
Issue: 7687 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

MoJ proposes clampdown on claims farmers’ fee rates

High fees charged by claims management companies (CMCs) are to be capped

Consumers targeted by CMCs over payment protection insurance and similar claims are often hit by rip-off fees of as much as 40% of any compensation. The Financial Conduct Authority has reported that, since 2011, over £21bn has been paid out to consumers for Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) claims alone. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) estimates that CMCs may have taken as much as £3.5bn in charges since that date. For the year ending March 2015, more than 200,000 new PPI claims were received by the Financial Ombudsman Service, of which 79% were lodged by CMCs on behalf of consumers, and around 20% came from consumers directly.

MoJ proposals launched last week would cap the completion fee at 15% for bulk claims such as mis-sold payment protection insurance, and cap the overall charge for claims worth more than £2,000 at £300. The maximum completion fee for other types of financial claims would be 25% of the final amount of compensation awarded. CMCs would also be banned from charging upfront fees for financial claims before any work is carried out, from charging cancellation fees of more than £300 for bulk claims, and from charging referral fees for introducing a consumer to a third party.

Justice Minister Lord Faulks says: “Some claims management companies charge as much as 40% of the final compensation awarded for very little work. This has got to stop.”

Kevin Rousell, head of the Claims Management Regulator, says: “We want to make sure that people who use CMCs can be confident they are getting value for money and are not being exploited.” The regulator has cancelled more than 1,000 CMC licences since 2010.

The MoJ is holding an eight-week consultation.

Issue: 7687 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll