Goldsmith Williams vindicated over Cartel
This follows recent news that the legal firm handling Cartel’s claims has been closed down by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, leaving clients potentially facing court costs of several thousand pounds for failed court cases.
Eddie Goldsmith, partner at Goldsmith Williams, said: “This sad affair is a sober reminder of the danger of referring clients’ to firms who thrive by creating false expectations. Unfortunately, it’s not only clients who suffer but also the reputation of those brokers who made the original introductions.
“Throughout 2009 Goldsmith Williams issued a series of warnings to brokers about the dangers of their clients expectations being unrealistically raised by a flurry of adverts virtually guaranteeing that their clients consumer credit debts could be written off.
“Time and time again we warned that these adverts were unrealistically raising clients expectations and we did not believe that there were anything like the number of legitimate claims out there.
“Our view was that the Courts were unlikely to allow debts to be written off through spurious technicalities and we were proved right by the raft of decisions in the Courts going against these claims.
“On many occasions we received aggressive responses to our warnings, but we have stood firm in our view and, with the suspension of the licence of the largest company dealing with such claims, we have been proved right.”
Simon Cottrell Litigation Partner at Goldsmith Williams, adds: “Brokers should be wary of any companies which promise guaranteed pay-outs, quick results or the payment of hefty referral fees to brokers. What’s more, brokers should avoid any firm which demands the up-front payment of fees from clients.
“It is scandalous that so many people should have had their hopes dashed and I feel very sorry for anyone who has paid upfront fees and who may now not be able to recover them, let alone have their debts written off.
“As always, Goldsmith Williams has taken an ethical stand in this market.
“There are many members of the public who have been mis-sold products such as PPI and who have legitimate claims, but borrowers who had the benefit of loans were never likely to be able to have them written off on a technicality. That’s not justice.”