adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,003 
Likes: 5,139
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 28, 2019 17:48:42 GMT
With reference to potentially suing the FCA, I believe this has previously been attempted through the European Court of Human Rights. Which article of the convention are they breaching? www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdfNot one bit, because the ECHR is nothing to do with the EU.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Apr 28, 2019 18:03:09 GMT
With reference to potentially suing the FCA, I believe this has previously been attempted through the European Court of Human Rights. Which article of the convention are they breaching? www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdfNot one bit, because the ECHR is nothing to do with the EU. It's protection of property rights under Article 1 of Protocol 1 that is relevant (again, mentioned by the Minister in the link I posted above). The FCA's statutory liability indeed does not restrict claims relating to this. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the case law in this area to comment further on how feasible this might be, though. (And, even if it were feasible, it's likely that it would be bloody expensive!)
|
|
squid
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 204
|
Post by squid on Apr 28, 2019 21:24:03 GMT
Re. costs - yes likely to be expensive, but nonetheless a possibility if supported by a sufficient number of investors in a class action.
I believe it to be best at this stage if all options are kept open, with nothing ruled out.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,868
Likes: 6,912
|
Post by duck on Apr 29, 2019 4:49:46 GMT
The trouble with the ECHR is that member states have to 'best accommodate' it's decisions (they are not binding on states, you currently need the European Courts of Justice for that). The biggest number of adverse decisions are against Russia and their 'best accommodation' is to effectively ignore the decision. Remember the 'can't extradite Abu Hamza' fuss when Teresa May was Home Secretary? It was 90% political bluster, as long as the death sentence wasn't an issue he could have been extradited to the US far earlier. Political embarrassment yes, barrier no.
As for costs, the ECHR it is perfectly accessible to an individual, you don't need a legal team as long as you are prepared to do a fair bit of reading. I as a Litigant in Person (LIP) have helped another person to have a case heard at the ECHR and I myself have had a case listed in the European Courts of Justice. The European Courts are far more accessible than the Royal Courts of Justice (High Court) where every barrier is put in place against LIP's.
That said I do not believe legal action is appropriate here.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,003
Likes: 5,139
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 29, 2019 7:14:03 GMT
It's protection of property rights under Article 1 of Protocol 1 that is relevant (again, mentioned by the Minister in the link I posted above). The FCA's statutory liability indeed does not restrict claims relating to this. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the case law in this area to comment further on how feasible this might be, though. (And, even if it were feasible, it's likely that it would be bloody expensive!) My italics.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Apr 29, 2019 8:37:43 GMT
Re. costs - yes likely to be expensive, but nonetheless a possibility if supported by a sufficient number of investors in a class action. I believe it to be best at this stage if all options are kept open, with nothing ruled out. 'Class actions' are an American thing. Something similar was brought in in 2015 for competition infringements, but that's not relevant here. There are ways that multiple people can bring claims in the UK, but it's not quite the same idea as a US class action, as far as I'm aware The trouble with the ECHR is that member states have to 'best accommodate' it's decisions (they are not binding on states, you currently need the European Courts of Justice for that). The biggest number of adverse decisions are against Russia and their 'best accommodation' is to effectively ignore the decision. Remember the 'can't extradite Abu Hamza' fuss when Teresa May was Home Secretary? It was 90% political bluster, as long as the death sentence wasn't an issue he could have been extradited to the US far earlier. Political embarrassment yes, barrier no. As for costs, the ECHR it is perfectly accessible to an individual, you don't need a legal team as long as you are prepared to do a fair bit of reading. I as a Litigant in Person (LIP) have helped another person to have a case heard at the ECHR and I myself have had a case listed in the European Courts of Justice. The European Courts are far more accessible than the Royal Courts of Justice (High Court) where every barrier is put in place against LIP's. That said I do not believe legal action is appropriate here. The HRA means that you often don't need to actually go to the ECtHR (because it imports the rights into UK law), so you don't necessarily need to work about the enforceability of the latter's decisions because you can get a UK court order. You also don't necessarily 'need a legal team' in the UK courts either, but - while I do not doubt for a second your abilities - I don't think we'd want to go anywhere near this without a good legal team taking care of it. Interesting that you find European courts more accessible because the procedure for the CJEU (I have no direct experience of the ECtHR) was always an utter nightmare for me...! It's protection of property rights under Article 1 of Protocol 1 that is relevant (again, mentioned by the Minister in the link I posted above). The FCA's statutory liability indeed does not restrict claims relating to this. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the case law in this area to comment further on how feasible this might be, though. (And, even if it were feasible, it's likely that it would be bloody expensive!) My italics. Sorry if I'm missing something, but what's your point? The italicised provision is just a caveat to make clear that, for example, someone's assets can be seized if they evade tax or the like. Okay, that's enough boring law chat from me, given it's a bit of a tangent from this thread's title..!
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,003
Likes: 5,139
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 29, 2019 8:48:05 GMT
Sorry if I'm missing something, but what's your point? The italicised provision is just a caveat to make clear that, for example, someone's assets can be seized if they evade tax or the like. "We, the FCA, took the action we did in the public interest." End of. Bye. Don't let the legal bill for both sides hit you in the backside on the way out. Oh, and don't forget... So you've already taken the case against the FCA to the Supreme Court, and lost, before you can even go near the ECHR. Except it'd have been tested against the same criteria in a domestic court first, under HRA98.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Apr 29, 2019 8:55:43 GMT
Sorry if I'm missing something, but what's your point? The italicised provision is just a caveat to make clear that, for example, someone's assets can be seized if they evade tax or the like. "We, the FCA, took the action we did in the public interest." End of. Bye. Don't let the legal bill for both sides hit you in the backside on the way out. Oh, and don't forget... So you've already taken the case against the FCA to the Supreme Court, and lost, before you can even go near the ECHR. Except it'd have been tested against the same criteria in a domestic court first, under HRA98. 1) I already said above that I wasn't sure about the feasibility of this and that it would be incredibly expensive anyway. That said, I don't think the provision you cite does what you think it does. If you could blanketly claim 'public interest' for enforcement of any and all laws, the ECHR would never have any use. 2) Yes - as I already mentioned above, you would use the HRA to make a claim in the UK first. And yes, again as I have already said, this would all be incredibly expensive (and this was one of the reasons I originally said that). Can we stop violently agreeing with each other that this is almost certainly not a good idea? 
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Apr 30, 2019 15:57:21 GMT
Disappointing BDO didn't send me an email telling me about this important report they published 6 days ago. I wouldn't have known about it if I hadn't looked on this forum today.
I rarely read P2P stuff online now because, with the COL situation, it was causing me additional worry and anxiety and affecting my health. What will be, will be.
This progress report is about what I would have expected. At least it's a little bit more thorough than some previous updates.
Exorbitant fees continuing to rack up nicely for BDO. They've already made themselves a million I see. Still only a few recoveries and, to date, these total less than BDO's fees.
Positive - "the Joint Administrators currently anticipate that two further redemptions may close by the end of April 2019."
* Well, the end of April is today and these would boost the recoveries pot. I wonder if we will be able to be informed if these have gone through ? It would improve our position a little bit and make some people feel better.
Negative ? - "In addition to the claims of investors, the Joint Administrators have received three claims to date from unsecured creditors, totalling c£758,000.These claims are still being reviewed by the Joint Administrators and have not yet been adjudicated."
I don't know enough to know if this could be relevant or not.
As I see it, our best chance of a decent recovery would seem to be the FCA having to make up our shortfall for misleading us into investing with COL by having an incorrect Register and then allowing us to invest for 3 more months after they knew they shouldn't have been operating.
I have already made one formal complaint to the FCA. After reading the forum today, I shall make another.
I will now try and forget about this matter for another few months.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Apr 30, 2019 18:36:18 GMT
Disappointing BDO didn't send me an email telling me about this important report they published 6 days ago. I wouldn't have known about it if I hadn't looked on this forum today.
I rarely read P2P stuff online now because, with the COL situation, it was causing me additional worry and anxiety and affecting my health. What will be, will be.
This progress report is about what I would have expected. At least it's a little bit more thorough than some previous updates.
Exorbitant fees continuing to rack up nicely for BDO. They've already made themselves a million I see. Still only a few recoveries and, to date, these total less than BDO's fees.
Positive - "the Joint Administrators currently anticipate that two further redemptions may close by the end of April 2019."
* Well, the end of April is today and these would boost the recoveries pot. I wonder if we will be able to be informed if these have gone through ? It would improve our position a little bit and make some people feel better.
Negative ? - "In addition to the claims of investors, the Joint Administrators have received three claims to date from unsecured creditors, totalling c£758,000.These claims are still being reviewed by the Joint Administrators and have not yet been adjudicated."
I don't know enough to know if this could be relevant or not.
As I see it, our best chance of a decent recovery would seem to be the FCA having to make up our shortfall for misleading us into investing with COL by having an incorrect Register and then allowing us to invest for 3 more months after they knew they shouldn't have been operating.
I have already made one formal complaint to the FCA. After reading the forum today, I shall make another.
I will now try and forget about this matter for another few months.
I echo your thoughts. My patience has almost run out regards Col/Lendy/FS. Karmas coming. Can you hear it LB? Much more patience required still
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 1,214
|
Post by travolta on May 1, 2019 17:08:47 GMT
So relieved to hear that BDO are almost able to cover their costs at our expense... I wouldn't like to think they might be out of pocket if there is anything left . 'Vholes is the man to watch'.
|
|
|
|
Post by peertopier on May 18, 2019 9:28:40 GMT
I've been ignoring this for a while. I haven't had any emails about it since last year. I thought I'd catch up today.
I've skim read a few threads and had a look on the bdo website but it's not clear what's going to happen. Limited loan recovery minus a lot of fees for the people trying to unpick this mess? What's going to be left? Should I prepare for nothing?
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on May 18, 2019 10:37:03 GMT
I've been ignoring this for a while. I haven't had any emails about it since last year. I thought I'd catch up today.
I've skim read a few threads and had a look on the bdo website but it's not clear what's going to happen. Limited loan recovery minus a lot of fees for the people trying to unpick this mess? What's going to be left? Should I prepare for nothing?
At the the risk of sounding trite, "Prepare for the worst and hope for the best." If not already done, part of that preparation could be registering your displeasure with the FCA about how they failed in their duty of care over their legal obligation to maintain an accurate register of authorised firms. (See this thread, if further information required.) It was partly the "lack-of-permissions" problem that led to this mess in the first place.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on May 18, 2019 12:29:30 GMT
I've been ignoring this for a while. I haven't had any emails about it since last year. I thought I'd catch up today.
I've skim read a few threads and had a look on the bdo website but it's not clear what's going to happen. Limited loan recovery minus a lot of fees for the people trying to unpick this mess? What's going to be left? Should I prepare for nothing?
The FCA is completely, utterly and totally 100% responsible for the mess, which they actually created, by their ineptitude & in/actions .If The FCA didn't consist mostly of ineffective & incompetent commercial sector rejects a proper business like and correct solution and course of actions would have been undertaken. The FCA will be held accountable, it may take time, but it will happen
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on May 19, 2019 8:51:54 GMT
I've been ignoring this for a while. I haven't had any emails about it since last year. I thought I'd catch up today.
I've skim read a few threads and had a look on the bdo website but it's not clear what's going to happen. Limited loan recovery minus a lot of fees for the people trying to unpick this mess? What's going to be left? Should I prepare for nothing?
The FCA is completely, utterly and totally 100% responsible for the mess, which they actually created, by their ineptitude & in/actions .If The FCA didn't consist mostly of ineffective & incompetent commercial sector rejects a proper business like and correct solution and course of actions would have been undertaken. The FCA will be held accountable, it may take time, but it will happen In the meantime, unless I have missed an update somewhere, it's becoming increasing clear, in my head at least, that in the event of any return we're looking at pennies in the pound. All very convenient that lenders/investors were deemed to be creditors and moved out of 'protected' investor status. Hence there was and is little incentive for BDO to tidy the mess up in a timely manner when there is a honeypot sitting in front of them.
There may be recourse against the FCA but you can bet your bottom dollar that they will wiggle like a caught fish. Undoubtedly there will be a committee set up, then another. This thing will drag on for years IMO unfortunately.
Not really sure what they were thinking when they established the FCA. Wasn't it the same staff, same address as the old discredited FSA!!!
|
|
