The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

[garlok]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

No not a word from our MP yet. Give it another few days and will ask him for response.

regards
Garlok

[Paul.]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

It is for this reason that the Government launched a consultation last year on Lord Justice Jackson's recommendations for reforming no win, no fee arrangements. Following careful consideration of the consulation responses, the Government has decided to reform no win, no fee arrangements to stop the peverse situation in which fear of excess costs sometimes forces defendants to settle, even when they know they are in the right.

BING-FOOOKING-GO

thats the point i make all along, the Defendant in this case our man in debt faces a royal rodgering if he loses, but has no money to pay for representation, so he looks for a no win no fee solicitor

however when he wins he now fgets saddled with the successfee of the solicitor due ot the fact that our fabulous government thinks its a good idea to do away with recovering it from the loser.

Lets not forget our debtor has no say over the claim anyway, he says his agreements unenforceable but how many banks do you know who would agree? ive had claims go to trial where the bank or creditor admits it will not win!!!!

shocking is all i can say

[pompeyfaith]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

No not a word from our MP yet. Give it another few days and will ask him for response.

regards
Garlok

Ditto

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

David Willetts MP

and co...

Havant

... a clue.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

These reforms will ensure that meritorious claims are resolved at more proportionate cost, while unnecessary or avoidable claims will be deterred from progressing to court.

Utter bollocks.

Not one of the many unmeritorious actions started by Jan Ludwig Hoch (link) was or could have been funded by a CFA.

This will help to end the unaccceptable compensation culture in this country which has closed much of our justice system to vast rafts of the ordinary public by legal costs out of all proportion to the dispute or the claim. Ordinary professional individuals will no longer have to be constantly concerned about the possible risk of litigation when they do perfectly ordinary things in the course of their daily lives.

This is more nonsense of the sort one would expect from the Daily Wail.

All of the above waffle only goes to explain why they are reforming (which we know) not what they might do for the cases which aren't related to "oops I tripped over your dog, pay me...."

It doesn't even do that.

Their motivation for the 'reforms' is three-fold:

1. the Daily Wail has demanded changes to stop customers getting millions from hot cups of coffee
2. MPs like to meddle and to 'do things'
3. the coalition thinks the measures might be popular so more MPs might keep their seats

The way to scupper it would be to shew that the changes aren't really needed (the American scalding award was reduced on appeal) and that the 'reform' will actually cost votes.

[diddlydee]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

Perhaps a screen print of CC's comments to my MP as a reply

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

The banks have unlimited resources ...

They dont give a monkeys bollocks if they throw away 20 cases or not per week

How many monkey testicles do the banks have?

[diddlydee]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

How many male employees would provide the answer, I presume!

[pompeyfaith]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

Right had a reply regarding this from Havant MP David Willetts:

[garlok]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

At least you have a response PF. Ours one Chris Ruane is rather more worried at his constituency disappearing altogether at the moment than looking after constituent problems. He can have a taste of my metaphorical cattle prod tomorrow.

regards
Garlok

[pompeyfaith]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

Garlok,

Go down to his local surgery and question him head-on, that is what I was going to do tomorrow until the letter came today.

[Paul.]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

Right had a reply regarding this from Havant MP David Willetts:

and again he misses the point toooooo

Its the Defendants FUNDED BY A CFA who will suffer, the banks have total backing with their assets to bank roll whatever litigation they want, so the bank can pay out to sue you and you cant recover your lawyers full fees if you win

fair? fck no it is not, the bank should pay for its cockups imho yet the defendant will suffer with this new law

[pompeyfaith]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

Paul,

Ill email him again pointing out this fact which he must make those trying to bring in this change aware off.

[Paul.]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

I agree with him that litigants who launch legal action should have responsibility for the costs of the same, but when you are sued and have nothing, how the hell can you pay a successfee of upwards of £5k if you WIN? that seems very perverse to me, you win but have to pay? the loser should pay imho

[Paul.]

Re: The Jackson reforms to Civil Litigation funding. NO MORE NO WIN NO FEE!!

this whole topic really gets to me as its the little guy who will end up suffering