Arc Europe & Trevor Munn Solicitors

[SaltnVinegar]

Hi All

I've posted this here as Arc Europe and Trevor Munn Solicitors were regularly used by Quickquid in the collection of payday loan debts. As those who follow my UE diary would know their practices were questionable and this was confirmed last year by Trevor Munn receiving a good spanking from the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Have a good read through the attachment to see exactly how this DCA/Solicitor combo acted.

Best
SnV

[helmsman]

Re: Arc Europe & Trevor Munn Solicitors

Greedy Bastard paid the price £75000 I wonder how much ARC Europe paid him.

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Arc Europe & Trevor Munn Solicitors

Greedy Bastard paid the price £75000 I wonder how much ARC Europe paid him.

"ARC agreed to pay the Respondent £6,480 plus VAT (in 2009) and £13,896 plus VAT (in 2012) in respect of such services. Any work outside the agreed retainer was to be charged to ARC at a rate of £200 plus VAT per hour but no such additional work was done by the Respondent. The Respondent received total fees of £25,920 in 2009 and £31,104 in 2010. In the period 2009-2010 the fees received by the Respondent represented between 8-12% of his total fee income. "

What is shocking is the following paragraph which shows how the template LBA's were abused by Arc Europe. 13,000 LBA's sent out on Munns letterhead (never mind the usual threat-o-grams). What would be telling would be how many of these actually resulted in a court claim being issued. This would expose the actual level of the abuse of this process.

ARC sent letters before action and pre-action correspondence to alleged debtors on behalf of third party creditor clients on the letterhead and in the name of the Respondent. Those letters were drafted by the Respondent in the first instance as standard template letters, to be sent in specific circumstances with the Respondent’s authority. However, the letters which were actually sent were prepared and sent by ARC from its offices by employees of ARC. In 2009 ARC sent in excess of 13,000 such letters on the Respondent’s letterhead.

What is even more shocking is the following, which, when claims were issued, they were frequently done so unlawfully. I am wondering how many people out there have had claims issued by default who could get them struck off as the result of this abuse.

"Claims were issued on behalf of third party creditor clients in the name of the Respondent by ARC employees who were not lawfully permitted to conduct litigation. Those employees signed the statement of truth and issued proceedings using ARC’s own user number for the County Court Bulk Centre. Other formal steps in litigation (such as issuing applications, filing applications for the entry of judgment in default and filing notices of discontinuance) were also done by ARC employees who were not lawfully permitted to conduct litigation."

[cymruambyth]

Re: Arc Europe & Trevor Munn Solicitors

They state that CCJs have been obtained and money collected. What action will be taken to contact all these clients and correct this?

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Arc Europe & Trevor Munn Solicitors

Greedy Bastard paid the price £75000 I wonder how much ARC Europe paid him.

"ARC agreed to pay the Respondent £6,480 plus VAT (in 2009) and £13,896 plus VAT (in 2012) in respect of such services. Any work outside the agreed retainer was to be charged to ARC at a rate of £200 plus VAT per hour but no such additional work was done by the Respondent. The Respondent received total fees of £25,920 in 2009 and £31,104 in 2010. In the period 2009-2010 the fees received by the Respondent represented between 8-12% of his total fee income. "

What is shocking is the following paragraph which shows how the template LBA's were abused by Arc Europe. 13,000 LBA's sent out on Munns letterhead (never mind the usual threat-o-grams). What would be telling would be how many of these actually resulted in a court claim being issued. This would expose the actual level of the abuse of this process.

ARC sent letters before action and pre-action correspondence to alleged debtors on behalf of third party creditor clients on the letterhead and in the name of the Respondent. Those letters were drafted by the Respondent in the first instance as standard template letters, to be sent in specific circumstances with the Respondent’s authority. However, the letters which were actually sent were prepared and sent by ARC from its offices by employees of ARC. In 2009 ARC sent in excess of 13,000 such letters on the Respondent’s letterhead.

What is even more shocking is the following, which, when claims were issued, they were frequently done so unlawfully. I am wondering how many people out there have had claims issued by default who could get them struck off as the result of this abuse.

"Claims were issued on behalf of third party creditor clients in the name of the Respondent by ARC employees who were not lawfully permitted to conduct litigation. Those employees signed the statement of truth and issued proceedings using ARC’s own user number for the County Court Bulk Centre. Other formal steps in litigation (such as issuing applications, filing applications for the entry of judgment in default and filing notices of discontinuance) were also done by ARC employees who were not lawfully permitted to conduct litigation."