Mortgage Mis-selling

A mortgage is, for most people, the biggest financial decision that they will make in their lifetime. As a result, laws have been put in place to protect people from lenders, brokers and other advisors who are involved in the transaction and whose interests may not align with your own.

Time limits (Limitation)

Limitation is a time limit during which a claim can be brought. If a claim is brought after limitation has passed, then the claim will be time barred and liable to being struck out.

The starting point is for us to determine if your claim is in time. Don’t worry if it is not, you won’t be liable for any of the fees incurred by Pure Legal Limited on your behalf (so long as you continue to provide honest instructions).

If your mortgage was entered into after 31 October 2004, then limitation will be 6 years from the date the loan was entered into, unless there is convincing evidence of secrecy or some other aggravating factor which meant that you could not have discovered the mis-selling or sought advice that would have enabled you to discover this mis-selling.

In the news

Pure Legal Limited have been in the legal news in recent months, with 2 cases being dismissed because they were out of time.

The claims were out of time because the claimants had all the information they needed when they entered into the mortgage to question the transaction and therefore any claim had to be brought within 6 years of the date the mortgage was entered into. In a further case, the claim was not dismissed, but only just. The judge in that case found that there may have been an aggravating factor in that the Claimant’s claim that the broker may have wrongly indicated that the mortgage was a lifetime one.

In Collett v SPF Private Clients the claimant was found to have had the mortgage offer letters and mortgage statements, they either knew or should have known their mortgage was an interest only mortgage and they did not have a repayment vehicle in place and they must have known that an interest only mortgage was going to be more expensive than a capital repayment mortgage in interest terms.

Finally, the value of these claims were overstated in that they included a claim for the capital which the Claimant says would have been repaid had a repayment mortgage been entered into. This was disallowed, reducing the claim value from around £158k to £17k . The court has indicated that any claims for costs would have to be proportionate to the amount of costs claimed which may make these claims unviable.

What does this mean for my case?

This is why we are undertaking a review of all of the claims to ensure that the cases are within time, and make financial sense to pursue.

What if they aren’t in time?

Don’t worry. If the claim was never in time, then you haven’t lost anything. You were never able to bring the claim. In those circumstances, we will ensure that your claim is submitted to the after the event insurer (ATE) and they will repay the outstanding loan that you owe to the funder. If they refuse, then you don’t need to be concerned because we have had confirmation that the funder will close your loan and you will therefore owe nothing.

If the claim was in time, but Pure Legal Limited did not bring the claim before expiry of the 6 year timeframe, then you may have a claim against Pure Legal Limited’s professional indemnity insurance. We will contact you further with more details if that is the case.

Click here to log on, provide consent to transferring your file and update your contact details.

Clear Law

We are a consumer litigation practice with substantial experience of dealing with contested litigation, including mis-selling and undisclosed commissions. We are a panel member of Recovery First.We have been involved in a number of these type of projects with Recovery First. In some cases, firms have undergone a managed closure of a part or whole of their practice. In those cases the transition for clients is smooth as they are well informed and an introduction to the new firm takes place over a period of time, allowing clients to adjust to the idea that their firm is no longer able to act for them.

In other circumstances, such as insolvency, there can be a feeling of disruption and abandonment.

Do not worry, your file will be protected and it will be reviewed over the course of the next 12 weeks. You will be kept informed during this review process by email.

This is an essential first step and at the end of this process you will be provided with advice about how your claim can proceed. You will find links on the case specific pages on Mortgage Mis-selling, Mortgage Mis-calculations, Undisclosed commissions and Data Breach which will enable you to make an enquiry if you wish.

Your Claim

Clear Law is a litigation practice, acting mainly for individuals across a wide range of disciplines. We have had substantial success in areas of financial mis-selling in particular involving secret commissions successfully acting for more than 6,000 clients (both individual and commercial) in our sister company Clear Commercial. The most successful group action saw a return of £21m.

Our experts

Darren Gray

A "diligent and effective" solicitor in Commercial and Banking litigation.

Darren has 15 years’ experience in the following specific areas of litigation:

  • Group Actions (both bringing and defending – mainly against financial institutions)
  • Supervision of search orders
  • Civil fraud, freezing orders and asset recovery
  • Employment related commercial disputes, eg springboard injunctions
  • Construction disputes
  • Breach of contract
  • Breach of directors’ duties, shareholder and partnership disputes
  • Professional negligence
  • Judicial review
  • Insurance disputes (both for and against insurers)
  • Sports Law
  • Catastrophic injury

Current and Recent Work

Sports Litigation

Unnamed -v- Liverpool Football Club – Darren acted for a schoolboy and his family in a claim against Liverpool Football Club and the Premier League arising out of an alleged breach of contract following Liverpool Football Club's breach of Premier League rules for which they received an unprecedented fine and ban. This attracted significant media attention:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/04/11/liverpool-told-father-youth-signing-lie-tapping-cover-up-scandal http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/04/06/liverpool-tapping-up-row-intensifies-stoke-chairman-also-seeking http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/04/05/liverpool-banned-signing-academy-players-two-years-illegal-approach
Hopkins –v- (1) Pullen (2) Taylor T/A Ippon Judo Club CC Preston 08/12/2005 – successful defence of a claim before a high court judge against a judo club arising out of a serious injury that occurred with a novice in their first training session. Expert evidence obtained from Neil Adams MBE.
Machin –v- Trentham Gardens (unreported) – successful defence of a catastrophic injury claim arising from a mountain biking accident whilst the claimant was trespassing on the defendant’s land.
Lake –v- Warwick Racecourse (unreported) – successful defence of a racecourse following a claim brought by a jockey for a career ending injury arising from alleged defective design of the racecourse.

Banking and Group Litigation

He has successfully pursued a Group Action and established a compensation scheme with a lender. In excess of 6,000 cases were pursued through the scheme and in excess of £21m was recovered. Darren has also successfully pursued and is pursuing several other Group Actions against lenders arising from allegations of fraud, a breach of fiduciary duty and a breach of the “unfair relationship” provisions of the Consumer Credit Act.

(1) Sinclair Collis Ltd (2) National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators (NACMO) –v- Secretary of State for Health [2011] EWCA Civ 437 – lead junior for the interested party, NACMO, in a judicial review against the government’s plans to ban cigarette vending machines in the UK.
Colour Quest Limited –v- (1) Total Downstream UK Plc (2) Total UK Limited (3) HOSL [2010] EWCA Civ 180 – lead junior acting for the defendants in litigation arising from the explosion at the Buncefield Oil Storage Terminal in 2005. Headed up teams across two firms in an electronic disclosure exercise that involved the investigation and review of c 2m documents.

Construction Litigation

Co-operative Group Limited –v- Birse Developments Limited & Others [2014] EWHC 530 (TCC) – lead junior for the claimants acting in a claim arising out of defective works for a warehouse.
Cleveland Bridge UK Limited –v- Severfield-Rowen Structures Limited [2012] EWHC 3652 (TCC) – lead junior for the defendant in a claim brought against it for alleged delays arising out of the construction of the Shard.

Other experience:

Darren has executed and supervised search orders arising out of claims involved intellectual property breaches. He has also been interviewed on Setanta Sports providing expert legal comment on a high profile football injury involving Iain Hume and Chris Morgan in a Championship game. He has written numerous articles and provided commentary on insurance and EU law issues related to the world of sport.

Darren is a member of the Commercial Litigation Association and the Annecto Group and has been recommended in the Legal 500 as 'diligent and effective'.

Matthew Corbett

Matthew is Managing Partner of the firm.

Since being admitted as a solicitor in 2002, Matthew has gained vast experience is a range of civil litigation resulting in him taking the decision to start his own firm in 2004. From the beginning he has been integral in overseeing the growth and success of the firm in both the consumer and commercial departments.

Andrew Kwan

Andrew manages the Legal department, contributing to the overall growth and development of the practice, whilst maintaining Clear Law's ethical client and staff focussed approach.

Putting people first is one of Clear Law's core values. This means working to obtain plain English approval, being committed to quality, reassuring our clients when they need help, being accessible and client focussed, training and developing our staff, maintaining our Lexcel, IIP, Apil and Law Society accreditations, and becoming ever more environmentally and corporately responsible.