Five nominations for GLC at Law Awards of Scotland

Govan Law Centre has received five nominations in four categories at the 2012 Law Awards of Scotland. The nominations were revealed at the Corinthian Club in Glasgow last night. GLC was nominated in the following categories:

* Law Firm of the Year (under 40 fee earners)
* Corporate Social Responsibility Firm of the Year
* Trainee Solicitor of the Year (Christine McKellar and Laura Simpson)
* Solicitor of the Year (Mike Dailly)

Govan Law Centre is delighted that its excellent team and achievements, as a campaigning community law centre, have been recognised by such a distinguished panel of independent judges.

The winners of the 2012 Law Awards of Scotland will be announced at a ceremony to be held in the Radisson Blu Hotel in Glasgow on 13 September.

Consumer challenges facing the UK's insurance industry

A link to GLC's Principal Solicitor's speech to the UK Industry Summit on Consumer Insurance Law and Regulation in London on Tuesday, 17 July 2012. Mike was speaking on behalf of the FSCP at the Infoline event, and discussed the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012, forthcoming law reform, the Revision to the EU Insurance Mediation Directive and various challenges the industry faced to deliver better quality, value for money and outcomes for UK consumers of insurance products.

Farepak: will the insolvency practitioner gravy train ever stop?

Over 100,000 victims of the Farepak Christmas club, which collapsed in 2006, will now receive almost 50 pence in the pound, primarily thanks to a charitable fund (17.5 pence) and a new £8m ex gratia payment from LloydsTSB (19 pence).

The work of the insolvency practitioners, BDO LLP, netted 13 pence in the pound yet their fees and outlays cost 19 pence in the pound; £8.2m - in other words they charged 60 pence to recover 40 pence.

The OFT's market study into this industry uncovered market failure in 2010. Big secured creditors, like banks, were able to exert some control over corporate insolvency practitioners (IP) fees and outlays. Yet, the OFT found in 40% of cases where unsecured small creditors were involved there was little or no oversight of IP fees and charges.

GLC's Mike Dailly speaks to BBC Radio 4's Money Box on the apparent licence that IPs have to print money, with little or no effective regulation from the UK Insolvency Service. In GLC's experience a similar problem exists in relation to IP fees and charges in the personal insolvency market.

GLC would like to see the OFT's recommendations - including an independent complaints body with real legal teeth to review IP fees and charges, and the power to impose fines - implemented.

The Insolvency Service consultation on these issue last year produced major industry opposition for any real change. Hardly surprising, when the present system represents the lightest touch of regulation for one of the most expensive and well paid industries in the world. An industry that frequently costs considerably more than it generates in recovered income.

GhLC's 'Unequal and unlawful treatment' report for Oxfam published online

Govanhill Law Centre's research report, 'Unequal and Unlawful Treatment - barriers faced by the Roma Community in Govanhill when accessing welfare benefits and the implications of section 149 of the Equality Act 2010' is now available online here (opens as a PDF).

A summary version in Czech is available here: Govanhill Law Centre – Zpráva o protiprávním a nerovném jednání.

Launch of Govanhill Law Centre's 'Unequal and unlawful treatment' research report

Tomorrow morning, Govanhill Law Centre 

(GhLC) will launch its report into the barriers faced by the Roma community in Glasgow's Govanhill when accessing welfare benefits, and the implications of section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to those barriers. 

GhLC is a project of the Govan Law Centre, and was commission by Oxfam to undertake its ' Unequal and unlawful treatment' research report through the European Commission Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity.  A copy of the report will be made available online following tomorrow's launch.

As over one third of our Govanhill clients identify themselves as Roma, we felt it was important to report and publicise the real struggles and injustices this client group routinely face. We decided to focus on the issue of welfare benefits (this is the issue the majority of our Roma clients seek our help with) and the way in which three public authorities responsible for administering benefits – Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) (Jobcentre Plus) and Glasgow City Council (Housing Benefit Department) – treat our Roma clients.

Our report is an attempt to establish whether there are recurring patterns in the treatment of Roma clients and, in particular, how these impact upon the public authorities in terms of their equalities duties under section 149 Equality Act 2010. 

The report's lead author, Lindsay Paterson, solicitor at GhLC will give a presentation on our report tomorrow morning, along with speakers from Oxfam, one of GhLC's clients who has personal experience of the barriers in accessing UK welfare rights, Romana Lav, and GLC's Principal Solicitor.

Sharp v. Bank of Scotland plc

The case has settled extra judicially and no further comment will be made.

NatWest, RBS & Ulster Bank: your rights & remedies if you've been unable to access funds

This week many customers of Natwest, RBS and Ulster Bank have been unable to access their accounts, withdraw funds, pay bills or make transactions; with banks opening their branches over the weekend to try and mitigate the damage caused by computer system failures. The following note is a brief guide to your key rights and remedies.

Your rights: The starting point is that you have a legal right to access funds in your personal current account (or business account) through 'payment instruments' (such as debit cards, online banking etc.,) provided to you by your bank. 

This right is regulated by FSA rules, the Payment Services Regulations, and the contract with your bank. In summary, this right can only be restricted by advance notice and in limited circumstances, and therefore in relation to a systems failure, the bank is prima facie responsible for any of your reasonable losses. 

If you can go into a local branch then clearly that will be the surest way to access your account, but that might not be feasible or possible for many customers, and in any event, damage might have already been incurred - so what can you do?

Your remedies: The golden rule is to 'keep all evidence' - receipts, bills, extra charges you have sustained, anything you think might be relevant - and keep a good written note of what has happened, itemising your losses and recording any significant inconvenience or distress, explaining how and why.

Clear-cut losses: There will be 'clear-cut losses', for example, where funds have not shown up in your account and direct debits have bounced with bank charges imposed - including third party creditor charges - all of these losses are directly caused by the bank's system failure, so they are liable to put you back to the position you would have been in, if this problem had never happened. In other words the bank should meet the cost of all charges, including third party charges levied for missed or late payments.

Consequential losses: Losses which are 'consequential' will require proof, and must be reasonably foreseeable and not unreasonable or remote. For example, you could not access your funds due to the bank's system failure and missed a flight or train, and ended up being charged for the hotel you booked and then had to cancel. Such consequential losses should in principle be recoverable because they are reasonably connected to the failure on the part of the bank - but you will need to keep evidence of your actual loss. 

Obtaining redress: You should log a complaint with your bank in the first instance. This can be done over the phone or in writing, and it is always best to follow things up in writing to have an evidential written record, and it may also be necessary to provide copies of receipts or bills for losses sustained (make sure you keep the originals). 

Inconvenience: If you have also sustained significant inconvenience or distress you can also claim for a monetary payment to reflect this - how much will depend upon the circumstances and the severity of the inconvenience. 

If your bank refuses to help: If after you have complained, your bank refuses to make reasonable recompense to your satisfaction you should make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The link provided will take you through the simple procedure which you can do yourself. Whatever you do, don't pay anyone to do this for you, and do not use a Claims Management Company - because the system is designed for consumers to do this for themselves for free. 

NatWest, RBS and Ulster Bank have indicated that they will not see their customers out of pocket, so you should obtain redress for yourself.

If you need help you can always get free impartial advice from a money advice agency or CABx. If you cannot obtain redress through the Financial Ombudsman Service you may wish to consult a qualified solicitor to ascertain if there is any legal remedies available to you.