• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.

Things about to get very serious and much more real? / Felicitas Letters

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post

    1 There is no case. 2 The case is too expensive/risky to action. 3 Last roll of the (low cost) dice before they move on to pastures new?

    Any of those are possible.
    3 is not a pleasant idea, as you would note from a previous post HMRC have basically said they won't do anything to stop other schemes from allowing Felicitas (or similar) from trying to recover money in similar ways.

    I suspect a lot of scheme users will be writing letters to dispute Statuary Demands in the future - as Felicitas repeat their playbook.

    Leave a comment:


  • WJK
    replied
    I personally have no intention of parting with any money until I receive a legal document from a practicing solicitor/ Barrister that will ratified by my Barrister. Then and only then I will consider payment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    You have to remember these loans are subject to IoM law (and probably IoM trust law) in most cases - which is why they previously used Statutory Demands to try and enforce payment in the UK - for Felicitas are cheapstakes and so are doing stuff as cheaply as possible.

    And the SDs would probably have worked out for them if this site hadn't told people how to respond to them.

    IoM courts are expensive and don't allow contingency deals so Felicitas need a lot of money paid upfront to launch an IoM court case.

    Now you would expect the latest offer to be higher than previous offers so I do find the 1.5% offer very interesting - as I cannot work out WTF they are asking for such a small amount...
    1 There is no case. 2 The case is too expensive/risky to action. 3 Last roll of the (low cost) dice before they move on to pastures new?

    Any of those are possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by shampoo View Post
    I was wondering what schemes the latest correspondence relates to?

    My view is they have copies of T&C's for some of the later schemes that call out the loan element and clauses on potential repayment etc and they're applying that rule of thumb for all the schemes for which they claim to have obtained the loan book.

    It wouldn't be worth chasing most individuals for 1.5% and it would suggest they're not in a strong position legally to recover the alleged loans ... if they were we'd have all been forced to pay them by now or had bailiffs at our door.

    Isn't agreeing to pay 1.5% as good as admitting it's a loan and agreeing you owe the money? I'd ensure the legal jargon is watertight before the xfer of any funds ... if it seems too good to be true and all that!
    You have to remember these loans are subject to IoM law (and probably IoM trust law) in most cases - which is why they previously used Statutory Demands to try and enforce payment in the UK - for Felicitas are cheapstakes and so are doing stuff as cheaply as possible.

    And the SDs would probably have worked out for them if this site hadn't told people how to respond to them.

    IoM courts are expensive and don't allow contingency deals so Felicitas need a lot of money paid upfront to launch an IoM court case.

    Now you would expect the latest offer to be higher than previous offers so I do find the 1.5% offer very interesting - as I cannot work out WTF they are asking for such a small amount...
    Last edited by eek; 13 August 2021, 10:43.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by shampoo View Post
    I was wondering what schemes the latest correspondence relates to?

    My view is they have copies of T&C's for some of the later schemes that call out the loan element and clauses on potential repayment etc and they're applying that rule of thumb for all the schemes for which they claim to have obtained the loan book.

    It wouldn't be worth chasing most individuals for 1.5% and it would suggest they're not in a strong position legally to recover the alleged loans ... if they were we'd have all been forced to pay them by now or had bailiffs at our door.

    Isn't agreeing to pay 1.5% as good as admitting it's a loan and agreeing you owe the money? I'd ensure the legal jargon is watertight before the xfer of any funds ... if it seems too good to be true and all that!
    Good points. Sadly, if WTT hadn't been chased away from here, that question might have been answered here for the benefit of everyone.

    Leave a comment:


  • shampoo
    replied
    I was wondering what schemes the latest correspondence relates to?

    My view is they have copies of T&C's for some of the later schemes that call out the loan element and clauses on potential repayment etc and they're applying that rule of thumb for all the schemes for which they claim to have obtained the loan book.

    It wouldn't be worth chasing most individuals for 1.5% and it would suggest they're not in a strong position legally to recover the alleged loans ... if they were we'd have all been forced to pay them by now or had bailiffs at our door.

    Isn't agreeing to pay 1.5% as good as admitting it's a loan and agreeing you owe the money? I'd ensure the legal jargon is watertight before the xfer of any funds ... if it seems too good to be true and all that!

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by MrO666 View Post
    So I've spoke to three people caught up in all of this, and none of them have received anything from Felicitas.

    Could it be that they're now being selective on who they're approaching and with what "offer" ?
    Pass - I believe the SD demands were sent in batches so I wonder if these letters will be as well.

    Either way I wish they would actually either go to an IoM court to try and enforce payment or give up...

    Sadly, given the current offer I suspect it's going to be neither of those things.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrO666
    replied
    So I've spoke to three people caught up in all of this, and none of them have received anything from Felicitas.

    Could it be that they're now being selective on who they're approaching and with what "offer" ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by WJK View Post

    Whether it was a typo I have it on black n white.
    If I did accept this latest offer they would need to prepare by a practicing solicitor/Barrister a written document and reviewed by my own solicitor before anything happens.
    Good luck, if it works for you. At least you might get your life back if it does.

    Leave a comment:


  • WJK
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    That was my thought as well - which is why I didn't make any other comment as an offer that low makes little sense, I'm almost wondering if it was a typo so we need some other recipients to check what thier their offers look like..
    Whether it was a typo I have it on black n white.
    If I did accept this latest offer they would need to prepare by a practicing solicitor/Barrister a written document and reviewed by my own solicitor before anything happens.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X