Insurance Disputes

  • Our client, a business owner in the Midlands, suffered a severe fire at their premises. The insurer alleged that the “waste warranty” had been breached because wood shavings may not have been swept up, and alleged fraud on the basis that (they said) our client had given a different version of events immediately after the fire than later. We presented our client’s case to insurers who remained intransigent and refused our request to mediate. We then referred our client’s case to the FOS and dealt with detailed submissions to the Adjudicator and Ombudsman, resulting in a Final Decision rejecting all allegations of fraud levelled at our client and directing that the insurer should pay our client’s claim in line with Policy Terms.
  • We represented a lady suffering from fibromyalgia. Her income protection policy provided for payment of a lump sum sufficient to redeem her mortgage but insurers refused to pay out. We pursued a complaint to the FOS and secured an initial decision that the insurer pay out under the policy. Given the unreasonable delay in the insurer accepting our client’s diagnosis, we subsequently secured a second payment via an FOS complaint to compensate our client for the additional capital and interest paid on her mortgage since the date insurers ought to have accepted her claim.
  • Under a Directors & Officers’ Policy our client, a substantial business in the waste industry, received insurers’ authorisation to incur a significant level of legal fees for representation on an Environmental Agency investigation. Part way through proceedings, insurers alleged non-disclosure, withdrew cover and demanded return of costs already paid. We successfully negotiated an acceptable resolution to the situation with insurers’ solicitors.
View Service

Interest Rate Hedging Disputes

  • We represented a London based property owner who had been sold a complex interest rate swap in conjunction with a refinance. The swap restricted the business to the extent that opportunities to develop the business could not be taken up. Prior to commencement of the FCA Review into hedging products, proceedings were issued then stayed to allow the FCA Review to progress. An initially poor result, offering an alternative swap, was received within the FCA Review. We challenged this and recovered basic redress for our client of over £1.1 million. A substantial consequential loss claim is currently being progressed.
  • Our client, a successful business in the golf industry was sold a long term swap when taking out a loan for new premises. The excess interest charges severely hampered the business in its early stages. The bank repeatedly refused to provide adequate redress in the FCA Review despite numerous submissions and meetings, taking the position that an alternative product in which the business would have actually paid more than the original product was fair redress. At the conclusion of the basic redress stage of the FCA Review, we referred the case to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) with a detailed submission and on an expedited basis. The FOS swiftly provided a fair outcome, the bank agreed to pay redress above the FOS compensatory limit of £150,000 and the case was returned to the FCA Review for consideration of consequential losses.
  • We acted for London based commercial property developers who entered into a swap product which unbeknownst to them carried a seven figure contingent liability which prevented them from developing or changing their business. Not initially wishing to incur litigation costs, we represented our clients within the FOS process and secured a final decision to the effect that our clients ought to have been sold a cap rather than a swap. The bank refused to honour the FOS decision above the FOS limit of £150,000 and the bank’s internal FCA Review decided that even though mis-selling was admitted, our clients would have entered into the same product. With the swap still severely curtailing our clients’ business, proceedings were issued and a positive outcome achieved at mediation.
View Service

Investment and Other Financial Cases

  • We represented a severely disabled young lady whose personal injury damages had been invested on an advisory basis by a high street bank. The portfolio of investments was highly geared in equities and in a situation where regular income withdrawals were required, the value of the portfolio fell severely. We alleged negligence in construction of the portfolio and secured a significant compensatory payment on mediation.
  • We represented a business who was facing an allegation of default action under a commercial loan based on breach of covenant. Our client wished to preserve their previously good relationship with the bank and did not, therefore want to alert the bank that they had taken legal advice. We provided advice and draft correspondence for our client, to challenge the interpretation of the covenants within the bank’s loan agreement which culminated in withdrawal of the bank’s demand and a resolution to the situation.
View Service

Professional Negligence

  • We pursued a claim against an insurance broker who had failed to notify an insurer of our client’s change of address which led to the declinature of a fire claim. Liability was denied and we pursued a complaint to the FOS, recovering substantial compensation for our client.
  • Our clients had purchased a house which they understood was on mains drainage. Their solicitor had failed to identify that in fact the drains from the property exited to a local river. Had our clients been aware of this they would not have purchased the property. We pursued a claim against their conveyancing solicitor and secured compensation sufficient to enable our clients to install a bespoke drainage system at the property.
View Service