ao link
0 £0.00
This item was added to your basket
Credit Strategy homepage
LinkedIn
Twitter
Intelligence, Insight and community for responsible professionals in credit

AMI welcomes court support on interest-only mis-selling claims

The Association of Mortgage Intermediaries (AMI) has welcomed the moves by several courts to terminate some interest-only mortgage legal claims before commencement, as the industry continues to battle against actions.

The legal claims relate to interest-only mortgage products sold between 2004 and 2007, with only a small number going to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The remainder face court action.

 

During recent months, several cases have been terminated before reaching the court, while a further three cases have supported the decision by companies to defend themselves.

 

The three cases that supported the broker position were Ross and Ross versus Attanta Limited; Collett and Collett versus APF Private Clients Limited; and Colborn and Colborn versus Albany Park Limited.

 

AMI chief executive, Robert Sinclair, said: “We have always maintained that these claims brought by professional law firms are vexatious and without proper foundation. So far the courts have supported this view. We will continue to challenge the Solicitors Regulatory Authority to accordingly supervise their member firms.

 

“It is critical that all cases are defended unless there is a genuine customer case. The fact that it was interest Only is insufficient. There needs to be other factors ignored at the time. I am genuinely struggling to identify what these might be.”

 

The AMI said it is continuing to work with members to ensure that these cases are defended in a “fair, but robust manner”, but has urged companies to engage with their PI insurer early.

 

Sinclair added: “The courts in delivering their judgements have also considered many of the substantive issues under review. These broadly have reduced the amounts of claim substantially, established that they have limited or no merit, set out that the costs of court time outweigh potential benefit and challenge the quality of both the claimant evidence and expert witness work.”

 

“We are encouraged that firms might be able to recover their costs from the claimants as they mostly are insured.”

Please login to continue reading this article.

Not a member?

Become a member

FREE registration. No credit card required

Register now
  • Stay up-to-date with industry news and appointments
  • Hear about events first
  • Read 1 free Premium article per month

Become a premium member

From as little as £3.48 per week

Become Premium
  • All the perks of a standard member plus:
  • Access to the entire Credit Strategy website
  • 12 months subscription to Credit Strategy Magazine
  • 25% discount to all conferences
  • Exclusive access to Premium Member only roundtables
  • 50% off award entry fees

GET THE LATEST INDUSTRY NEWS STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

READ NEXT

PSR publishes five-year strategy for improved payments market

PSR publishes five-year strategy for improved payments market

Clearpay’s parent company records 110% profit growth

Clearpay’s parent company records 110% profit growth

Klarna records year-on-year operating income increase

Klarna records year-on-year operating income increase

Upcoming events

Credit Strategy
LinkedIn page

Member of

Did you find our website useful?

Thank you for your input

Thank you for your feedback

creditstrategy.co.uk – an online news and information service for the UK’s commercial and consumer credit industry. creditstrategy.co.uk is published by Shard Financial Media Limited, registered in England & Wales as 5481132, Axe & Bottle Court, 70 Newcomen St, London, SE1 1YT. All rights reserved. Credit Strategy is committed to diversity in the workplace. @ Copyright Shard Media Group