Claims against MAS5 mortgages and Co-op bank
As part of our work with mortgage prisoners, Harcus Parker acts for a number of individuals whose mortgages have been operated by Mortgage Advisory Services Number 5 (‘MAS5’) which is a subsidiary of the Co-operative Bank. If your mortgage has been administered by MAS5 and you would like to get in touch about a potential claim, please fill out the form below and a member of the team will be in touch.Find out more
Legacy Payment Protection Insurance Claims
The unscrupulous selling of PPI gave rise to the UK’s largest and most serious consumer financial scandal. We estimate that 6 million customers have still not been compensated at all, that millions have been under-compensated, and that £18 billion remains to be claimed through our new group litigation.
It means that the banks are still holding onto to billions of pounds that they wrongly took from the public and have never paid back.Find out more
Credit and Debit Card Class Action
We are bringing a further class action lawsuit against Mastercard and Visa on behalf of businesses accepting payments using credit and debit cards. We say that transaction fees set by Mastercard and Visa are unlawful and that businesses should be compensated.Find out more
Whistletree Mortgage Prisoners
We are acting for current and former Whistletree customers who have been charged high rates of interest, in breach of the terms and conditions of their mortgage agreements.Find out more
Commercial Card Class Action
We are launching a class action lawsuit against Mastercard and Visa on behalf of businesses accepting payments using UK corporate cards, and credit and debit cards from overseas visitors. We say that transaction fees set by Mastercard and Visa are unlawful and that businesses should be compensated.Find out more
Closet Trackers Litigation
We are investigating claims on behalf of investors who have been overcharged for investing in alleged “closet tracker” funds.Find out more
We act for investors in their claim against Link Fund Solutions for their failure to manage the Woodford Equity Income Fund prudently. If you hold or have held shares in the LF Equity Income Fund (formerly the LF Woodford Equity Income Fund) either directly, through an intermediary or in your SIPP, you may be entitled to claim for compensation.Find out more
Mortgage Prisoner Litigation
We act for thousands of homeowners who have mortgages with lenders which do not offer competitive mortgage products and who have been trapped paying high rates of interest on their mortgages. If we are successful, borrowers would be entitled to compensation for the excessive amount of interest they have paid.Find out more
Despite 40 years of equal pay legislation, there is still an ingrained belief that so-called women’s work is worth less than men’s. We act for several thousand supermarket staff in their claim against Tesco for equal pay.Find out more
Do you have any suggestions? We would be glad to hear from you.Find out more
Our previous financial group litigation projects have included:
Lloyds / HBOS
We acted for shareholders in their claim against Lloyds Banking Group and some of its former directors for breaches of fiduciary duty arising from Lloyds’s acquisition of HBOS at the height of the financial crisis in 2008.
ARCH CRU GROUP LITIGATION
Claim on behalf of approximately 1,100 clients against the ACD of the CF Arch cru OEICs. The Arch cru funds, valued at £363m, were suspended in 2009, after it was discovered that the vast majority of the sub-funds’ portfolios consisted of conflict-laden and illiquid investments in cell companies incorporated in Guernsey and listed on the Channel Islands Stock Exchange.
TOWER / UKFS
Multimillion-pound claim against the managers and operators of ’double-dipping’ film investment schemes designed to shelter income and capital gains tax by taking advantage of s.42 Finance (No.2) Act 1992. We acted for a large group of investors who argued they had been misled about the schemes’ nature and risk profile.
TAKE FILM SCHEMES
Action on behalf of investors in the Take film scheme series, which sought to take advantage of tax incentives on British qualifying films. The claimants alleged that the scheme was implemented in a manner that was inconsistent with the promotional literature, and that the scheme was sold despite the operators knowing that it was bound to fail.
Claim on behalf of investors relating to mis-sold investments in commercial property sites situated in ‘enterprise zones’ (designated areas into which the Government encouraged investment by offering tax relief for investors).
EVOLUTION FILMS GROUP LITIGATION
Claim on behalf of the subscribers to a ‘production’ film partnership scheme, the structure of which was such that it could never have generated the investment returns or tax relief claimed.
FIRE CONTROL CENTRES
Claim for losses incurred by investors in a tax-driven investment scheme which invested in a network of control centres through which it was proposed to run the country’s emergency fire response.