** Seems its just one thing after another for the New Labour party. Our local MP has lost a case and had to stump up £36000. Still there you go not the first MP to get caught up in a legal case and lose and he sure wont be the last.
To be fair I had been waiting for this man to lose the case, and have his reputation ruined and lets hope he does the decent thing and not stand again for the people of Newport as they deserve better from their local mps.
Labour MP Flynn faces £36,000 legal bill after losing libel action
By David Prosser
Published: 09 November 2005
Paul Flynn, the left-wing Labour MP, agreed to pay out more than £36,000 yesterday to settle a libel action brought against him by a complaints handling firm that specialises in endowment mortgages. Mr Flynn's solicitor told the High Court that the MP for Newport West was retracting allegations he had made against Endowment Justice, a company that works on behalf of borrowers who believe they have been mis-sold endowment-linked mortgages.
Endowment Justice launched legal proceedings against Mr Flynn this year after he criticised the growing number of complaints handling firms that work with endowment mis-selling victims. The company had previously held talks with Mr Flynn over its concerns about bad practices at several complaints handling firms. But the MP subsequently named Endowment Justice in accusations he made about the whole sector.
A WELSH MP yesterday agreed to pay libel damages after a campaign against endowment policy mis-sellers backfired.
Newport West MP Paul Flynn was sued after he posted an attack on such companies on his website in February, claiming they were out to "re-rob" the victims of endowment mis-selling by dishonestly over-charging them for their services.
But he made the mistake of referring to well-regarded company Endowment Justice Ltd, which represents mis-selling victims on a "no-win, no-fee" basis.
The company and its directors sued and, at London's High Court yesterday, Mr Flynn made a public apology for the "unjustified attack" on the claimants' integrity.
He will also pay an undisclosed sum in damages, which will go to charity, and the claimants' legal costs bills.
DOH!!!!!!!!A company which represents people claiming compensation for endowment mis-selling today accepted £1,000 libel damages from an MP over an allegation of "robbing" consumers.
The directors of Endowment Justice, Nicholas Keca and Marianne Fitzjohn, and former director Graeme Webber, had brought proceedings in London's high court against Paul Flynn, the Labour MP for Newport West.
Their solicitor, Jo Sanders, said that in February, they were deeply distressed to see that Mr Flynn had referred on his website to companies which were out to "re-rob" victims of mis-selling by charging customers between 20% and 40% of any compensation received.
He stated that agents who had been responsible for the historic mis-selling of endowments and had "grown fat" as a result, were now "robbing their clients a second time" by dishonestly overcharging them to obtain compensation.
Ms Sanders told Mr Justice Eady: "Those may or may not be legitimate criticisms of some of the companies to whom the allegations were directed, but in this context the defendant also wrongly referred to Endowment Justice."
She said Mr Flynn repeated substantially the same defamatory allegations to a journalist from Money Marketing magazine, which published his statements in an article called "Endowment chasers are 'wolves profiting from misery"'.
Ms Sanders said all these allegations were completely false in respect of the claimants.
Neither Endowment Justice nor any of its directors were ever involved in any aspect of endowment policy selling.
Furthermore, the company - which operated on a "no-win, no-fee" basis - charged its customers either 17.5% plus VAT or 22.5% plus VAT of any compensation gained.
She said the charges were made clear to all potential clients and it was their choice whether to handle any claim themselves to instruct the company to act on their behalf.
No client had refused to settle the company's fees nor expressed concern about doing so.
Ms Sanders said Mr Flynn had apologised unreservedly to the claimants and had agreed to pay damages and their legal costs.
Outside court, lawyers said that the damages, which had been donated to the NSPCC, amounted to £1,000, with costs of £35,450.
Ms Fitzjohn said Endowment Justice had been set up to be a champion for people getting short shrift from the financial institutions, and that it had repeatedly called for endowment claims companies to be regulated as it recognised there were examples of bad practice.
"We reluctantly brought this action to vindicate our reputation, because our reputation and integrity are of paramount importance to us and integral to how we run our business."
Some endowment providers now refuse to pay out to claims firms, and last month the Association of British Insurers (ABI) said consumers who had been mis-sold a policy should consider applying for compensation direct to their provider, rather than using a third party.
Mr Flynn’s solicitor told the High Court that the MP for Newport West was retracting allegations he had made against Endowment Justice, a company that works on behalf of borrowers who believe they have been mis-sold endowment-linked mortgages.
Endowment Justice launched legal proceedings against Mr Flynn this year after he criticised the growing number of complaints handling firms that work with endowment mis-selling victims. The company had previously held talks with Mr Flynn over its concerns about bad practices at several complaints handling firms. But the MP subsequently named Endowment Justice in accusations he made about the whole sector.
Yesterday, Mr Flynn agreed to pay Endowment Justice’s legal costs of £35,450, plus £1,000 in damages, which the company has said it will donate to the NSPCC. The MP will also publish an apology on his website.
Marianne Fitzjohn, a director of Endowment Justice, said the company had been angry about being criticised for sharp practices because it believed it had played a leading role in campaigning against such behaviour. “We repeatedly asked Paul Flynn to apologise and withdraw his comments,” Ms Fitzjohn said. “We have also repeatedly called for the endowment claims companies to be regulated as we recognise that there are examples of bad practice.”
The claims handling companies are controversial because they charge fees for seeking endowment mis-selling compensation on borrowers’ behalf, even though the government-backed Financial Ombudsman Service offers an independent complaints service that operates free of charge. Endowment Justice charges 17.5 per cent of any compensation it wins on borrowers’ behalf, with fees at rival complaints handling services ranging from 10 to 40 per cent.
Mr Flynn said: “I’m proud of the campaign I have run on endowments.”
** Saved the best for last on this: from the mp's own site his apology - nothing as satisfying as a smug mp being made to apologise
Endowment Justice
On this website in February this year, I made certain statements referring to Endowment Justice Limited, one of the companies which offers assistance in obtaining compensation for those people who were mis-sold endowment policies. I have been campaigning against companies providing professional services in relation to endowment policy compensation claims, but my facts about Endowment Justice were incorrect. As a result, I wrongly accused the company and its directors Nick Keca, Marianne Fitzjohn and Graeme Webber of having previously mis-sold endowment policies and now dishonestly overcharging those self-same victims to help them obtain compensation. I am happy to clarify that neither Endowment Justice Ltd or any of its directors were ever involved in any aspect of endowment policy selling. It was therefore false and unfair to suggest that they had profited from the historic mis-selling of endowment policies. I was also incorrect in stating that Endowment Justice, which offers its services in recovering compensation on a “no-win, no-fee” basis, could charge its customers up to 40% of any compensation gained. Endowment Justice in fact charge customers 17.5% plus VAT or 22.5% plus VAT of any compensation gained. I was wrong to give the unintended impression that the company or its directors acts in any way improperly or unlawfully in providing services to those seeking compensation for endowment policy mis-selling. I would like to apologise to Endowment Justice for my allegations, and to Mr. Keca, Ms. Fitzjohn and Mr. Webber for any embarrassment or distress caused by my false remarks.
(Bet he is not looking so smug now...)** Finally here's one to cheer you up, whilst school kids get just 37p a day for food the humble MP gets an allowance to gorge themselves silly. Guess that explains the size of some MP's. Fat boy Prescot, Charles Clarke and so on...
MANY MPs benefit from a previously undisclosed perk, it has emerged — a monthly allowance of £400 to buy meals and groceries, write Jon Ungoed-Thomas and Abul Taher.
If their main home is in their constituency outside London, they can claim the food and grocery allowance without any need for restaurant bills or receipts. Further grants are available if receipts are furnished.
Officials in the Commons department of finance and administration released details of the £400 food allowance when MPs’ expenses were published last week.
It is the latest in a line of perks to emerge. MPs are able to claim for their TV licences for a second residence, and they can buy fridges on expenses.
Ian Liddell-Grainger, Conservative MP for Bridgwater, argues on his website that the expenses system is “crazy”.
He writes: “In many cases the authorities do not demand proper receipts . . . it is crazy. MPs should not set their own pensions, salaries and expenses.”
Other MPs says that they work long hours and the allowances are justified. Nick Harvey, the Liberal Democrat MP for North Devon, said: “When MPs are away from home, they are away from their domestic set-up. The MP is going to have lunch and dinner and the allowance is to cover that.”
Additional reporting: Holly Wat
Recently Paul Flynn was involved in a libel case where he made comments about an endowment pensions company, the result of which he had to pay out damages. He was sued after he posted an attack on such companies on his website, claiming they were out to "re-rob" the victims of endowment mis-selling by dishonestly over-charging them for their services.
But he made the mistake of referring to well-regarded company Endowment Justice Ltd, which represents mis-selling victims on a "no-win, no-fee" basis. The company and its directors sued and at London's High Court Mr Flynn made a public apology for the "unjustified attack" on the claimants' integrity.
The MP as part of the settlement put the following statement on his website: On this website in February this year, I made certain statements referring to Endowment Justice Limited, one of the companies which offers assistance in obtaining compensation for those people who were mis-sold endowment policies. I have been campaigning against companies providing professional services in relation to endowment policy compensation claims, but my facts about Endowment Justice were incorrect. As a result, I wrongly accused the company and its directors Nick Keca, Marianne Fitzjohn and Graeme Webber of having previously mis-sold endowment policies and now dishonestly overcharging those self-same victims to help them obtain compensation. I am happy to clarify that neither Endowment Justice Ltd or any of its directors were ever involved in any aspect of endowment policy selling. It was therefore false and unfair to suggest that they had profited from the historic mis-selling of endowment policies. I was also incorrect in stating that Endowment Justice, which offers its services in recovering compensation on a “no-win, no-fee” basis, could charge its customers up to 40% of any compensation gained. Endowment Justice in fact charge customers 17.5% plus VAT or 22.5% plus VAT of any compensation gained. I was wrong to give the unintended impression that the company or its directors acts in any way improperly or unlawfully in providing services to those seeking compensation for endowment policy mis-selling. I would like to apologise to Endowment Justice for my allegations, and to Mr. Keca, Ms. Fitzjohn and Mr. Webber for any embarrassment or distress caused by my false remarks.
0 people have spoken:
Post a Comment