View more on these topics

Only 10 active cases left as Keydata battle hangs in the balance

Just 10 active firms remain in the Financial Services Compensation Scheme’s legal battle with advisers, after it reached settlements with all 15 lead defendants.

In a statement on Keydata recoveries published today, the FSCS reveals it has recovered £52.4m from the proceedings against advisers, less £15.8m spent on legal costs. In total, it has recovered a net figure of £102.2m.

The FSCS selected 15 new lead case defendants in October after settling with its six original lead defendants.

But it says it has now settled with all of the lead defendants.

From an initial pool of 820 firms, the FSCS has resolved its claims against all but 10 of the active defendants. In November, there were 63 active defendants remaining.

A case management conference is due to be held in March and the FSCS says it will await further directions from the court as to how the remainder of the proceedings should be managed.

National law firm DWF partner Harriet Quiney says: “It is going to become an increasingly less cost effective exercise to pursue this case. But the FSCS will not necessarily drop it, because if it did all the advisers it has settled with would feel betrayed and it would create negative publicity.”

The long-running saga between the FSCS and Keydata advisers originally required lead defendants to have insurance and legal representation.

But following a large number of settlements, in May the FSCS’s lawyers invited the court to make the following orders: that each defendant with claims worth over £150,000 be a potential lead defendant, and to remove the requirement that lead defendants have insurance and legal representation.

In July, the criteria was further widened to those with claims of between £100,000 and £150,000 against them.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. How can you have equality under the law, when the defendant cannot afford to pay for legal representation while the accuser is able to raise a levy against the accused to fund it’s pursuit of a claim.
    The F-pack have planned the man and not the ball with small firms, while playing the ball with Banks and providers and then not sending off any offending players (or large players being suspended pending an investigation) in the Banks and Providers camps.
    This is meant as NO criticism of either Dr Debbie Harrison nor of Stewart Ford, but the former has not even been asked publicly by a journalist what happened (so hasn’t even had to say “no comment” and has since been given a sinecure at the Financial Services Consumers Panel, while Stewart Ford could afford to have legal representation and has run rings round the F-pack as a result!
    Come on Tessa, don’t just phone me for a comment, phone Dr Harrison and Stewart Ford so they at least have to say “no comment”.

Leave a comment