Roger Allanson, former head of Allansons LLP, has hit back against the shut down of his unregulated investment scheme by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Allansons ran a litigation funding investment opportunity offering 50% returns which was, according to third-party introducers which solicited investments on Allansons’ behalf, “zero risk” and “100% secure with FSCS”.
I am extremely grateful to you for your support and faith in the funding opportunity I have given to you. Unfortunately the SRA have panicked due to the insistence of one of your number that matters are not what they seem.
Matters are and remain exactly as they were.
When he says that “Matters are and remain exactly as they were” Allanson presumably means “apart from the fact that I was banned from running my practice in late 2018 over unrelated client money breaches, and have had my certificate to practice suspended”.
Allansons originally projected that the scheme would deliver 50% returns in 6 to 18 months. The failure of Allansons to meet this timescale is blamed on the lenders stringing the cases out in court.
The lenders have not treated this exposure well and have treated the challenges like a can to be kicked down the road rather than them address the real issues in the cases. This has delayed results and that has added to the concerns that this plan has not yet borne fruit.
As yet the SRA has not yet officially stated its reasons for shutting down Allansons. When it intervened it stated “Mr Allanson, as a manager of the firm has failed to comply with the SRA Principles 2011, the SRA Practice Framework Rules 2011 and the SRA Accounts Rules 2011” but has not elaborated on these compliance failures.
Allanson claims it is because the SRA thought Allansons was too small to handle the 4,500+ cases referred to in his letter.
The SRA cite the lack of results as well as the volume of work involved in the number of cases, which they believe to be beyond the capabilities of a small outfit like mine. They have found an excuse for regulatory intervention and deludedly believe they have acted to protect the public. They have done nothing of the sort.
Allanson insists that the investment scheme is still operating, and that the cases will be passed to larger firms of solicitors.
He also states that the After The Event insurance – which is the bedrock for the claims by third-party introducers that the Allansons scheme is “zero risk” – is still in effect.
I have future-proofed matters to safeguard and ensure the fund route back at the end.
In the immediate aftermath of the Allansons shutdown, the firm that sourced clients for Allansons and analysed whether they had a case for suing their mortgage lender, Mortgage Audit Bureau, displayed this message on their website:
We have been made aware this morning (24th May 2019) of a re-assignment of cases between Allansons and Quanta Law.
This message was however swiftly removed. The MAB website now directs Allansons clients to a FAQ written by Gordons LLP, the SRA’s Intervention Agent.
Gordons LLP’s FAQ states bluntly:
If you were a client, Allansons can no longer act for you. You will need to find another lawyer to act. Gordons are not acting for you.
There is no mention on Gordons’ FAQ of any deal to take on Allansons’ clients.
Allanson finishes by attacking a “claim-farmer” called “MFN” which he says is contacting Allansons investors. Allanson denies MFN’s claims that his investors were “taken advantage of”.
This was not an operation to line the pockets of any of participants who have a role in seeing that the lenders are taken on effectively. Each of us had an important role and outsiders do not know the extent of it nor the amount of work involved nor the science behind the systems, staffing etc involved. It is mischief-making bordering on blackmail.
The letterhead includes the rather curious footer “Tidying up after the Solicitors Regulation Authority”. So far it looks like the other way round, that the Solicitors Regulation Authority is tidying up after Allansons.
This text appears where a solicitor would normally include their SRA registration details, which may explain its placement.