Financial Reform

Financial Reform -

Commercial Litigation: Guide to the Corporate Climate Change

Litigation, especially in the corporate field, has always been a costly activity. It is risk-riddled and pursuing claims for millions of pounds is a timely endeavour. In some cases, it can take several years to reach a verdict; that’s a long time to cover all the legal fees when there is the chance the case can flop.

Given present day economy, it is no surprise to hear that many businesses are sidestepping going to court, even when they have a strong case. The prospect is expensive and many in-house counsels choose not to risk tying up the cash flow.

Third party litigation funding was once an illegal, mistrusted practice but nowadays, more and more businesses are turning to independent funders to help with the costs of litigation. FTSE 100 companies and global businesses are consulting third party funding firms, like Vannin Capital, to fund their cases and spread the risks.

It has now become a respectable method of funding legal costs and achieving justice. As with most things in life, money unfortunately is at the heart of litigation and it always will be. It costs money to take a case to court and pay all the legal fees; and sadly money doesn’t grow on trees.

However, a judicial review by Lord Justice Jackson has led to the recent reforms of legal costs, with the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO). The new law will hopefully give clients clarity on funding costs, give funding providers clear guidelines to follow, and encourage good practice within the industry.

As part of the reforms, cost budgeting at the start and during a trial has become compulsory, and After-the-Event Insurance (ATI) remains vital. Damage-Based Agreements (DBAs) have replaced Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) and will very much be a ‘wait and see’ component.

What else has changed? The industry has become self-regulated. The Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales (ALF) was set up in 2011 and all members are fully vetted. They must follow a strict code of practice which ensures that they do not run out of money half way through a trial, or unduly interfere in the running of a case.

However, it must be noted that not all litigation funders in the UK have become affiliated, so we strongly advise you to only use a reputable member.

Overall, commercial litigation has evolved with the times and arguably, for the better. In this day and age, no credible funder will take your case on board if it is not likely to succeed which gives businesses and solicitors self-assurance when pursuing a claim.

As the economy fluctuates, it can only be predicted that more changes will come. However, one thing in the industry remains the same; commercial litigation funding via a third party provider will certainly give you the security that you need to take a case to court.

 

This article was written on behalf of Vannin Capital, leading specialists in litigation funding. The team has experience in cases from the jurisdictions of England and Wales, the EU, the Caribbean and international arbitration matters. Visit litigationfunding.com today to learn more.

[Guest Post] Tales of a PPI Claims Handler – Delay Tactics, Low Refunds and Billions Saved in Compensation

Time was when a compensation case went one of two ways; no payout or full payout. But part nationalised bank, Lloyds, and other lenders are avoiding expensive mis sold PPI refunds by using a third option – a partial payout.

As you read this ‘upheld in part’ is being printed on thousands of refund letters in bank offices across the UK and it’s being used to save billions of pounds in compensation.

Limiting the damage

We’re seeing more and more ‘upheld in part’ mis sold PPI offers from banks with around 10% off the full refund amount. It may not sound like much but take 10% off the estimated total refund bill and you’re looking at a saving of over £2bn. With £18bn set aside so far for PPI refunds and the total refund bill estimated at anywhere between £25 and £40 billion, UK banks and lenders are looking at a lengthy and costly period of payouts. By handing out partial refunds it looks like Government-owned Lloyds and other banks have decided to try and limit the damage.

What ‘upheld in part’ means

In an ‘upheld in part’ situation the lender admits to mis selling the entire PPI policy but decides that you should have had some cover and takes the cost of that cover from the refund. It’s like taking a £30 shirt back that you don’t want and the shop giving you £15 and another shirt of it’s choosing, saying that it still thinks you need a shirt. Ludicrous.

What they should be doing is giving you all of the money back or asking ‘do you want us to take the cost of a more suitable policy?’. The (even more) ridiculous thing is: while it may be acceptable to offer another policy if the loan is still active, in most of the cases we come across the loan has been paid off so any cover charged for is completely unnecessary.


An example from a refund letter, this customer had three loans with two ‘upheld in part’ and was owed an additional £1,400 including interest.

It’s easy to think you’ve been fully refunded (and hard to get to the truth)

If the refund letters adequately explained what ‘upheld in part’ means it wouldn’t be so bad, but in my opinion, they don’t. As a result the recipient could easily miss the fact that they have not been refunded the full amount. The picture above shows a refund amount, which may lead people to think that they have received their full PPI refund. In reality they have not only been done out of money that they paid into the policy, but they’ve also not been paid the 8% interest on top as well. A double slap in the face.

To clarify what they’ve done the banks should include a sub-header in the letter titled ‘upheld in part explained’ with a paragraph explaining that they’ve decided that we did mis-sell you PPI, but think that you should have had some cover. As a result we’ve taken some money off your refund to cover the cost of a more suitable PPI policy. It’s still not right, but at least it would be explained and the customer would know that they haven’t got a full refund.

On their radar

The MOJ is aware of ‘partial refunds’ and recently included the topic in their December ‘13 Special PPI Bulletin:

Alternative redress

Some banks have been making offers on an ‘alternative redress’ basis/calculation on PPI complaints since early 2013. This is sometimes also referred to as ‘comparative redress’ or ‘partial upheld’.

These offers need to be properly assessed and instructions from clients should be obtained about whether the offer is appropriate. Further information about alternative redress offers can be found on the FOS website at – http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/redress.html

No going back

But say you knew what ‘upheld in part’ meant and that you were still owed more mis sold PPI money – do you take the smaller lump now or wait potentially another 18 months for the full amount? In our experience most people go for the smaller amount mainly because they may have to wait a while for the full refund.

And once they accept the offer there’s no going back, the bank has the right to keep the extra cash. Either way, if people take the payout or wait for the full amount the bank are saving money – when they should be giving people all of their money back. Moral of the story: beware of ‘upheld in part’ offers and know that if you get one – you are still owed more.

By John Gregory

John writes for a PPIClaimsAdviceline.com as well as a number of financial blogs, he also create content for infographics, FAQ’s and personal finance sites. You can find him on Google+ and Twitter, get in touch – he doesn’t bite. Unless you’ve been mis-selling financial products.

Is Cash Going Out of Date?

Back in the day, the Queen was the only one with the luxury of not having to carry cash around with her. Whenever she got a hankering for a good smoky bacon crisp sandwich some subordinate or other would do the buying for her while the Queen stood, dignity intact, browsing in Morrison’s frozen food section. These days though, it seems no one carries cash. We’ve all moved on to plastic. With so many options available, including credit cards, debit cards, store cards and Christmas cards (not yet a currency, but still closely linked to the ancient barter system), few people bother with the actual pounds and pennies anymore. Moreover, cash in the wallet simply begs to be spent, while a payment card can restrict the temptation by lightening the pockets, helping you better manage your bank accounts.

To illustrate how in danger cash is, here are some facts and figures.

It seems cash has been in crisis mode since at least 2010. For it was in the summer of 2010 that debit card spending overtook the total spent in cash. Debit card spending came in at a tidy £272 billion with cash spending at £269 billion. It was a tight race, sure, but one that cash seemed destined to lose. Especially when you throw credit card spending into the mix, at that point the contest between cards and cash becomes pretty one sided. And debit card spending continues to grow. In 2012 debit cards were used to make 7.7 billion purchases, with the number of debit card holders increasing by around a million.

Of course, credit card use is on the up too. There are over 30 million credit card holders in the UK now. And the amount of credit card purchases is expected to rise to 3.5 billion by 2022 with total spend coming in at about £214 billion.

Still, credit and debit cards shouldn’t be feeling too smug. Just as it seems that they are about to be become the transaction kings (or to cast aside their current truce and engage in a vicious fight to the death) along comes the new pretender to the throne: contactless payments.

If carrying cash is too cumbersome and plastic is the practical alternative, how convenient would it be to carry nothing at all? Really convenient. OK, you’d need to have your mobile on you, but you’d have that anyway. Unless you forget it, then you might be in trouble.

The idea is that instead of carrying cards around with you every single place you go, taking up all that space and weighing you down like a dumbbell or a practically invisible feather, you just scan your phone (which is linked to your bank account) and the money disappears from your account. Like magic.

The technology has been around since 2007 and the time seems right for contactless payments to stake its claim as the undisputed king of paying for things. Especially when you consider just how smartphone crazy we all are in the UK – another excuse to use it more is always welcome. Credit and debit cards are getting in on the action in this arena though, with their own form of contactless payment where you can wave your card over a card reader, rather than using the more traditional chip and pin or swiping method. Still you’re not really fooling anyone; you still have to carry those pesky cards around. And if predictions are to be believed, the mobile payment is the only way to go. You can then say goodbye to all those dozens of coupons and points cards too – the mobile offering (namely Google wallet) will eventually encompass these too.

Only certain phones are enabled with the contactless payment option built-in, although there are all kinds of apps available to enable it on your click and talk device of choice. In fact, in a recent article in the Telegraph futurologist Peter Cochrane predicted that by 2020 cards could have disappeared completely as a payment device. Where physical cash will end up by the time 2020 comes around, well, that remains to be seen. The suspicion is that while cards might be king at the moment, cash will hang on in there in some form or other (probably just its current form), ultimately beating out card payments with its durability.

Lloyds Fined £35m for Dickensian Sales Incentives

Lloyds bank has been fined £35m for a sales incentive scheme that saw staff threatened with demotion if they didn’t hit targets. One adviser felt so pressured that he sold products to himself, his wife and a colleague just to keep his job.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Regulator issued the fine after saying Lloyds ‘created a culture of mis-selling by rewarding staff for selling thousands of products to customers regardless of their need or suitability’.

Sales incentives at Lloyds were deemed to be inappropriate and detrimental to customers

The fine is the ninth biggest ever issued by the City regulator and came as a result of an investigation into incentive schemes at Lloyds between 2010 and 2012. The bank recently pumped a further tranche of cash into their PPI compensation pot, which stands at around £8bn and is the biggest refund bill of any UK lender.

The investigation focused on Lloyds’ sale of investment products and found advisers were offered champagne and £1000 cash for hitting sales targets. The FCA investigation uncovered the following figures between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2012:

- 399,000 Lloyds TSB customers bought 630,000 products, spending over £1.2bn and paying £71m in protection premiums

- 239,000 Halifax customers bought 380,000 products, spending £888m and paying £38m in protection premiums

- 54,000 Bank of Scotland customers bought 84,000 products, spending £170m and paying £9m in protection premiums

Some of the individual bonuses received by staff are eye-watering, including one Halifax manager that received £39,000 for three months sales, almost doubling his annual salary. Another controversial product, packaged bank accounts, were rumoured to be being investigated by the FCA, but they refused to comment. Lloyds stopped selling packaged accounts at the beginning of 2013.

Good news for tax-payers though as the Government-owned bank was able shave 20% off the £35m fine buy settling earlier with the regulator.

How to Save Over £1,000 in Six Months

Saving money is actually easier than you think. Everyone needs to save in this tough economic climate and some of us are undertaking fresh measures to make ends meet. You may have taken on an extra job, sold your car or even downsized your accommodation and moved to a smaller place.

If you think carefully about your expenses though, you’ll find that you can actually save a large amount of money over six months if you focus on the smaller details.

Change your phone contract – £100

You can save massive amounts of money if you go with a bundle deal and pay for your TV, broadband and phone contract as one package. By doing this, you could save up to £200 a year – £100 in six months. Go to a phone provider store to view the SIM only deals, ASAP.

Don’t waste food – £200

Britain wastes an atrocious amount of food, something that is not only unethical, but stupidly costly as well. Experts estimate that British homes discard around £400 in food a year. If you have uneaten odds and ends, turn them into a stew or an omelette – it’s not so hard to do and will keep you from another trip to the supermarket for another few days. It all adds up.

Quit buying coffee every day – £285

Do the maths – £2.50 a day adds up to £285 in six months on coffee alone which is frankly shocking, when you think about it. It’s far more prudent to buy your own coffee and brew it at home. Get an insulated mug or flask and take yours to work instead of paying extortionate amounts for sub-par coffee from the overpriced chain coffee shop on the corner.

On your bike! – £180

Living in the big city isn’t exactly easy on your wallet in terms of getting around. Even going to see your friends tends to be a big spending decision in some cases. The average commuter burns £454 a year on fuel just travelling to work and back. If you subtract the costs of buying a bike you could save up to £360 a year, which works out to be £180 in six months. Oh – and you’ll get fitter, too.

Work out at home – £300

Gym memberships should be reserved for only the most dedicated. The majority of people, it seems, are guilty of being too keen and signing up for annual memberships, which they then never fulfil. If the average gym membership costs £50 a month, you could save £300 over six months by jogging in the park and doing your exercises at home – the end result will be the same, after all.

 

Six months later, and you’re £1,000 richer! Hopefully. On top of the above suggestions, there are even more ways you could cut back on your expenses, which include investing in energy-efficient kitchen appliances and light bulbs. If you feel like you’re burning too much cash, it’s time to review the smaller, hidden expenses in order to save.

The Benefits of the Help to buy scheme for Britain

In today’s market buying a house is not easy.  Not only are we currently trying to recover from the recession and having to live on less money but also we have a recurrent situation where we see house prices rising and falling! At present there seems to be a sudden increase again which may be a good thing for the home owner wishing to sell, however this only adds to the angst and distress for those looking to buy.

So how can we get onto the property ladder and what options are available to help and support us when it comes to buying a home in Britain?

Britain introduced the ‘Help to Buy Scheme’ recently to support those trying to get onto the ladder. As the market saw a sudden rise in house prices and a recurrent growth in property prices, many believed we would be destined for another housing crisis but thanks to the government’s plans to get bankers to support ‘state backed mortgages’ we are now seeing a light at the end of this long and perplexing tunnel.

What are the benefits?

Thanks to this new scheme, buyers can get onto the property ladder by putting down a small deposit of as little as 5 percent. For most buyers finding a hefty deposit is without a doubt one of the most difficult things to accomplish and within a situation where banks were simply ‘not lending’ it was almost impossible. This scheme will come as a warm welcome for many and not only is it a great thing for buyers but also a positive way of pushing forward bankers into building relationships with lenders again, ultimately building the trust between the two and helping to restore people’s faith in the banks.

Why now?

This new scheme was pushed forward by the prime Minister and chancellor George Osborne to help boost the already recovering economy and many believe that this is a desperate attempt at boosting the Conservatives appeal ahead of the 2015 general election, as similar situations have been apparent in the past – we once saw Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher push forward the scheme which allowed people to buy their rented accommodation from their local authorities in a similar manner. Either way, this new scheme is set to increase and guarantee mortgages by up to 15 percent which can only be a good thing.

Who can benefit?

Aimed at helping to support the low income or middle class working families, this new government backed scheme comes as a breath of fresh air. Not everybody is born into wealth, so to be able to easily buy a home should help alleviate one of the major burdens in most people’s financial lives. While there is a rush to get these state back mortgages, and some critics are saying that this influx of buyers who would not have traditionally qualified for a mortgage is a replication of the behaviour that caused the economic crises, most people should see this as a step forward. For those people who still find it difficult to raise the 5% deposit, or are unable to show the proof of work required for this scheme – renting through a company like Rentify continued to make the best sense in the London area. A company like this can act as a broker between the tenant and landlord, making for a smoother renting experience.

A Beginner’s Guide to Cash ISAs

Cash ISAs (Individual Savings Accounts) are savings accounts available to every UK citizen and Crown dependency aged 18 years or over which are exempt from income tax on the interest accrued. The 2013/14 tax free allowance is set by the UK Government for Cash ISAs is £5,760. This is the amount that you can deposit in an ISA over a single tax year. This allowance is reviewed by the Government annually.

Although there are other types of ISA available, such as the Stocks and Shares ISA, for the purposes of this guide we’re going to focus on the most common type of ISA; the Cash ISA.

Understanding how the Yearly Tax Free Allowance Works

Once you have met the yearly tax free allowance for any given year you may not add additional funds, even if you have previously withdrawn these funds. Once the money’s in, it’s best that it stays in. This means if you have £5,760 sat in an ISA and you withdraw £2,000 in September 2013, you will only be earning tax free interest on the remaining £3,760 until April 2014, at which point you can invest any amount that does not exceed the newly announced tax free allowance for 2014/15.

Some ISAs also come with penalties for early withdrawal and so it’s important to realise that ISAs are for long term savings and shouldn’t really be treated as easy access bank accounts (although many accounts offer more flexible withdrawal options). ISAs with penalty free withdrawals tend to offer lower interest rates than those that don’t though.

Many ISAs pay out bonuses after a year or more but these bonuses can often be one offs and so it’s important to keep shopping around to find the best ISA to put your money. You can take out one Cash ISA with one provider per tax year but you can hold funds in multiple ISAs at any one time.

Finding the Right Type of ISA for You

There are many types of ISA providers out there and finding the best ISA account will inevitably take a good deal of research and consideration. It’s important to first of all work out what kind of ISA will suit you. Do you want easy access to your money without incurring fees? Do you want to invest most or all of your yearly allowance in one go or do you wish to pay it in incrementally over the year?

There are two main types of Cash ISA that between them satisfy most types of saver. These are Fixed Rate and Regular Savings.

Fixed Rate Cash ISAs

A Fixed Rate Cash ISA offers a fixed rate of interest over a fixed period (usually a year). Depending on the terms and conditions of the account any withdrawal made during this period may cause the interest rate to drop to a lower rate and be backdated to the point at which the ISA was taken out.

Whilst some fixed rate ISAs will allow a minimal number of withdrawals (often one per year) it’s important to understand that the more access you have to your money the lower the interest rate will tend to be. With this in mind a fixed rate ISA should only be an option if you don’t think you’ll require urgent access to your savings in the immediate future.

Regular Savings Cash ISAs

Regular Savings ISAs allow savers to invest their yearly tax free allowance over the tax year in increments. As such these accounts are subject to lower overall interest rates due as the interest are dropped every month.

Let’s take an example: If you were to invest £480 in April (1/12th of your tax free allowance for 2013/14) then you would receive the full rate of interest for that month. When you came to invest another £480 in May however, you would only receive 11/12ths of the interest rate as there are now only 11 months remaining in the tax year. By March 2014 you’d only be earning 1/12th of the interest rate.

Like Fixed Rate ISAs, Regular Savings ISAs may incur a penalty if money is withdrawn over the year or they may have a withdrawal limit or a set notice period. Again, consider whether you require easy access to your money and most importantly of all, do your research.

Is Everything We Hear About Payday Loans Industry True?

As the payday loan industry continues to grow in the UK, so have the number of unsavoury stories regarding its practices of providing the needy with fast loans. With MPs labelling lenders as professional loan sharks and calling for their regulation, recent surveys and reports have indicated that the picture painted by MPs is, in fact, way off the mark.

A survey by uSwitch in August this year claimed that 49 per cent of payday loan customers described their experience with their lenders as ‘positive’. Another 30 per cent claimed that they would consider using the service again. These figures provide a more complex picture than the MPs would rather have you believe, it seems.

Fulfilling a demand that the banks won’t

The problem seems to arise from the fact that the banks are too reluctant to lend to customers who do not have exemplary credit histories. The uSwitch survey tells us that 25% of British payday borrowers resorted to quick loans because their banks refused them. As a result, there has been a sharp rise in the number of those in need of quick cash injections to help deal with seemingly ever-rising living costs.

Living costs have risen 25 per cent over the last five years. Because of this, there are many who need to bridge the gap between the paying of bills and associated other costs between paydays. Payday loans help alleviate this problem: banks, on the other hand, haven’t offered any help at all in this area.

Irresponsible lending and borrowing

Another sad truth is that not all lenders are responsible in the way they conduct business. If you’re thinking of getting out a payday loan, you should make efforts to find out as much as you can about the lender before you commit.

There are plenty of irresponsible lenders that operate the market: these are the types that approve loans that they know very well the customer will not be able to pay back on time, getting them into deeper debt.

Finding a responsible lender

It’s on you to make sure that the lender you’ve chosen has a good reputation. Good lenders will always carefully consider all cases on an individual basis and will only approve the loan if they are confident of your ability to repay the loan on time without sliding into further debt.

This way, you’ll be able to spend the money and repay it on time without getting yourself mired in more debt. By being accessible and responsive to their clients, a good payday lender will help you avoid the pitfalls so you can borrow and return the money without trouble.

Nothing is ever black-and-white  and payday loans are no exception. With the right amount of research and attention, you’ll be able to put to bed any worries you may have had and safely take advantage of a service that very few institutions currently provide.

How much does a Court Case actually cost?

How long is a piece of string? Both questions are equally meaningless and therefore impossible to answer.

Of the court case there are just too many variables: take for instance the type of court. It might be the Small Claims Court, the Patents County Court, the County Court, the Defamation Court, the Mercantile Court, the Technology and Construction Court, the High Court, the Commercial Court, the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal. (This is considering only cases in civil courts. Criminal cases would need a separate list and additional consideration for costing.) Generally the higher the court’s jurisdiction, then the more costly the case will be. Another rule-of-thumb is that London courts will be more expensive than provincial ones. A case which needs hearings in several courts will also be more protracted, and therefore more expensive than one which is decided at the first hearing. Equally a case which settles before trial will be cheaper still. Not surprisingly mediation and alternative methods of dispute resolution are increasingly popular, as a way of avoiding court costs altogether.

Equally divergent will be type of case and the degree of complexity.  A cut-and-dried claim for damages between two individual litigants will cost nothing like as much as a major breach of a commercial contract. The latter might involve hundreds of litigants and years of legal wrangling. Degree of legal complexity links to lawyers’ fees. Complex cases will need more experienced lawyers. At solicitor level an equity partner’s work will be more expensive than a legal trainee or recently qualified lawyer. If the case needs the opinion of counsel, then a QC’s opinion will cost more than a junior barrister’s. Expert witnesses may be needed for complex medical or technological claims, and will be another variable expense.

So given that calculation of legal costs at the outset of a case is virtually impossible, what can be done to minimise and control these? Firstly, a case will need accurate and fine budgeting. An experienced solicitor will not only advise on the legal merits of a case, but will advise on projected costs of running the case. Gone are the bad, old days when a retainer might mention a hourly billing fee and little else. Such laxity often resulted in horrendous bills, years later which the hapless client received with shock. Indeed recent governmental concern with controlling the costs of litigation has led to new legislation and tighter controls. Since April 1, 2013 new Civil Procedure Rules lay down stringent requirements for case budgets to be drawn up by both sides at the initial stage of a dispute. These require approval of the judge and court managing the case. Rules for amending agreed budgets are equally demanding and a driving factor in agreeing any budget is that it must be proportionate to the claim. All this is to help control costs and to ensure more uniformity and accurate predictability of costs. Such reforms not only help standardise good practise and control costs; they also aid transparency, especially for a client from the outset of the case.

A further aid to calculating the likely cost of a case, is that it now a professional obligation for solicitors to discuss ways of funding cases with their clients. For such discussion to be meaningful an accurate budget must have been prepared. In the past most clients, whether individuals or companies , would have financed their own litigation. A few might have qualified for legal aid, but in the present climate this has all but disappeared. However, to help companies and individuals finance legislation, there are now new options. Foremost of these has been the growth of third party funding. This is an arrangement whereby a commercial funder or investor (who is not a party to the legal proceedings) finances all or some of the legal costs, in return for an agreed share of the damages, in the event of success. Although the client foregoes a share of his award, there are advantages. Third party funders reject 90% of applications for funding, so acceptance is indication that the claim is a strong one. Without funding the client might not be able to bring the case at all, so to give up some of the winnings is a small price to pay. Where a company secures funding, it often releases resources for investment in options other than a risky law case. For it is this risk which is the unknown expense. If a case does fail, then a third party funder receives nothing and loses the investment, possibly having to pay costs. The average winning case would probably recover 80% of damages. Reducing these to say 50% for a funded case is not bad, since the risk has been diverted. Again careful costing options would have to consider insurance premiums. These might be Before the Event or After the Event. The new CPR’s have changed the guidelines here; for example, After the Event insurance premiums are no longer a recoverable cost from a losing party. Contingency fees (no win, no fee) are now permitted as a way of paying the legal bill, but these alongside Damage Based Awards are all part of the complex web of calculating the real costs of the litigation.

So clearly calculation of the cost of a court case is complicated and open to many variables. In stark monetary terms a fairly average bill for a run-of-the-mill dispute in the High Court has been calculated at £50,000 as a minimum. But remember the variables and funding options. The best advice is to choose a good law firm and one that is up to speed on all the recent costs legislation and rules since April 2013.   At least these make budgeting compulsory!

Guest post provided by Anne Evans, a legal consultant for Vannin Capital. For more information visit litigationfunding.com.

UK’s economy predicted to rise by 1.2% in 2013

The CBI business group has predicted an increase of 1.2% in 2013 and 2.3% in 2014. This is due to a shift in the economic climate although it is “still early days” according to the CBI lobby group of 240,000 UK businesses which also feels that due to frequent imports from overseas in an attempt to improve growth more attention needs to be place to encourage exports. John Cridland, director-general of the CBI said that the government needs to “get behind talented UK businesses” and help them with encouraging business overseas.

On a positive note, John Cridland said: “The economy has started to gain momentum and confidence is picking up… We need to see a full-blown rebalancing of our economy, with stronger business investment and trade, before we can call a sustainable recovery… We hope that will begin to emerge next year, as the Eurozone starts growing again.”

The recent sunny weather has also helped to boost UK high street sales. A spokesman from Capgemini Consulting, Alex Smith-Bingham responded “The warm weather encouraged shoppers to leave their homes and shop on the High Street to enjoy the sunshine. As a result, bricks-and-mortar retailers saw sales rise.” There are also less empty shops in the UK, in comparison to previous years, due to the increased footfall shown in research conducted by the British Retail Consortium and Springboard, which has risen by 0.8% in July.

Online sales in the UK however have declined by 2% in June-July, which is reported to be the lowest since 2010. There is also some concern as to news that use of payday and Doorstep loans providers has more than tripled in the past 18 months, and many blame inflation and government policy for this.  The general secretary of Unite Union Len McCluskey stated “Low wages and insecure employment are destroying incomes, forcing people to turn to payday lenders… This is a personal debt pile-up that cannot be ignored and certainly ought to correct overblown claims of economic recovery. No recovery can be built on hardship and misery.”

Despite the mixed picture, the UK is officially rising from recession as figures reported by bloc’s GDP showed an increase of 0.3% towards the end of 2013. There is also positive movement in the services, construction, housing and manufacturing sectors. In spite of this, the UK’s economic improvement will still see an increase in imports rather than exports, countering any potential increase in trade contribution if strong enough support is not shown by parliament for UK businesses.