I have received some further information that would be of interest to former Rockingham clients. Gordon Pullan has sent this to me to make available to all subscribers to the Armhelp website. I have not edited any of the content, and have reproduced his communication.
Ian H Ward
As you will know from David’s email sent out on Wednesday last week, he is currently enjoying a well earned break in Italy and he has left me in charge.
You will also know from David’s recent email that the FSCS is now reconsidering its decision in respect of its earlier rejection of our test case’s application for a compensation award against Rockingham. This appears to be very good news, but just to be certain David asked the FSCS if the expected outcome for our test case sets a precedent for all Rockingham claims. David shared with you all the text of his email to Jenna on the subject.
Jenna’s initial response was that our test case might have specific circumstances which might not apply to other claimants, but that she would refer to colleagues in the claims department for a clearer response. David and I reviewed what additional evidence we had submitted in support of our test case, but we could not see anything which might be considered to be case specific.
Nevertheless, David and I considered that it would be best to wait to see what emerged from the FSCS before inundating them with claims. On Friday we received a further email from our contact in the claims department of the FSCS, and his email is set out in full below:
“FSCS is currently in the process of reassessing the claims previously considered against Rockingham in relation to ARM investments. Therefore it is not necessary for existing claimants to resubmit their claims. We expect this initial review to take a couple of months, although if the claim is considered to be eligible for compensation it will take a little more time to finalise an offer of compensation to the claimant.
Until that review is completed, we do not yet know what proportion of claims will now be eligible for compensation (and recognising many claimants will have been fully compensated following parallel claims made against Catalyst). At that time we will consider how best to update affected investors.
In the meantime, if anyone wishes to register a claim against Rockingham who has not yet completed an FSCS application form, they can request an application form by contacting Freephone 0800 678 1100 or 020 7741 4100. Once the form has been returned, FSCS will assess the claim.”
I believe this is further good news, and seems to reinforce our view that we probably do now have a precedent. The key points from this latest email are:
- The FSCS is reassessing claims previously submitted.Hence any investors who have already made a claim against Rockingham will not have to resubmit their claim, even if your claim was previously rejected. The FSCS suggests it will take a couple of months to undertake this process, but for now you can sit back and wait for some (hopefully) good news.
- Once the above initial review is completed by the FSCS then they will update affected investors.I believe this statement applies to both those who have already made claims and also to investors who have not yet claimed against Rockingham, but that the FSCS considers might be eligible to claim. No doubt this will be a complex and lengthy process, but we will endeavour to keep close to the FSCS to monitor progress.
- Investors who have already made a Catalyst claim and have been fully compensated will not be included in this process. If you have already received full compensation on the FSCS basis of calculation (i.e. net of coupons received) then you will not be eligible for any further compensation.
- If you believe you still have uncompensated losses but have not yet registered a claim against Rockingham then you should contact the FSCS to obtain a claim form.The contact numbers for the FSCS are 0800 678 1100 or 020 7741 4100.
- Once you have registered your claim with the FSCS and received your claim form then it should be completed and submitted.I do not consider there is any immediate urgency to do this, because the FSCS will take a few months to sort themselves out before looking at new claims. Also, the number of claims is likely to be much lower than for Catalyst and hence there should not be a processing bottleneck.
The obvious issue which springs to mind is “What grounds do I submit as a basis for my Rockingham claim?” I should point out that our test case was an advised client of Rockingham and he relied on this advice. His case is that Rockingham negligently failed to exercise due care in providing advice. As you will appreciate, neither David nor I are qualified or authorised to give advice, but we can give you our opinion. In our opinion Rockingham had a duty of care to all its clients and acted negligently in failing disclose important information to investors. Attached to this email is (I hope – technology permitting!) a redacted copy of the “additional information” we presented to the FSCS on behalf of our test case. Some of this evidence might apply to your circumstances and might help you draft your claim. If you have already submitted a claim then I cannot see any need for you to make any additional submission, unless the FSCS asks you to do so.
If you have any queries then we will do our best to help. Please bear in mind that David is away for the next couple of weeks and hence he will not be able to answer your queries until he returns home. If you send any queries to me at email@example.com then I will do my best to answer them, but I am also away from home for a number of days over the next couple of weeks. If you can wait, then it might be worth seeing if any further information emerges from the FSCS in the near future.
Supporting Evidence Document