search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
CCR2 Litigation


Right at the front of the pack


Moriarty Law has established itself on the legal collections scene, using the latest in scoring and technology to give the best possible service to creditors, debt purchasers and their customers


Established in 2013, Moriarty Law was set up as one of the first Alternative Business Structures (ABS) and we have well over a 100 years of combined experience of the use of Litigation in Recovery, running one of the largest and most successful DCAs in the UK.


Changing times Over the last decade or more, Litigation has fallen from favour, initially over concerns about the high cost of collecting via this method – sometimes costing way more than a pound to collect a pound! And more recently in reaction to TCF fears, following years of mentioning Litigation as a potential escalation to all customers. We understand, at Moriarty Law, that


Litigation is not a blunt instrument and most certainly should only be used in the right circumstances. We believe that Litigation and the threat


of Litigation can only be used when it is appropriate and proper, and measures have been taken to exclude the vulnerable and unsuitable.


Nevertheless, Litigation remains a highly


effective means of recovery and, in many cases, the only way that some customers will ultimately pay.


Not all Law Firms are the same! The Litigation route was often taken, in the past, before referral to DCAs, taking many customers through a legal process when it may have been more appropriate and cost- effective to send these to a prime DCA, especially as the typical model was – and still is – that the solicitors are paid regardless of outcome. However, not all Law Firms are the


same! Moriarty Law – provided that the customer is passed by their LawScore scorecard – will undertake the risk and cost of Litigation in return for a success-only commission rate. Crucially, this is often after placement to


Prime and Second Placements, as we believe that there are still a significant number of customers whose reason for non- payment is not financial. We will tackle cases where Litigation is not only in keeping


We understand, at Moriarty Law, that Litigation is not a blunt instrument and most certainly should only be used in the right circumstances


with the principles of TCF, but is also the only way that these customers will be encouraged to pay. Our Client Portal gives clients the


opportunity to monitor the activity on their cases.


LawScore – protecting the vulnerable As we already work with several companies that are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, we are ahead in our desire to deal fairly and appropriately with each and every customer. We believe that litigation should only


ever be undertaken with the correct checks and protection of those customers who are vulnerable or in obvious financial difficulties. We are not afraid to reject cases that are


not suitable for litigation. To achieve this, Moriarty Law has taken


several years to develop and build a series of scorecards which we call LawScore. This has been achieved by analysing the outcomes of over 300,000 litigated cases. LawScore looks at multiple Credit Data


Points and allows Moriarty Law to identify and remove customers in obvious financial difficulty and the potentially vulnerable, looking to highlight customers who are


28 www.CCRMagazine.co.uk January 2017


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52