SSB Enter Administration – What Does This Mean For Its Clients?

Former claims firm, SSB Group Limited, who traded as SSB Law Limited, entered administration on 4^th January 2024, more than six weeks after it gave notice of closure.

SBB took out loans worth £30m in 2021-2022, after taking on files from the collapse of Pure Legal Group. In total, the amount owed to creditors rose from £2.46 million to more than £48 million within a year.

No win no fee cavity wall claims

A large amount of these loans were taken out to fund cavity wall claims. More specifically clients who had cavity wall insulation installed incorrectly or when they did not require it, leading to dampness in the home.

Most of these clients instructed SSB on the basis of a ‘no win, no fee’ agreement, or otherwise widely known as a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA). These agreements mean that, if the client is not successful in winning its claim, then they will have none of their own legal fees to pay. It is understood that this was a key factor which encouraged many clients to make these claims, that is, they believed there was no risk if they did not win.

As a result of SSB’s administration, it is understood that many of these claims have now failed, and clients have been served with Adverse Costs Orders (“AVO”). These are the costs arising throughout legal proceedings when a claim fails, including legal fees, disbursements, and expenses, and are usually made against an unsuccessful claimant by the defendant. When making an AVO, the Judge will consider who has ‘won’ the proceedings, the general rule being that the loser is liable to pay the winner their costs of proceedings.

Insurance

In usual circumstances, litigation funding should be taken out by the parties to litigation, to cover these situations. After the Event Insurance is insurance that aims to protect a party where an AVO is made against them in legal proceedings. This insurance can be taken out by claimants or defendants but is usually taken out by claimants. It is a product that provides protection against the financial exposure of having to pay an opponent’s legal costs (and in some cases disbursements) if the insured is unsuccessful in their legal proceedings.

SSB advised its clients that it had taken out ATE on behalf of them. It was its responsibility to notify the insurers of any updates in the cases. It is understood that the insurers are now refusing to pay out to the clients who have been served with AVO’s which raises the question as to whether the insurers were notified of proceedings correctly,

As expected, this has come as a surprise to many clients. They are now faced with paying a substantial amount of costs, or judgment will be entered into against them. SSB’s clients have joined forces, creating various WhatsApp groups, where people in similar positions are voicing their concerns and trying to help each other out. However, it seems that from the comments in these groups, many people are struggling to determine what they need to do, to try and prevent paying these adverse cost orders.

In addition, some clients have now discovered that their cavity wall insulation was not installed incorrectly, and so they do not have any claim. Without being able to comment on each case without knowing the facts, if any client is incorrectly advised on the merits of their claim, it could give rise to a potential professional negligence claim against their solicitors.