QUOTE(RaniMuthu @ Jan 25 2023, 11:03 PM)
Dear Milla,
As you rightly pointed out, APC was a scam from the start. Investors had believed a scam and invested thousands of dollars/ringgit, and you now expect the lawyers to do their work on contingency basis. It is a worldwide scam and it was only after we brought our legal work to the media, we now have other litigants worldwide approaching us to set up a committee to trace the assets, worldwide. Thus, it is not a simple litigation process.
Good afternoon Madam Rani,
I thought I'd reply to the brief message you left for me. And thank you for doing so. Please excuse my late reply, I have been out stationed.
Lets address your point...
There are numerous litigations companies, legal organizations and law firms that operate Contingent Law in cases that cross jurisdictions. Multiple jurisdictions in fact. And that is because whether a case is in one country or more than one country has completely no bearing on if a law firm is prepared to offer a contingent fee (no win no fee) basis of payment. My old law firm teamed up on many occasions with a specialist in cross boarder contingent law, Legal Alliance Asia. Here in this thread, people are using an even larger firm called Asia Claim in exactly this APC case on a no win no fee basis. Which clearly demonstrates your point is invalid. It can happen, does happen and will continue to.
In any case, APC was not global. That was a farce. APC had operations only in Malaysia and Singapore.
The bottom line for a law firm is the same as any business. How much money is in it for the firm? If the firm is confident there is money to be claimed and they can agree a percentage of that money that far exceeds the fee they would charge up front, they will not wait to be asked, they will offer a contingent fee. Its more money. Its business common sense.
If a law firm is not confident there is money to be had, they will not. There could be various reasons for this...
1) they are not confident of getting a favorable ruling.
2) as in this case, the presumption that a company is smart enough to defraud such a large sum, but foolish enough to invest in assets or leave as liquid cash in a company bank is non sensible.
You are more than within your rights to hope that. But I promise you Rani, lawyers are much more pragmatic with there business calculations.
3) fee generation law. A slang term used by lawyers whom are not confident they can achieve the outcome their clients are hoping for but will take the case because they are being paid to. Win or loose.
Mentioning no law firms here but if there are two hundred people in a group (for example) paying 1000 Ringgit per year to the lawyer (for example). Then the law firm achieves billing capability of 200 x 1000 = 200,000 RM per year for a couple of appearances by one lawyer, some small disbursements fees and the secretaries time to email the group here and there.
There is one case against APC in Singapore for five years. Still no money has been paid to the complainants. If my example I give above which is an APC litigation group known to me, the lawyer will collect ONE MILLION RINGGIT FOR NOT GETTING THEIR CLEINTS A SINGLE RINGGIT.
WHAT GREAT WORK FOR THE FIRM..NOT SO GREAT FOR THE VICTIMS.
And why will it almost certainly work out that way if you go via the standard court procedure? Because as mentioned, the lawyers job is ONLY to get the ruling. He is not a debt recovery agent.
The liquidators have limited powers of inspection. Once the monies have been misappropriated from the business like a directors loan for example, or a false joint venture agreement (which is a common way to drain money). The liquidator has the power to search and cease from the suspicious parties only. Once the monies hit the third party accounts that are not proven people of interest in a fraudulent case, their powers of inspection cease. I know that. You think your lawyers don't? You think the APC masterminds don't? Of course they do.
People that have been fraudulently stolen from should consider a specialist in the field of dealing with white collar criminals. Not general law firms that may have done a divorce or a property conveyance just before. Then pay them only to conduct a shallow investigation to determine if they would offer NO WIN NO FEE BILLING. Let their decision to offer the contingent billing scheme be the real indication of their confidence.
As mentioned, we used Legal Alliance Asia. Others here use Asia Claim. There are others.
Finally, this is not meant to rain on anyone's parade. But just to keep matters and expectations real. And also of course to use my many years of experience to help hard working people that may have lost their life savings to these kinds of companies.