Im a long time lurker on this and the other CLA threads.
The contract scam is fabulous and as mooted by others karma coming back to her.
I have seen Claudia on that TV programme Posh Pawn so was surpirsed to see her meeting with CLA. However, when you look deeper into Claudia and her businesses and finances it tells a different story. Without doubt a lackadaisical approach to her accounting and tax affairs.
My guess is the terms of the contract ie. the 25% management fee was sold to CLA using small figures, for example 'Leanne, for every £100 you earn, you still get to keep £75 and we will manage you and open doors globally', Leanne would only be focused on the £25 which is basically the cost of a Deliveroo/Uber McD's . What i believe she has failed to do is to scale it up the costs in her head, as the management fee in her head appears minimal, but the reality is when scaled up its colossal. This will also mean she has to keep a record of income or give the management company full transparency of ALL her earnings and bank accounts. Also remember she watches Dragons Den, so the 20-25% share/fee/ROI seems normal to her as she would have seen the Dragons making those offers and in business owners accepting
On contracts my solicitor writes for my clients, there is always a cooling off clause of 21 days, although there doesnt have to be one, if you can demonstrate the contract has been explained in detail or the offer of independant legal advice has been refused. For me after the 21 days have elapsed the only way out is a break clause which is a percentage of the project total cost (i build houses etc,) i wish it was 25% or even half of that, but its nowhere near.
The filming the signing was a lovely touch and no doubt Leanne would have thought she was becoming a big star (i know shes already famous ha-ha) and being filmed like recording artists, footballers etc when they sign on with a company.
I predicted many tantrums and tears etc, yes there is a contract in place, however there are no tangible assets to go after to force payment. Bankrupty (as the debt is over £5000) isnt an option as she has nothing and lives under the radar when it comes to benefits, job, income etc. I do not think that an attachment of earnings can be made on her benefits to settle part of the debt . I do not know about the social or welfare systems so i was just guessing on that last sentence.
