A well respected, award winning social enterprise
Volunteer run - Government and charity funded
We help 50,000 people a year through divorce

01202 805020

Lines open: Monday to Friday 9am-5pm
Call for FREE expert advice & service info

Do you need help sorting out a fair financial settlement?

Our consultant service offers expert advice and support to help you reach agreement on a fair financial settlement quickly, and for less than a quarter of the cost of using a traditional high street solicitor.


WHEN IS CHANGE DUE

  • .Charles
  • .Charles's Avatar
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
19 Mar 10 #192851 by .Charles
Reply from .Charles
I agree Elle - there are rotten apples in the law as in all professions. I have never said otherwise.

Unfortunately Arnie has cast all solicitors in the same light which is disingenuous and also unhelpful on a public forum. There are many thousands of solicitors in the UK and it smacks of arrogance to give them the same label based on limited experience.

I guess, as with all posts, people are free to read or skip whichever they choose to so I will not harp on any longer.

Charles

  • Elle
  • Elle's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
19 Mar 10 #192858 by Elle
Reply from Elle
Charles_prev.fleagal wrote:

I agree Elle - there are rotten apples in the law as in all professions. I have never said otherwise.


I am one of the misfortunates to have engaged in my hour (years) of need with scumbag sols....I am however fortunate in that I have met with decent sols (albeit too late for me in divorce and CI) and "met" with the good sols here and in person.

E

  • Arnie Saccnuson
  • Arnie Saccnuson's Avatar Posted by
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
19 Mar 10 #192859 by Arnie Saccnuson
Reply from Arnie Saccnuson
"it smacks of arrogance"

You know nothing about me, you do not know what my level of experience with the legal profession is and yet you pontificate with authority. Pot calling the kettle black.

I have successfully sued one fukwit solicitor and another firm have spent a lot of time and money trying to shut me up and haven't succeeded as yet. I have a sister who is high ranking in your circles and I have been employing solicitors for over thirty years now. Your posts in this thread are just postures and of little substance, rather than dealing with the issues your pontificate about irrelevance.

What arrogant defenders of the status quo like you forget is that you are the SERVANTS of the people not the masters,and that mindset is exactly where the corruption begins

  • Elle
  • Elle's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
19 Mar 10 #192863 by Elle
Reply from Elle
Amazingly I can see both sides of the coin here!!

Arnie, I have lived similar to you and I agree with most that you say.

Charles, I respect your input here, but do question your profession on account of my experiences and what I have witnessed by your "learned" colleagues.

Life aint easy for many...the laws to protect are good, its how they are applied that makes a difference...and for many the application is not in the clients best interests.

E

  • musicmad
  • musicmad's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
22 Mar 10 #193475 by musicmad
Reply from musicmad

the laws to protect are good, its how they are applied that makes a difference


Yes. If you look at state literature you will see many references to "treat both parties equally" which is of course in reality, savagely ignored...

Lets take finances. In english law, (sorry Elle!), there is no concept of a Clean Break where children are involved and one party can be subject to paying the other party until the end of time. The level of maintenance is set and then never adjusted until the poor payer then goes back through the same corrupt system to get it lowered - at which point it can actually be increased! As soon as the open sore of maintenance is awarded - (and unless you are young and pretty equivalent in earnings it always will be) - one party instantly looses out against the other (if the payer falls on hard times, there being no way under english law for money to flow in the opposite direction of course - assets being split, stay split). This situation is so crushing for many people, that they fight and fight to try and avoid. This is where the bad apples kick in and start rubbing their hands... after all, if they ask for the world for their client, it just prolongs the fight and the agony... If your partner has instructed one, you will be dragged into their world whether you want to or not.

Lets take children. Who can see the children is completely decided by the wife, regardless of circumstance. Unless the man has been a house husband for years the wife gets to dictate when and how long the husband is allowed to have "access" to his children. The term "access" sums it up brilliantly - they are under lock and key by the wife and the husband comes and goes under her command. This is supported whole heartedly by law. If a man is denied access to his child, where can he go legally? The state run organisation being so outrageously gender biased - the usual "seeing the children every other weekend" is just not good enough. Never seeing the children is Absolute unmitigated cruelty. The fact is that the savage removal of fathers from children's lives has a devastating impact on children is ignored; the abduction of children being the most powerful weapon in the divorce war arsenal which allows the legal profession the ability to extend the fight and profit immensely. Elle - your situation is very unusual but shows very clearly that the whole hearted transfer of "parental rights" is very much financially fueled...

Corrupt - very much so. However, even with the system as it is I don't think that every solicitor is bad. I think that the real blame lies in court. This is precisely why there is a state blanket ban on seeing court outcomes...

When a judge can order maintenance to a childless wife in her thirties (I believe) of the order of £125k when she earnt £85k because of the destruction of her career (from a two year marriage) it shows clearly that the judge ignored his remit and added his personal venom against an unfaithful husband when he had no right to do so. Thus opening the idea of a component of compensation to the receiver of maintenance (even under a "no fault" divorce) and also showing that the judge can punish the individual as he sees fit.

When a judge can turn around to a man and imprison him for parking a car outside his child's school just so that he can see her it shows the level of downright evil being paid out by the courts. When a judge can turn around and tell a man that he has a reasonable relationship with his child because he is allowed to send her a christmas card and a birthday card this is straight out of Orwell's 1984.

Until the decisions of judges are made public, held to review (and importantly the judge is responsible if shown to submit an openly biased decision) we will be forever drowning in our own sea of misery and they will be profiting hansomely from the openly immoral blackmail of ordinary people...

If you could go to court and be treated fairly, the judge awarding the best, fairest and most equitable split around finances and child care - all of the arguement surrounding good/bad/indifferent solicitors would dissappear.

  • Elle
  • Elle's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
22 Mar 10 #193547 by Elle
Reply from Elle
Hear hear MM!

It astounds me that when it is obvious to those of a fair mindset, the legal system is manipulated by control freaks, parents willing to abuse their children for their own selfish purposes and money grabbing scumbags!

E

  • Arnie Saccnuson
  • Arnie Saccnuson's Avatar Posted by
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
22 Mar 10 #193691 by Arnie Saccnuson
Reply from Arnie Saccnuson
Some food for thought:

This thread has been running for five months, in that time how many of the legal profession have commented with any positive suggestions for change?

How many of the legal profession on the entire Wiki site have contributed any suggestions for change and what have they done to make it happen?

How many of the legal profession have used the wiki forums as a springboard for monetary gain(by stealth)

How many solicitors in the UK have taken a PRO ACTIVE step to stop the corruption that they all admit exists in a "small" minority of legal firms.

Does anybody in the UK believe that there is equality in treatment in law and that the same rules apply to the man in the street as apply to the legal class?

Answer from my perspective: Good people post or email Arnie with encouragement and support, the legal class generally ridicule, ignore or smear Arnie

Draw your own conclusions on how committed to change they really are.

My daughter was born in 1992 and by that stage the marriage was finished, her mother had made quite clear that if ever I left I would never see my children again and I knew the law would support her, I held on until 2003 and then she got her wish, aided and abetted by a corrupt legal firm and ridiculous system that musicmad has articulated much better than I can.

I personally dont believe that change can come from within, especially when the overwhelming majority of the legal and political class cant even face up to the fact there is a major problem in the process,and for the MAJORITY of the legal class its a gravy chain, so all you'll get are mock words of sympathy and remorse for the "odd failure" but nothing better than a quality system called Resolution that has no complaint procedure and the only qualification being an annual subscription, and not to forget the legal classes trump card "we are all doing a difficult job in difficult circumstances" just as they said in 1992 or was that 1902.

CHANGE is long overdue and YOU the legal class are major contributors to broken Britain and it is about time you faced up to that and made CHANGE happen!!!!

Moderators: wikivorce teamrubytuesdaydukeyhadenoughnowTetsSheziLinda SheridanForsetiMitchumWhiteRoseLostboy67WYSPECIALBubblegum11