This just proves to me that if anyone dares to try and complain about a solicitor ,then they all "close ranks" .
Ultimatly ,there is no "closed shop" like the establishment . They are all in it together , the working class have no hope of justice in a judical system that is there to protect the ruling classes . The ruling classes have the police ,army and even the media on their side . What do we have ?
It must , of course ,be remembered that at the head of our legal system is Mrs Elizibeth Windsor , herself descended from a dynasty that unlawfully invaded this island in 1066 (threfore she should be refered to as "Duchess of Normandy) . It follows that the legal system , has no more authority in this island than Nazi Germany did in occupied France .
Now there's a thought !!!!
PS Should I change my username to "The leveller " or "The digger " ??
Sealion how did I know you would find this blummin post?
For heavens sakes boys this is getting silly. Making blanket comments about a profession is simply out of order.
I mean, I dont post that I hate all accountants and everyone of them is corrupt and in cahoots with the Revenue just cos mine cant't get my tax liability down to what I want to pay, and nor would I dream of doing.
Solicitors and barristers are heavily regulated. I accept that some get some things wrong and others may inflate the results that they can get for you, but if you want to have this debate can we have some thought out, analytical, logical posts rather than blanket comments?
In terms of the profession closing ranks, the legal complaints commissioner is not a lawyer and is deliberately taken from outside the profession to prevent allegations of it being a closed shop.
And as for the working class having no hope of justice...sealion from one working class girl within the profession (and there are plenty of us) that is certainly not my experience.
Having just seen the other thread on this topic, I would now like to reply in a more serious vein.
I have no problem with with people having a moan about bad solicitors, or bad experiences with solicitors - in fact, I did start a thread asking for comments about solicitors in an attempt firstly to have a reasoned debate, and secondly so that we could take on board the things you did not like and try to erradicate them in our practice.
However, posting general comments that all solicitors are corrupt, above the law or such like may actually have the effect of doing some damage to Wiki in the long run.
Lawyers come to places like Wiki with a genuine desire to help - if they did not have that desire they would not give up their free time to read and post, and I can tell you that it does take some considerable time.
However, you will find that they watch a forum for some time to make sure it is a suitable place to become involved with, as no lawyer can become involved in a "radical" site.
By posting in the manner that some people do, on some forums, you may well be turning some lawyers off wiki. And I think that is a bad thing - you may think that I would say that, being a lawyer, but from what I have seen there are a lot of people out there that benefit from a bit of qualified input into the forum, and overall that can only be to the benefit of places like wiki.
What I am saying in short is please think before you post, and please think about the effects of your post. Debate is welcomed here, but sweeping ill thought out statements can only damage the place.
My view on this is that the issue is less about corrupt solicitors, rather about useless or inefficient ones.
If a sol is truely corrupt then I do think you can get action taken against them. If they are just pretty rubbish at their job then it is much harder to address.
The typical scenario is where you sign up with a solicitor and after some months you feel that thay are:
- ineffective, inefficient
- doing and billing for un-necessary work
- charging expert rates for admin tasks
- failing to put real effort into achieving an early out of court negotiated settlement
- pushing you relentlessly down an expensive court route
The options for complaining seem totally ineffective.
You first complain to the firm itself / the partner. It's rather obvious what their response is likely to be. Note that it is different from a typical consumer organisation like Tesco / Amazon / M&S etc because these companies have a brand image and reputation to protect. Solicitors do not really operate in a free market and so they do not have much incentive to offer an excellent service. They each have their local town catchment carved out and business will roll in however good/bad they are at their job.
The more formal complaint routes don't seem to work except for serious malpractice.
I don't have the stats but my guess is this:
- the number of peeps dissatisfied with their sol is huge
- the number of upheld complaints is miniscule
I guess my point is that Tesco's will listen to your complaints and act on them because they want you to shop there next week, and the week after.
A solicitor processing your divorce wont't lose too much sleep worrying about whether you like the service enough to use them again - its easier just to make a nice few bob out of you and then move on to the next case.
By the way, for clarity, some solicitors and legal firms are excellent, but the system at present also allows the useless ones to flourish - whereas in other areas of business useless companies go bust.
What I would really like to know from the profession, and it is difficult to be detailed, is the following.
In the divorce, I was honest and I told my Barrister, an absolutely gorgeous intelligent sophisticated HONEST barrister, that in 1987 I had slightly broken the council right to buy rules. Immediately the final hearing was suspended, I was reported to the CIS or whatever, and for three months I was investigated as to whether I was a criminal. In that very same case there is overwhelming evidence that my wife’s solicitor completely fabricated his entire on-line CV for in excess of two years and there is a real possibility that he was complicit in obtaining a financial agreement in a COURT OF BLOODY LAW under false premise.
THATS FAIR??????? AN oversight??????? what planet are you lot from???
On my blog there is a phone conversation, where the belief of 48 years in BRITISH JUSTICE LAW AND Order just evaporates when I realize that their behaviour is apparently acceptable and the norm.
And they are my CHILDREN you B@$T@&D$
Thank you moderators but I still think I should be able to say bastards, because they are all complicit, they do NOTHING to help me or my family. I still havent given up, they lost interest as soon as they had sucked me dry
I think DownbutnotOut makes a valid point. The issue is very often one of competence, and the difficulty is that the average client does not have the means of knowing who the good ones are. That is why I always recommend that a client should hire a lawyer who is a member of Resolution or an accredited collaborative lawyer. This is not an absolute guarantee of competence, but short of personal recommendation it is the best safeguard you have.
But to be fair, the same applies to other trades ; I am currently considering installing a boiler, and there are many firms advertising their services, but how do I know who will do the job properly ?
Another problem is the very nature of family law. There are many spouses who
will use ancillary relief, or children, as weapons wherewith to punish the other for actual or supposed marital misconduct. It does not matter how reasonable you or your solicitor are, if your x2b is hell bent on revenge, no amount of sweet reasonableness will work. In that case the only thing you can do is go down the Court route.
Then again, you have the solicitor who simply likes the cut and thrust of an argument, and family law offers ample opportunity to such a lawyer to feed his passion. That shouldn't happen, of course ; the client's interest must always be paramount ; but human nature being what it is, such people still exist.
And last but not least, I can think of some firms who are basically in the business to make profits, the larger the better. They are totally ruthless, and anyone who works for them has to be similarly ruthless. Anyone who is not will not last ten minutes. There aren't many of them ( thank goodness ) but they exist and the client has no means of knowing who they are.
But there are many reasons which cause delays and frustrations and are wholly beyond the control of solicitors.
I don't want to elaborate on these without taking over the whole site ; but in summary :
1. The present state of the law relating to ancillary relief is confused, unclear,
and in URGENT need of simplification.
2. Although there are sanctions against unreasonable behaviour, there seems to me as an outsider to be a marked reluctance by judges to use them.
3. If a client is dilatory, disorganised, slow to respond to communications, the process will inevitably be slowed down.
4. It is sometimes difficult for a client to tell the difference between, on the one hand, a solicitor who is being plain bolshy, and one who is only behaving in the way (s)he is because that's what the client wants.
5. I really do wish that we could find some form of basic, no frills, binding arbitration which can be used where the issues involved are not complicated.
But much of this is outside the control of solicitors and until the Government gets a handle on it there are going to be lots of dissatisfied clients.
I think it depends in life when something doesnt go our way, we have to scream and shout and lump everybody 'as one'.
Reading most of these postings there have been a fair amount of 'discrepancies' upon finalising divorces. Failing to finalise one thing or another. I recently paid a large amount for a one off meeting with a reputable firm, re my divorce. He advised me, scribbled notes on a piece of paper, which he gave me there and then, then sent the bill a week later together with s**t load of files of how they work, what they expect from me, company figures, company directors, etc.etc.etc...BUT not one thing in print about ME or the divorce, best of luck or ANYTHING else. My attitude? I wont go back there again! But hey.. the advise I got from this site from Amanda and co was worth a lot more. AND it was free.
So well said Amanda, We shouldnt lump everyone the same. You have my thanks.
But i am guilty of a similar thing, when I say EVERY tramp that sleeps with a man knowing he is married, should have her eyes poked out and burns in the eternal flames with every other bitch too. See i'm doing it now.