Can the other side’s solicitor refuse to communicate with me as a litigant in person?

[CrazyDiamond]

Hello,

This is my first post, apologies if it’s not in the correct place!

I have a dispute with my neighbour relating to restrictive covenants, and I’m pretty sure I’m in the right (the covenants are clear, and he’s definitely in breach of them)

The trouble is, my neighbours solicitor is refusing to communicate with me. She’s insisting I engage a solicitor of my own and she will only communicate with them.

Is this allowed? I’m assuming the courts will take a dim view of it, but is there any actual guidelines from the Law Society that I can use here?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

[echat11]

Hi CRAZYDIAMOND

I don't think that's the case, in theory she could guide you without compromising her own client,

a couple of links to read:

https://www.barcouncilethics.co.uk/d...lines-lawyers/

https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/st...ct-solicitors/

[des8]

The problem will be if this dispute reaches court, and you are found to have acted unreasonably and ignored the solicitor's advice to seek legal representation, you could well have to pay their legal costs.

Not saying you will lose but......................

[islandgirl]

I would expect the other side to communicate with me first and then, depending on what they say regarding the case, I would make my decision whether or not to engage a solicitor. I would write and say that! Once I see their side I can make that decision. I don't think that could be classed as unreasonable?

[R0b]

Never seen anyone being penalised for costs because they refused to engage a solicitor in relation to a dispute. There is absolutely no legal obligation to engage one, but of course costs may be awarded if you lose depending on the track the claim is allocated to.

You might want to look at this link: Litigants in person: guidelines for lawyers | The Law Society

The solicitor owes no duty of care but as this is a dispute, they should be acting in a way that upholds the administration of justice (one of the SRA Principles). Under the old SRA rules, there were indicative behaviours that provided examples to show whether or not a solicitor was complying with their duties. At the very least, they don't seem to be acting in the best interests of their client.

I'd be inclined to send a formal complaint to the SRA, point out that you have reason to believe that the solicitor is not acting in accordance with the SRA principles and behaviours. That you have a dispute and they're refusing to engage with you unless you instruct a solicitor and their conduct is no in accordance with ensuring the proper administration of justice. Worth referring to the above link too and point that out that it is expected for lawyers to engage with litigants in person.

Stir up the pot a bit and inform the solicitor you've made a report about them to the SRA due to their failure to engage with you in a genuine dispute and that their conduct is contrary to the SRA Principles and Regulations. Also point out that if the matter comes before a court, you reserve the right to bring their correspondence to the court on the question of costs.

Something may come of it or nothing will and they will continue to ignore you. However, if you intend on commencing legal proceedings then the solicitor is going to have to engage in responding to the letter before action and ultimately file a defence.

In the end, does it really matter to you that they're not engaging? Just plough ahead unless your intention is to simply play ping pong correspondence and go nowhere with it.

[pt2537]

Never seen anyone being penalised for costs because they refused to engage a solicitor in relation to a dispute. There is absolutely no legal obligation to engage one, but of course costs may be awarded if you lose depending on the track the claim is allocated to.

You might want to look at this link: Litigants in person: guidelines for lawyers | The Law Society

The solicitor owes no duty of care but as this is a dispute, they should be acting in a way that upholds the administration of justice (one of the SRA Principles). Under the old SRA rules, there were indicative behaviours that provided examples to show whether or not a solicitor was complying with their duties. At the very least, they don't seem to be acting in the best interests of their client.

I'd be inclined to send a formal complaint to the SRA, point out that you have reason to believe that the solicitor is not acting in accordance with the SRA principles and behaviours. That you have a dispute and they're refusing to engage with you unless you instruct a solicitor and their conduct is no in accordance with ensuring the proper administration of justice. Worth referring to the above link too and point that out that it is expected for lawyers to engage with litigants in person.

Stir up the pot a bit and inform the solicitor you've made a report about them to the SRA due to their failure to engage with you in a genuine dispute and that their conduct is contrary to the SRA Principles and Regulations. Also point out that if the matter comes before a court, you reserve the right to bring their correspondence to the court on the question of costs.

Something may come of it or nothing will and they will continue to ignore you. However, if you intend on commencing legal proceedings then the solicitor is going to have to engage in responding to the letter before action and ultimately file a defence.

In the end, does it really matter to you that they're not engaging? Just plough ahead unless your intention is to simply play ping pong correspondence and go nowhere with it.

I agree !!

[des8]

I didn't mean to suggest that not engaging a solicitor would result in penalties.

Crazydiamond is convinced he is correct (how often do we see that)
The solicitor is "insisting" he engages his own solicitor. Solicitors tend to use strong language and perhaps this is just a strong recommendation that OP needs to obtain legal advice before proceeding.

I obviously don't know, so I was just warning OP to be aware of possible costs consequences, even in the small claims track.
As we don't know what the dispute is about, if it has even reached court let alone which track, it was apposite to warn the OP about possible cost consequences for acting unreasonably. Having ignored advice from the opposition to seek legal advice would not assist in mitigating a claim for costs from that party.

[pt2537]

I didn't mean to suggest that not engaging a solicitor would result in penalties.

Crazydiamond is convinced he is correct (how often do we see that)
The solicitor is "insisting" he engages his own solicitor. Solicitors tend to use strong language and perhaps this is just a strong recommendation that OP needs to obtain legal advice before proceeding.

I obviously don't know, so I was just warning OP to be aware of possible costs consequences, even in the small claims track.
As we don't know what the dispute is about, if it has even reached court let alone which track, it was apposite to warn the OP about possible cost consequences for acting unreasonably. Having ignored advice from the opposition to seek legal advice would not assist in mitigating a claim for costs from that party.

Absolutely right Des, and it is clear that the solicitor is behaving unreasonably in insisting that the OP instructs their own lawyer, it is a fundamental right to represent yourself in your proceeedings, no solicitor can order you to instruct someone, the best they can do is recommend and you can ignore that recommendation. As you say Des the risk is a wasted costs order if you lose.

[emmabrigden]

Hi - any advice much appreciated ...... i just found this thread when I googled "solictor wont communicate"

My son went to a private nursery where he was bullied. Long story he was 3.5, a child who was 6.5 was still in the nursery environment & was physically & verbally abusing / teasing my son. The nursery kept dismissing us even my child got kicked in the leg after they left him in a toilet alone with the older child (after i had requested in writing he be kept away from my son). I also saw him punching my son in the nursery gardens. They also breached our confidentiality & more aggresion to our child & us occured.

Basically I am looking for compensation / our money back - its kind of a consumer issue I guess.

Its just they have ignored every communication - the response to the pre-court action letter was from a solictors & merely said "

We represent The ***** Nursery School and have had sight of your recent correspondence dated 15^th September 2022.

We are instructed to reject your claim. We are instructed to have no further correspondence with you on this matter. Our client will also not correspond with you further on this matter.

So no info on why they reject the claim. So is there any point sending a "without predjudice save as to costs" or just go direct to a court claim?

Thank yOu!

[des8]

Emma Brigden

However could you please start your own thread and repost.
Hijacking an existing thread only causes confusion.

[emmabrigden]

Oooops sorry ... didnt mean to hijack!