Dodgy solicitors

[heisenberg]

Dear all,

I am beginning to question the conduct or ethical behaviour of some solicitors.

I have approached many firms regarding various potential cases and what they seem to do is seek to extrapolate further information before deciding whether or not they are interested. If they are not interested they seem just to revert to a 'sorry, too busy' or a 'sorry, poor prospects' (without saying any more) response.

This does beg the question as to why they asked for the full information before checking they had the resources.

As for finding out why the case is deemed to have poor prospects, in most cases I will never know and I imagine this suits the respective solicitors rather well as I have no recourse in these circumstances.

Any thoughts or input would be appreciated.

[Amethyst]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

To be honest, I'd be more worried if a solicitors firm didn't ask for more information about a case before deciding whether to take it on and whether it had merit. Although I'd have thought they'd give a slightly fuller response than 'poor prospects' or 'too busy'.

What is the case?

[EXC]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Thing is solicitors give advice for a living. If they told all their potential clients why, in their view, their case wouldn't succeed there'd be no point in them being in business.

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

To be honest, I'd be more worried if a solicitors firm didn't ask for more information about a case before deciding whether to take it on and whether it had merit. Although I'd have thought they'd give a slightly fuller response than 'poor prospects' or 'too busy'.

What is the case?

Thanks Amethyst.

I have no issue with solicitors asking for more information before looking at the prospects however they ask for more details when they are allegedly far too busy which rings alarm bells.

I have even reverted back to them asking for fuller reasons as to why they asked for details when they did not have the resources and I get no response. Similarly, I ask for fuller reasons for the case allegedly having poor prospects and that seems to be like drawing blood out of a stone.

I have many potential cases. A lot of them relate to potential discrimination claims. I am no stranger to being discriminated against hence the reason I am slightly concerned in these circumstances.

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Thing is solicitors give advice for a living. If they told all their potential clients why, in their view, their case wouldn't succeed there'd be no point in them being in business.

Some seem to do a better job at this than others though. Some provide a letter of advice setting out where the case is deemed to have no merit. I think legal aid even pays for this service so that the advice can be considered and referred back to when deciding to take the matter to court. After all, just because a solicitor believes that the case has poor prospects does not necessarily mean you will lose as any good solicitor knows there are no guarantees in the world of litigation.

[nemesis45]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Dear all,

I am beginning to question the conduct or ethical behaviour of some solicitors.

I have approached many firms regarding various potential cases and what they seem to do is seek to extrapolate further information before deciding whether or not they are interested. If they are not interested they seem just to revert to a 'sorry, too busy' or a 'sorry, poor prospects' (without saying any more) response.

This does beg the question as to why they asked for the full information before checking they had the resources.

As for finding out why the case is deemed to have poor prospects, in most cases I will never know and I imagine this suits the respective solicitors rather well as I have no recourse in these circumstances.

Any thoughts or input would be appreciated.

It would be very difficult for a solicitor to know what resources would be need to pursue a claim
if they didn't have the full picture, as has been said it would be more worrying if the did not ask.
There is no malpractice in this at all.

nem

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

It would be very difficult for a solicitor to know what resources would be need to pursue a claim
if they didn't have the full picture, as has been said it would be more worrying if the did not ask.
There is no malpractice in this at all.

nem

I agree to an extent. I think they would generally need the same resources for most claims going down the small claims track. After all, legal aid offers no representation and there is only one hearing. So, to this end, I am not convinced they are always behaving as they should. Further, they are solicitors and they know that it is almost impossible to prove they are in fact not actually 'too busy'.

I have also had a recent issue when they did not even ask reasonable questions and made their 'assessment' after being copied into one or two e-mails. I queried this and they just refused to communicate.

[R0b]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Have you spoken to these in person or just via email? If you haven';t already then request an initial advice meeting with them and set out some specific questions you think you might answer - nothing too onerous however as free consultations aren't there to give you everything you need to know. That might help and they should at least be able to give you a short summary as to why no prospects e.g. lack of evidence or whether they think they have the resources to take on your case or it might not be viable for them if its a small claims case.

Alternatively, you could provide us with some brief facts of your problems and we could possibly help out and give some pointers?

[nemesis45]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

I agree to an extent. I think they would generally need the same resources for most claims going down the small claims track. After all, legal aid offers no representation and there is only one hearing. So, to this end, I am not convinced they are always behaving as they should. Further, they are solicitors and they know that it is almost impossible to prove they are in fact not actually 'too busy'.

I have also had a recent issue when they did not even ask reasonable questions and made their 'assessment' after being copied into one or two e-mails. I queried this and they just refused to communicate.

I have to disagree every case is different and with out proper disclosure of details of potential claims
no solicitor would commit to acting for you.

A solicitor or a firm does not have to take any case nor are they obliged to give you free advice on the
chances of a claim succeeding.

You mention pursuing various cases how many have approached local solicitors on?

nem

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Have you spoken to these in person or just via email? If you haven';t already then request an initial advice meeting with them and set out some specific questions you think you might answer - nothing too onerous however as free consultations aren't there to give you everything you need to know. That might help and they should at least be able to give you a short summary as to why no prospects e.g. lack of evidence or whether they think they have the resources to take on your case or it might not be viable for them if its a small claims case.

Alternatively, you could provide us with some brief facts of your problems and we could possibly help out and give some pointers?

Just via e-mail. It seems the legal aid solicitors don't offer any free initial advice meetings.

Thanks for the offer to help out. I'm in the process of putting together a chronology etc. so may post another thread at some point in the future.

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

I have to disagree every case is different and with out proper disclosure of details of potential claims
no solicitor would commit to acting for you.

A solicitor or a firm does not have to take any case nor are they obliged to give you free advice on the
chances of a claim succeeding.

You mention pursuing various cases how many have approached local solicitors on?

nem

I agree every case is different hence they should really ask for some more detail which they fail to do by all accounts.

I have approached about 20 plus firms. One minute they are not busy then they are. Some fail to elaborate on why the claim is deemed to have poor prospects (one in particular did not even bother asking for details). A small minority say they do not have the relevant skills and expertise.

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Another thing I just realised - should requests for assistance with discrimination claims by way of legal aid not go through the Civil Legal Advice line? If so, it is evidential that some of these solicitors have been doing something incorrect (knowingly or unknowingly).

This is what I was told by one firm:

'Since April 2013, all applications for legal aid in discrimination cases must be made through the Legal Aid Agency’s Civil Legal Advice telephone Gateway (0845 3454 345). They will assess your eligibility for free legal advice, and if you qualify, they will either offer you specialist legal advice over the phone, or refer you to a specialist discrimination solicitor.'

I am a little confused...

[nemesis45]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

I agree every case is different hence they should really ask for some more detail which they fail to do by all accounts.

I have approached about 20 plus firms. One minute they are not busy then they are. Some fail to elaborate on why the claim is deemed to have poor prospects (one in particular did not even bother asking for details). A small minority say they do not have the relevant skills and expertise.

Why can't see why you cannot explain your case fully in the first instance?

You say you have contacted 20+ firms and have had the same results from everyone of them?

It does make me wonder if the legal grapevine has you tagged as frequent complainer and after
all is said and done the solicitors are not obliged in any way to take on your multiple complaints/claim.
Also if your claims are against public bodies/authorities they can be prolonged and extremely costly
and may have only a minimal chance of success.

No what you want to hear I know but I 've seen this happen a few times.

nem

[heisenberg]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Why can't see why you cannot explain your case fully in the first instance?

That's what I would like to know.

You say you have contacted 20+ firms and have had the same results from everyone of them?

It does make me wonder if the legal grapevine has you tagged as frequent complainer and after
all is said and done the solicitors are not obliged in any way to take on your multiple complaints/claim.
Also if your claims are against public bodies/authorities they can be prolonged and extremely costly
and may have only a minimal chance of success.

No what you want to hear I know but I 've seen this happen a few times.

nem

I've never approached the majority of these firms before. In any event, are they allowed to cherry-pick clients and cases (whilst being dishonest in refusing to assist)?

[R0b]

Re: Dodgy solicitors

Lets just clear a couple of things up, the solicitors you have contacted are not being dishonest in any way. Just like businesses they can cherry pick who they wish to act and deal with, they are not a public body or authority where they must consider certain circumstances. You cannot force a firm of solicitors into a contract making them take on your case, unless it is a universal one (which of course solicitors do not do this). I am sure if the shoe was on the other foot you wouldn't want to be acting for a person where you are making a total loss out of the claim because you cannot get your costs back or are unlikely to get your full costs and/or there's no prospect of success. A business is there to make money and its as simple as that.

All that being said there are services called pro-bono in which lawyers offer to take on cases free of charge but again, they are free to pick and choose which cases they take on again for the same reasons above. If you want legal aid then if the law says you must make an application via the telephone then that is what you must do. Before solicitors take on your case and start work they will usually conduct background checks and part of this will be advising you of alternative funding which you may be entitled to. So just because they didn't advise you at the offset that you must make an application via telephone for legal aid does not make them dishonest.

You may also wish to consult Citizens Advice bureau where they do offer free advice usually by appointments only.

It seems you have indicated that your case or cases relate to discrimination and so there are probably people on here that have some knowledge on this so it may be worth posting your situation. If not, I think the posts have pretty much covered your concerns and you have now realised that you need to call to apply for legal aid for discrimination