My troubles with a small law firm

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I'll be taking it up with Civil Legal Advice. I'll be pressing them and the Legal Aid Agency to send me to a firm that has some professionalism. Seems they have got all their 'clients' over a barrel though.

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I should add that they haven't even responded to my formal complaint in full. Where they have responded they have admitted to wrongdoing. I can't take it any further of course because I have nowhere to go.

I can't even take legal action against them for professional negligence as, guess what, there is no legal aid for those types of matters.

[Openlaw15]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

Oh my word! I have just discovered that this organisation is not a regulated law firm that is approved to provide legal services in England and Wales. I therefore have no recourse in raising a complaint with the legal ombudsman.

Bloody hell... It seems this is the best the most vulnerable in our society are given. What a disgrace.

I don't know so much about that - if they're providing 'legal services'...the Ombudsman may have jurisdiction. Have you enquired with the Legal Ombudsman? What I do not understand about you is you're intelligent enough to think of legal situations and out of them you come up with some decent points of law, arguments which to the lay persons may not have been either recognised by them or they may not have had the balls to attempt a remedy in which you do, ie discrimination claims against NHS/ staff. However, you can do all this but, on the downside of your skills/ abilities/ talents, your home-work, to research the companies offering you 'legal services' has not been done, the most basic of tasks. Hmm

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I don't know so much about that - if they're providing 'legal services'...the Ombudsman may have jurisdiction. Have you enquired with the Legal Ombudsman? What I do not understand about you is you're intelligent enough to think of legal situations and out of them you come up with some decent points of law, arguments which to the lay persons may not have been either recognised by them or they may not have had the balls to attempt a remedy in which you do, ie discrimination claims against NHS/ staff. However, you can do all this but, on the downside of your skills/ abilities/ talents, your home-work, to research the companies offering you 'legal services' has not been done, the most basic of tasks. Hmm

Hi Openlaw15,

Hope you are well.

The Legal Ombudsman has sent me a letter confirming there is no way the can look into a complaint about them.

I can't be that good at County Court claims as my Particulars of Claim (PoC) are under heavy attack. The other side has argued that the PoC are defective as I didn't know how much detail was required in the first instance. By the time you correctly pointed this out I think it was a little too late (the claim had been filed). Of course there was not so much as a peep from my 'solicitor' in this respect - another case and point.

If I had somewhere else to go I would certainly have sacked them, so to speak, by now.

For these reasons I am also inclined to settle the matter purely on the basis that there will be no costs application (though my 'solicitor' isn't even pulling his weight on that as he seems to be vanishing off the face of the planet at any given opportunity).

I still wonder, nonetheless, if I am not liable for costs in seeking to amend my claim even at this early stage. Presumably I am as the 'no costs' rule doesn't apply yet.

I was a also a bit naive in terms of knowing the 'no costs' rule only applies when the claim is assigned to the small claims track (this seems a real issue with the way small claims are processed as even though the value of the claim is low you can still get hit with a huge legal bill).

Unfortunately the knowledge I have obtained is a direct result of being sacked and discriminated against in an employment setting. I know near to nothing about the Civil Procedure Rules and even how to settle a claim in a County Court.

[Openlaw15]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

Hi Openlaw15,

Hope you are well.

The Legal Ombudsman has sent me a letter confirming there is no way the can look into a complaint about them.

I can't be that good at County Court claims as my Particulars of Claim (PoC) are under heavy attack. The other side has argued that the PoC are defective as I didn't know how much detail was required in the first instance. By the time you correctly pointed this out I think it was a little to late (the claim had been filed). Of course there was not so much as a peep from my 'solicitor' in this respect - another case and point.

If I had somewhere else to go I would certainly have sacked them, so to speak, by now.

For these reasons I am also inclined to settle the matter purely on the basis that there will be no costs application (though my 'solicitor' isn't even pulling his weight on that as he seems to be vanishing off the face of the planet at any given opportunity).

I still wonder, nonetheless, if I am not liable for costs in seeking to amend my claim even at this early stage. Presumably I am as the 'no costs' rule doesn't apply yet.

I was a also a bit naive in terms of knowing the 'no costs' rule only applies when the claim is assigned to the small claims track (this seems a real issue with the way small claims are processed as even though the value of the claim is low you can still get hit with a huge legal bill).

Unfortunately the knowledge I have obtained is a direct result of being sacked and discriminated against in an employment setting. I know near to nothing about the Civil Procedure Rules and even how to settle a claim in a County Court.

The costs matter is not at all straight forward. It's a discretionary matter for a judge initially. If the opponent makes an application for a costs order it depends on the judge as to whether one is made but they are determined by many things, ie bad conduct, vexatious (no genuine claim), or whether the loser was entirely unsuccessful or whether they were partly successful. In the case of the latter, a costs order may not be made. The judge may also have a discretion to waiver the formality of court rules for litigants in person. If i were you, I would let it go as a cost order of several thousand pounds is simply too much of a risk for you gamble with. Even if you were successful, a pay out may only be a bit more than the opponent's costs order. Is it worth it, you have been given a ticket to escape at this point?

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

The costs matter is not at all straight forward. It's a discretionary matter for a judge initially. If the opponent makes an application for a costs order it depends on the judge as to whether one is made but they are determined by many things, ie bad conduct, vexatious (no genuine claim), or whether the loser was entirely unsuccessful or whether they were partly successful. In the case of the latter, a costs order may not be made. The judge may also have a discretion to waiver the formality of court rules for litigants in person. If i were you, I would let it go as a cost order of several thousand pounds is simply too much of a risk for you gamble with. Even if you were successful, a pay out may only be a bit more than the opponent's costs order. Is it worth it, you have been given a ticket to escape at this point?

Indeed. I think the major factor for consideration was the other's side's complete failure to engage in the pre-action protocol allowing:

1. The matter to be settled there and then and;
2. The exchange of sufficient information in a very fact-sensitive area namely matters of discrimination.

I believe you are right though. I think on weighing everything up this isn't worth it. I think the whole stress of the matter and the risk of costs far outweigh any compensation I may or may not be awarded.

My only worry is that the other side stated that the offer was only valid until 5pm on Friday. This is not the first time they have used such a tactic though. In fact, I think it is the third time. Also, I think allowing me around 20 minutes (presuming I check my e-mail every 10 minutes which I don't) to consider the terms of settlement, seek advice, print the documents, sign and date them, scan them and then e-mail them back is simply ridiculous.

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

However, you can do all this but, on the downside of your skills/ abilities/ talents, your home-work, to research the companies offering you 'legal services' has not been done, the most basic of tasks. Hmm

I have done a little research on the organisation offering 'legal services' ol' chap. Just remember I didn't exactly cherry-pick them and I had certainly no way to anticipate they would be this substandard. It is very much a case of 'take it or leave it'.

I spoke to one of the managers at Civil Legal Advice this morning and even she was in disbelief that I could not ask the Legal Ombudsman to take a look at my concerns.

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have just sent the other side a letter confirming I accept the proposed terms of settlement albeit reluctantly.

I still feel they are not entirely free from any wrongdoing and they have capitalised on their serious and unforgivable mistakes (plural) and my understandable ones being a litigant in person and one with a mental health disability.

[Openlaw15]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have just sent the other side a letter confirming I accept the proposed terms of settlement albeit reluctantly.

I still feel they are not entirely free from any wrongdoing and they have capitalised on their serious and unforgivable mistakes (plural) and my understandable ones being a litigant in person and one with a mental health disability.

The threat of costs order though in your situation, with a relatively low claim....as you did, was probably the best outcome. It's not fair, in your view, but law is really not what's fair but who has the resources, in any country with a legal system there's like no difference. Lawyers are paid to get rid of problems, even though it's exploitative to litigants in person. If it were a family law issue or property law issue it's different. If it were a tribunal issue, again these are more priority, but in the case of a tribunal if there is a genuine claim it's unlikely to attract a costs' order.

[Openlaw15]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have just sent the other side a letter confirming I accept the proposed terms of settlement albeit reluctantly.

I still feel they are not entirely free from any wrongdoing and they have capitalised on their serious and unforgivable mistakes (plural) and my understandable ones being a litigant in person and one with a mental health disability.

You massively under-valued your claim too!!!

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

The threat of costs order though in your situation, with a relatively low claim....as you did, was probably the best outcome. It's not fair, in your view, but law is really not what's fair but who has the resources, in any country with a legal system there's like no difference. Lawyers are paid to get rid of problems, even though it's exploitative to litigants in person. If it were a family law issue or property law issue it's different. If it were a tribunal issue, again these are more priority, but in the case of a tribunal if there is a genuine claim it's unlikely to attract a costs' order.

Indeed. I think I have been saying all along that it is a chequebook justice system. Obviously those with deep pockets aren't going to worry about stressful claims in the small claims court in any event.

In my opinion, the few pennies the government sets aside for legal aid services is a waste of money and merely an act of tokenism. It's a bit like the old saying that if a job isn't done properly it is not worth doing at all. I think that applies here.

Employment Tribunal (ET) fees also make a mockery of the justice system. Knowing what I know about ETs there is no way in a million years I would fork out circa £1500 with a view that my case will be dealt with appropriately. I know that that is simply unrealistic.

- - - Updated - - -

You massively under-valued your claim too!!!

Possibly but the last thing I wanted was the damned thing to head down the fast track. I was also pre-empting that it was unlikely I would be successful in all heads of claim.

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have just discovered reputable private firm that specialises purely in discrimination claims. They offer no-win no-fee agreements and there is no upfront fee to assess the merits. I think I will consider using their services in future because at least I know the following:

1. They are highly professional.
2. They are regulated.
3. They have a huge incentive to succeed.

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

You're all good people on this forum by that way - an absolute godsend (though I am not religious). :stars:

[wales01man]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have a respect for what you are trying to achieve but have to say you are in this case beating your head on a brickwall you are so right with your view of the Justice system IMO its just a jolly boys club for the privaledged us mere mortals will always have to fight hard .
I cannot offer any legal advice but I would support your actions if advice is there is a chance of winning
Take a rest for a short while and destress

[heisenberg]

Re: My troubles with a small law firm

I have a respect for what you are trying to achieve but have to say you are in this case beating your head on a brickwall you are so right with your view of the Justice system IMO its just a jolly boys club for the privaledged us mere mortals will always have to fight hard .
I cannot offer any legal advice but I would support your actions if advice is there is a chance of winning
Take a rest for a short while and destress

Indeed.

Thanks wales01man. Sincerely appreciated.