Swift advances plc

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift advances plc

Well the thing I see, Payne is signing on behalf of a firm or company and SGLS are neither

And here is the meaning of "Assistant Solicitor"

http://www.lawcareers.net/Solicitors/LifeAsASolicitor

Life as an associate

Having qualified and been employed by a firm, your title will almost certainly be that of assistant/associate solicitor. This means that you are an employee of the firm, normally working under the supervision of a partner or senior associate, and will work on a fixed salary.


SGLS don't have partners or a senior associate they ARE NOT a firm??




The working life of an associate varies considerably according to the type of firm you are with, the partners supervising you, the areas of work in which you are practising and your own abilities. In general, you will be expected to work hard and take responsibility for your own clients without constant supervision. To find out more about what it might be like, read our profiles of solicitors working at different law firms in different practice areas.



Most NQs work eagerly towards increased seniority in the firm. Associates can become senior associates, then salaried partners and finally full-equity partners (see below). You do not always need to go through all of these steps - it is possible (though unusual) to go straight from associate to equity partner


TINKS X

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

Can anyone tell me what Paynes actual position he is signing as on this form

Matthew William Payne

Solicitor Admitted as a solicitor 15/03/90
Employee at: Swift Group Legal Services Arcadia House, Warley Hill Business Park, The Drive, Great Warley, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 3BE, EnglandTel:01277 359466


Swift Group Legal Services

Tel:01277 359466Email:legal@swift.co.ukSRA ID:487661Type:Not an SRA-regulated law practice

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift advances plc

Matthew William Payne

Solicitor Admitted as a solicitor 15/03/90
Employee at: Swift Group Legal Services Arcadia House, Warley Hill Business Park, The Drive, Great Warley, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 3BE, EnglandTel:01277 359466


Swift Group Legal Services

Tel:01277 359466Email:legal@swift.co.ukSRA ID:487661Type:Not an SRA-regulated law practice

Look what it says AMY, they are not regulated by the SRA as a law firm.

TINKS X

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

Matthew William Payne

Solicitor Admitted as a solicitor 15/03/90
Employee at: Swift Group Legal Services Arcadia House, Warley Hill Business Park, The Drive, Great Warley, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 3BE, EnglandTel:01277 359466


Swift Group Legal Services

Tel:01277 359466Email:legal@swift.co.ukSRA ID:487661Type:Not an SRA-regulated law practice

H Amethyst, Have all this on file...Years ago actually.
1. Swift Group Legal Services are registered with the Law Society as an Organisation not a Law Firm as TINKS has posted.
2. Swift Group is an unrecognised body.(trading name)
3 IMO a trading name can't be an employer of anyone
4. Swift Group Ltd ( they are Caravan Manufacturers based in HULL Yorkshire is the only company that is close to the name Swift Group
5. I have a letter from said Swift Group Ltd confirming that they are NOT linked to SGLS in any way and state that they wish not be mistaken for SGLS nor do they wish to be associated with SGLS in any way
6. Swift Group Legal Services and SGLS were only added to Swifts CCA Licence on 6th Oct 2010, the OFT confirmed those additions are not retrospective..however that away in the wind the FCA wont do much about them using those names before 6th Oct 2010.
7. SGlS and its other name are not recognised by the SRA..nor any other body and there is a list of them who I contacted and all said they ad never eard of SGLS and on what I told them about SGLS they Didn't want to know them.....all this back in and from 2008 onwards.
Sparkie

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

Date: 07/09/2011 Type of action: Fines On 25 July 2011, the FSA fined Swift 1st Limited £630,000 as a result of breaches of Principles 3 (Management and control) and 6 (Customer's interests) of the FSA's Principles for Business and Rules 12.3.1R, 12.4.1R, 12.5.1R, 13.3.1R, 13.4.1R and 13.5.1R of the Mortgages and Home Finance: Conduct of Business Sourcebook ("MCOB") which occurred in the period between 1 June 2007 and 31 July 2009.

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

H Amethyst, Have all this on file...Years ago actually.
1. Swift Group Legal Services are registered with the Law Society as an Organisation not a Law Firm as TINKS has posted.
2. Swift Group is an unrecognised body.(trading name)
3 IMO a trading name can't be an employer of anyone
4. Swift Group Ltd ( they are Caravan Manufacturers based in HULL Yorkshire is the only company that is close to the name Swift Group
5. I have a letter from said Swift Group Ltd confirming that they are NOT linked to SGLS in any way and state that they wish not be mistaken for SGLS nor do they wish to be associated with SGLS in any way
6. Swift Group Legal Services and SGLS were only added to Swifts CCA Licence on 6th Oct 2010, the OFT confirmed those additions are not retrospective..however that away in the wind the FCA wont do much about them using those names before 6th Oct 2010.
7. SGlS and its other name are not recognised by the SRA..nor any other body and there is a list of them who I contacted and all said they ad never eard of SGLS and on what I told them about SGLS they Didn't want to know them.....all this back in and from 2008 onwards.
Sparkie

Yes I know, you(or someone) were asking what Matthew Payne's position was.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

After spending 100's of hrs on SGLS and what they can and can't do, simply put.
1.If Mathew Payne had signed that N244 form as a sole practitioner in his own right under his own practicing certificate, there would be no argument to this whatsoever...But he didn't sign in that capacity


2. If Swift Group Legal Services had been registered with the Law Society as a Law FIRM or a Limited Liability Partnership and he signed in that capaciy as either an employee or a partner, there would have been no argumemt against that either
But again he didn't.


To conduct " In House Activites" you do not need to be regulated by the SRA, for reson carrying out " In House Business activities" is not considered " Reserved Business" activities.


Reserved business activities is OUT of House activities which is getting involved in any kind of litigation


They conned everyone and the Courts up until R/K took over and SGLS stopped even writing to anyone


In house activities is acting and advising the firm or company on its own internal legal obligations.THe only time they can conduct outside activities is representing any employee of the company, should someone issue proceedings against an individual employee
Solicitors code of Conduct Rule 13

[Amethyst]

Re: Swift advances plc

So what did the SRA say about it?

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

So what did the SRA say about it?

Hi again Amethyst,
Never got anything of any real useful feeback off the SRA just veiled inferences of what they could and might do,......... but VERY soon after all the bombarding of the SRA by me, A1 and a few others, plus the N.Ireland Swifties bomabrding the N. Irish Law society..... they stopped using SGLS and RoslingKing took over.
You will find that anyone writing to Swift Group Legal Services get an answer back from RoslingKing.....that is somewaht strange don't you think??? Solicitors having to get other solicitors to answers letters for them
Sparkie

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift advances plc

In my letter back from the SRA they actually stated they had received 15 complaints.....they did nothing.

TINKS X

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

In my letter back from the SRA they actually stated they had received 15 complaints.....they did nothing.

TINKS X

What date was your letter TINKS? I know of 11 complaints that were made to N.Ireland Law Society & and Trading Standards over there
Sparkie

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift advances plc

What date was your letter TINKS? I know of 11 complaints that were made to N.Ireland Law Society & and Trading Standards over there
Sparkie

Will have to dig the letter out, but I know it was sometime in 2011.

TINKS X

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift advances plc

This gives you the initial Guidance to Rule 13....Rule 12 (Framework of practice) allows a solicitor or an REL to practise in-house from an office in England and Wales as the employee of a business which is not a recognised sole practitioner, recognised body or authorised non-SRAfirm, but subject to restrictions. The solicitor or REL may act only for the employer or in the circumstances set out in rule 13.Rule 12 also provides that a solicitor, REL or RFL in an authorised non-SRA firm may do work which falls outside the firm's authorisation, but only if acting for the firm or within 13.02 (Work colleagues), 13.03 (Related bodies) or 13.04 (Pro bono work). The rule, except for 13.04, does not apply to your overseas practice, but you must comply with 15.13 (In-house practice overseas).

In rule 13 if you read it carefully it says that solicitor can only act outside their remit only in certain exceptional circumstances but the backbone of it they can only act for their employer..who are stated to be on their registration with the Law Society as" Swift Group Legal Services" who do not really exist as it was/is an unrecognised body/firm.


Rule 13 keeps repeating and relating to" acting as an in house solicitor fora " non authorised firm "

[Guest]

Re: Swift advances plc

What is the sanction for breaking this rule ?

[mystery1]

Re: Swift advances plc

What is the sanction for breaking this rule ?

What's the sanction for telling lies on a court form is probably more pertinent.

M1