Loading...
-
I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.
If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .
I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.
You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here. -
Re: Save UK Justice
If they go ahead pt don't you agree that more & more people will end up in prison which are full up now any way as they will without doubt be found guilty even if they are innocent.Originally posted by pt2537 View Post
I know I moan about pratically everything................but I think I can moan about this.
Is that what is meant to happen we will have a nation of people with ciminal records.
I'm glad my life is over the hill and don't have to be around to be witness to a good country filled with mostly good people ending up like this govt is directing it to ........the Rubbish Dumps.
SparkieComment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
I'm not liking item No 4 on that list which states "your legal representative will be rewarded financially for agreeing with a case against you". Does this mean there will be incentives for lawyers to get their clients to plead Guilty to avoid trial costs?Originally posted by pt2537 View PostComment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
of course, they will push more work through and make more money, so they wont give a toss if your not guilty, they will want a guilty pleaOriginally posted by PlanB View PostI work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.
If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .
I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.
You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
Complete and utter madness. Why has this not been plastered over the front pages of the press? Maybe it has during my enforced break!Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
It wasn't.Originally posted by labman View Post
The press has entirely been convinced by the persistent repetition of the familiar lies about what the Legal Aid system costs and how Roland Freisler ^W^W Chris Grayling will save money.Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
As the petition has reached over 60,000 signatures, the Ministry of Truth has made an official response:
As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response: We have one of the most expensive legal aid systems in the world and spend more than £1billion of taxpayer’s money on criminal legal aid each year. We must ensure we get the very best value for every penny spent. We are tackling areas which are eroding public confidence – such as wealthy defendants who can afford to pay their own costs routinely receiving legal aid; prisoners being given legal aid for issues better dealt with by via the prisoner complaints system; a small amount of high cost cases swallowing up many millions in pubic money; and those who do not have a strong connection to this country qualifying for legal aid. Under the proposals for reform of the criminal legal aid scheme that we are consulting on until 4 June, quality assured duty solicitors and lawyers would still be available – just as they are now. All providers would be required to satisfy specified quality standards when they submit their tenders and subsequently through contractual requirements. They would therefore all be capable and competent of delivering criminal legal aid services to any client. The consultation proposals aim to deliver a more credible and efficient system which will save £220million from the legal aid bill by 2018/19. The consultation is open until 4 June and the department welcomes submissions on its proposals via the following link: https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digit...ming-legal-aidComment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
It is - of course - rather disingenuous. Let us look at the twaddle a bit more closely:
To tell lies convincingly, it is always helpful to start by telling the truth so that one's fibs may slip through unnoticed.We have one of the most expensive legal aid systems in the world and spend more than £1 billion of taxpayer’s money on criminal legal aid each year. We must ensure we get the very best value for every penny spent.
No. They are "tackling areas" that have been the subject of misleading and erroneous reports in the Tory press for several years. If public confidence has been eroded, that was because of misreporting rather than the operation of the Criminal Legal Aid system.We are tackling areas which are eroding public confidence
That is - of course - utter nonsense.such as wealthy defendants who can afford to pay their own costs routinely receiving legal aid;
Even prisoners have a right to justice!prisoners being given legal aid for issues better dealt with by via the prisoner complaints system;
What is meant there, however, may be one or two prisoners using a Judicial Review rather than an internal complaint. Judicial Reviews are not funded by the Criminal Legal Aid system.
If that is what they cost, then that is what they cost. Justice should never be sold like bags of coffee.a small amount of high cost cases swallowing up many millions in pubic money;
By their resort to foolish xenophobia, one may be reminded of the celebrated aphorism wherein Dr Johnson declared that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.and those who do not have a strong connection to this country qualifying for legal aid.
However, as it is an inviolable right for anyone accused of a crime to receive a fair trial and to understand the trial, any accused person has the right to legal representation (and, where necessary, an interpreter) whether or not they "have a strong connection to this country". Or does Herr Grayling suppose that only UK citizens should receive justice in UK criminal trials?
The rest of the official response was just flim-flam.Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
Here's some more useful quotes: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...lawyers+strike
Oops - is that the sound of clanging hypocrisy now that people think it might be to their own detriment instead of someone elses?Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
No, Eloise, it was nothing of the sort.Originally posted by Eloise01 View Post
If you were more interested in advancing the discussion than desperately trying to score points, you would also have commented that I did not disagree with either of your posts concerning the Legal Aid system and that I thanked you for having made those remarks.
Finally, I would be most grateful if you could indicate with what crime you believe I will be charged, if the proposed changes might be to my own detriment.Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
I made no comment as to which posts I was referring to, just that there were some other useful quotes and obviously not everyone was as keen to prevent these changes as indicated here when they thought that the issue was about pay and not justice. If you feel that my comments relate to things you may have said, then it wasn't me so indicating...Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
If you say so.Originally posted by Eloise01 View Post
Perhaps, then, you might care to indicate which of the contributors to the other thread (link) could suffer detriment from the proposed changes to the Criminal Legal Aid system and why they would need the services of a good, criminal barrister?Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
I'm not a psychic, but I'm going to hazard a guess that the two definitions from the Oxford English Dictionary may be able to be used together in a meaningful sentence after June 4th:Originally posted by CleverClogs View Post
1. Definition of consultation
noun
[mass noun] the action or process of formally consulting or discussing
2. Definition of ignore
verb
[with object] refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally:Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
Pt: - have to-day e-mail M.P. for his comments on this subject, also took liberty (hope you do not mind) to quote comment you stated initially, regarding the issue. Item 1.Comment
-
Re: Save UK Justice
Excellent idea Mike. I too have just emailed my Labour MP to ask if there is anything he can do directly or indirectly to halt this.
Thanks for sharing the idea.Comment
Tweet
Comment