Yes, he’s been successful. That doesn’t make him “plain unlucky”

 

Have you been succesful in any of your claims / complaints so far?

 

It suggests he is careful what cases he takes on, rather than pursuing hopeless cases, whereas ......

 

Probably the key determinant : Is he taking on your (2nd / ‘new’) matter for you?

Why would he take on cases on my behalf?

Say again?

If you going to accuse my behaviour on this thread as being unreasonable then please go ahead and substantiate that? I can only presume, as before, you turn your nose up at people who raise various issues and then don't boast about their successes.

Why would he take on cases on my behalf?

Well you could ask his opinion ...... but would you trust if if he said “those other posters on CAG are right, not worth applying for a JR and you wouldn’t get legal aid for it”.

With 100+ successes (depending on how many losses, if any, went with that): he may well be good at assessing which cases are worth pursuing.

If you going to accuse my behaviour on this thread as being unreasonable then please go ahead and substantiate that?

Rationale already stated a number of times.

If you can’t follow it, I’m not sure restating it, yet again, adds anything.

Well you could ask his opinion ...... but would you trust if if he said “those other posters on CAG are right, not worth applying for a JR and you wouldn’t get legal aid for it”.

With 100+ successes (depending on how many losses, if any, went with that): he may well be good at assessing which cases are worth pursuing.

Firstly, I don't think it's courteous e-mailing people out of the blue with requests for legal assistance.

Secondly, I suspect he knows little about public law as he is a disability activist.

Rationale already stated a number of times.

If you can’t follow it, I’m not sure restating it, yet again, adds anything.

How about you sum it up as I'm afraid I'm struggling to see it in all the various attacks you've sent my way.

Firstly, I don't think it's courteous e-mailing people out of the blue with requests for legal assistance.

 

Secondly, I suspect he knows little [my bold] about public law as [my bold]he is a disability activist.

Does that make sense? Why would he know little about public law simply because he is a disability activist? Does such a disability prevent one from knowing about public law?

Firstly, I don't think it's courteous e-mailing people out of the blue with requests for legal assistance.

I see. So when you said you were discussing it with him, you weren’t actually discussing it with him, and hence you’d be Emailing him out of the blue.......

How about you sum it up as I'm afraid I'm struggling to see it in all the various attacks you've sent my way.

Nope. Enough time wasted already.

You put in the effort, or find someone able to explain it to you.....

If you find someone not as emotionally invested in it as you are, perhaps they won’t just see it as “attacks” and might be able to look at the logical basis.

Good luck!

I fear the circles are spiralling evermore inwards and posters are more likely to get pulled under (or inside - yeeuuch!)

Does that make sense? Why would he know little about public law simply because he is a disability activist? Does such a disability prevent one from knowing about public law?

Well, he is not a solicitor so he's hardly in a position to advise on such matters and I think it would be unfair to press him on it.

Nope. Enough time wasted already.

 

You put in the effort, or find someone able to explain it to you.....

If you find someone not as emotionally invested in it as you are, perhaps they won’t just see it as “attacks” and might be able to look at the logical basis.

Good luck!

Seems a cop out to me.

I'm not that emotionally invested.

I am all for reasonable argument but you do seem to be approaching this matter with a considerable degree of bias. I think it's fair to say you have even admitted to that.

I fear the circles are spiralling evermore inwards and posters are more likely to get pulled under (or inside - yeeuuch!)

Is it an argument or just contradiction?

Seems a cop out to me.

 

I'm not that emotionally invested.

 

I am all for reasonable argument but you do seem to be approaching this matter with a considerable degree of bias. I think it's fair to say you have even admitted to that.

Of course.

5 minutes or the full half hour?.

I mean we’ve had you latching on to poster’s grammar, and we moved on to dictionary definitions.

Yet, it seems more contradiction than reasoning ... at least on your side.

So, let’s agree (purely if it helps prevent further posts).

You are right.

Always.

Especially when you contradict yourself.

In fact, you are so right you don’t need any advice, just people telling you how right you are.

That has happened now ..... so is it time to close the thread?

It seems you certainly like to bicker.

Yes, and you are never wrong too and never treat people unfairly? It must be a gift to the righteous...

It's certainly not what my definition of an argument is!

But my wife might argue about that! Sorry - I mean disagree...

I've sussed it out!.

The OP's just got off on the wrong floor!.

Right room, wrong floor. "12a but one floor upstairs" is "sycophantic agreement / pointless 'pseudo-validation"....... that is where they need to be ........

Well, he is not a solicitor so he's hardly in a position to advise on such matters and I think it would be unfair to press him on it.

But your clear implication was that he knew little about public law because he was a disability activist. Whether he is a lawyer or not, I do not see what bearing his status as a disability activist has on his knowledge of public law? Does being a disability activist prevent him from having in depth knowledge of public law? Is that really what you are saying? Think about it. Isn't it a bit discriminatory in itself?

If he's brought about 100 disability claims (you don't mention success rate) he must have a wealth of useful knowledge for you. It may be "unfair" to ask his views on this, but why don't you? If he's told you about these 100 claims he might be more than willing to share some wisdom with you. Why wouldn't he? He can always qualify it by saying "I'm not a qualified lawyer, but..."

Might be better than asking random people on the interweb...

(Apologies to the non-random knowledgeable people on this interweb)

Somebody looking like a 45 year younger John Cleese tells me that my "argument" pre-payment has run out. They refuse to argue any further until I pay more. So I'm off to bed now. Will look in tomorrow to see how close to the centre of the whirlpool this thread has got.

I certainly didn't mean to be unfair to him. I may get back to him if I feel he can offer a reasonable opinion.

He didn't mention his success rate. I know he has been hit by a costs order to the tune of 7k so it's clearly not been all plain sailing. I also know discrimination cases are very hard to prove as I've fought many myself. I've had some success and some cases where the Judge wouldn't attach any weight to my evidence/submissions etc. purely because he knew I had brought other cases (a bit like someone on this thread).

Somebody looking like a 45 year younger John Cleese tells me that my "argument" pre-payment has run out. They refuse to argue any further until I pay more. So I'm off to bed now. Will look in tomorrow to see how close to the centre of the whirlpool this thread has got.

Here is the response I received from the SRA:

"I can confirm that the SRA does not hold the information that you have requested.

Having checked with the relevant business areas I can confirm that we use the natural meaning of those words, as set out in a dictionary.

We do not have any document which elaborates on that definition."

Which is what I said on around page two of the thread.

Ever decreasing circles.....

If you had followed my advice their would be no need for pages of waffle

Admin can you lock tho thread, all questions have been answered

Which is what I said on around page two of the thread.

 

Ever decreasing circles.....

 

If you had followed my advice their would be no need for pages of waffle

 

Admin can you lock tho thread, all questions have been answered

Seems we still have a few grumpy types around.

Horse and water spring to mind

Horse and water spring to mind

sgtbush and ill-mannered springs to mind.