Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About totally_pennyless

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. 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."
  2. 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).
  3. 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...
  4. 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. 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.
  5. 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. 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.
  6. Why would he take on cases on my behalf? 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.
  7. So it's all a numbers game for you? I don't see any mileage to be gained by discussing this with you. By not necessarily agreeing to your future predictions about how the SRA may respond to requests for information, deal with a review request and, subsequently, how a qualified and experienced solicitor may consider the merits of a Judicial Review if I feel compelled to explore that?
  8. And you know enough about all my past issues, in all your infinite wisdom, to come to the conclusion that I my concerns were not substantiated? You are also of course aware of the fact that just because something isn't proven in terms of judicial or quasi-judicial processes it doesn't automatically follow that the allegation never occurred as alleged.
  9. With respect to you, you know very little about those matters. So, to propose that because I've raised other issues therefore the problem must lie with me is arguably offensive, whether intended to be that way or not. Further to my last past, I was discussing issues with a disabled person who has brought around 100 disability discrimination claims in a County Court. According to your reasoning, he can't have been successful in the last few claims because that would make him "one of the unluckiest people alive". However, he has been successful in his recent claims and the Supreme Court hav
  10. You have really taken a disliking to me haven't you? You can't really expect me to take your comments too seriously when you overtly admitted to trying to discredit or undermine my concerns simply because I have raised issues in regards to other organisations. It is plain that, right from the outset, you weren't going to approach and comment on the matter at hand fairly.
  • Create New...