Can a solicitor ignore a request for legal assistance and a complaint?

[BazzaS]

Firstly, that page relates to decisions and their publication.

 

Secondly, if they are challengeable by appeal, and that hasn’t been done that precludes a judicial review in almost all circumstances, and is an absolute bar to granting of legal aid for judicial review.

[Guest]

[Manxman in exile]

Similar conversation on LegalBeables - going in circles a bit, but hasn't yet explored the SRA/FoI/JR what is a "prospective" client route.

[totally_pennyless]

Are we both wrong (and yet again both wrong)?

 

Yes, clearly you are wrong. The SRA is subject to Judicial Review.

 

Similar conversation on LegalBeables - going in circles a bit, but hasn't yet explored the SRA/FoI/JR what is a "prospective" client route.

 

I thought that is exactly what I was doing.

 

I thought I was grumpy at times but some people on here are clearly grumpy as hell.

[cjcregg]

Nobody is saying SRA aren't subject to judicial review.

 

You just can't get legal aid for JRs against SRA.

[totally_pennyless]

On what basis?

 

If they are subject to JR they are a public body/authority.

[Manxman in exile]

I think he's trying to say (quite clearly! )that you can't get legal aid to JR the SRA. Not that the SRA is not subject to JR.

 

 

I do not know whether either or both of these is true (or false!)

[BazzaS]

I think he's trying to say (quite clearly! )that you can't get legal aid to JR the SRA. Not that the SRA is not subject to JR.

 

Quite.

 

It might (in very restricted circumstance!) be possible to get legal aid for a judicial review of an SRA decision, although it will be vanishingly rare.

More and more obstacles to LA funding of JR's has been created, not just in 2013 but in the 2016 amendments, too.

 

Thge OP seems to be conflating:

a) Is the SRA subject to JR with

b) Is it likely there can be LA funding for a JR of an SRA decision, with

c) Is it likely there can be LA funding of a JR of an SRA assessment that a matter falls outside of their remit for a decision!, with

d) Could this OP get LA funding for a a JR of the SRA's assessment that the OP's complaint about the new instruction is a matter that falls outside of their remit for a SRA code of conduct decision!

 

The OP may try to divert attention to any of a-c), where what matters to the OP is d) ; the situation they face.

 

So, the OP, on the matter they have raised : the SRA's hadling of their complaint about the firm's refusal to take new instruction on a new matter , is nowhere near able to get LA funding for a JR, on at least 2 aspects (merits, and process ; the process issue being that they haven't exhausted an appeal option available to them).

 

Similar conversation on LegalBeables - going in circles a bit, but hasn't yet explored the SRA/FoI/JR what is a "prospective" client route.

 

Are they giving the impression they are 'posting for validation, not advice' there too?.

 

 

I thought that is exactly what I was doing.

 

I thought I was grumpy at times but some people on here are clearly grumpy as hell.

 

Why is it 'grumpy' to not only say that you are wrong, but explain why you are wrong, too.

You only perceive it as 'grumpy' because you only want to hear answers that validate your expectations.

[totally_pennyless]

I think he's trying to say (quite clearly! )that you can't get legal aid to JR the SRA. Not that the SRA is not subject to JR.

 

I do not know whether either or both of these is true (or false!)

 

Err... he seems to be suggesting (quite clearly!) that legal aid is not available as the SRA are not a government body and because they are exempt from the FOI Act. This is of course absurd.

 

Quite.

 

It might (in very restricted circumstance!) be possible to get legal aid for a judicial review of an SRA decision, although it will be vanishingly rare.

More and more obstacles to LA funding of JR's has been created, not just in 2013 but in the 2016 amendments, too.

 

Thge OP seems to be conflating:

a) Is the SRA subject to JR with

b) Is it likely there can be LA funding for a JR of an SRA decision, with

c) Is it likely there can be LA funding of a JR of an SRA assessment that a matter falls outside of their remit for a decision!, with

d) Could this OP get LA funding for a a JR of the SRA's assessment that the OP's complaint about the new instruction is a matter that falls outside of their remit for a SRA code of conduct decision!

 

The OP may try to divert attention to any of a-c), where what matters to the OP is d) ; the situation they face.

 

So, the OP, on the matter they have raised : the SRA's hadling of their complaint about the firm's refusal to take new instruction on a new matter , is nowhere near able to get LA funding for a JR, on at least 2 aspects (merits, and process ; the process issue being that they haven't exhausted an appeal option available to them).

 

Are they giving the impression they are 'posting for validation, not advice' there too?.

 

Why is it 'grumpy' to not only say that you are wrong, but explain why you are wrong, too.

You only perceive it as 'grumpy' because you only want to hear answers that validate your expectations.

 

Did someone on this thread accuse me of being argumentative?

 

Are you a solicitor trained in public law?

 

Can you see into the future and see how the SRA are going to respond to my request for information and can you foresee the outcome of any appeal or request for them to review their decision?

 

It is certainly my impression that certain people are hoping I am unsuccessful in any regard here. So much for being a positive contribution to this forum...

[cjcregg]

Err... he seems to be suggesting (quite clearly!) that legal aid is not available as the SRA are not a government body and because they are exempt from the FOI Act. This is of course absurd.

 

Not only won't you get legal aid you won't have any standing to bring a JR against them as you are neither regulated by them or are commercially effected by their decisions. You are a third party.

 

 

Have you actually come across any judicial review case bought by an individual against SRA or in fact any non governmental regulator?

[totally_pennyless]

What on earth are you on about?

 

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/regulatory-blog/dogged-and-obstinate-bacp-prevented-from-proceeding-to-adjudicate-on-a-complaint-already-disposed-of-by-the-ukcp

[Guest]

re cjc post #115

thats what i was getting at, ''regulatory decisions' when they say they can be JR'd. ie a regulatory decision against a sol/firm.

re joe bloggs being unhappy with the sra's decision not to side with them and make a decision against a firm, they wld have to make a complaint to the sra. then if still unhappy, go to the ombudsman re the sra's decision. as per the legit formal process. JR against the sra re that?, no chance.

[totally_pennyless]

Sorry but your grammar isn't the best so I am struggling to understand what you are positing.

[cjcregg]

What on earth are you on about?

 

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/regulatory-blog/dogged-and-obstinate-bacp-prevented-from-proceeding-to-adjudicate-on-a-complaint-already-disposed-of-by-the-ukcp

 

Do you suffer from dyslexia?

 

The claimant in this case was regulated by body he judicially reviewed.

[Guest]

Sorry but your grammar isn't the best so I am struggling to understand what you are positing.

don't apologise.

it's quite clear, no chance of JR

and yes, thats the thing, you are struggling to understand anything.

[totally_pennyless]

Do you suffer from dyslexia?

 

 

The claimant in this case was regulated by body he judicially reviewed.

 

He is still an individual and it's a case brought against a non-government body. That's what you asked for or are you backtracking now?

 

So, you are still suggesting a member of the public cannot challenge a regulator's decision by way of JR?

 

don't apologise.

it's quite clear, no chance of JR

and yes, thats the thing, you are struggling to understand anything.

 

Yes, thanks for the impartial 'advice'.

[cjcregg]

He is still an individual and it's a case brought against a non-government body. That's what you asked for or are you backtracking now?

 

So, you are still suggesting a member of the public cannot challenge a regulator's decision by way of JR?

 

 

 

 

''He'' is actually a she who bought the case not as a ''member of the public'' but as a regulated counselling psychotherapist practitioner against her professional body.

[totally_pennyless]

In that case, she is still an individual (i.e. not an organisation).

 

Whose decisions can be challenged by judicial review?

 

Decisions made by public bodies in a public law capacity may be challenged by judicial review.

 

If a public body is not exercising a public function, for instance where it is acting as an employer, or in a contractual relationship with a supplier, or if it acts negligently, its actions are governed by private, not public law.

 

Increasingly public functions are contracted out to private companies. If a private company is deemed to be exercising a public function, its acts and omissions are governed by public law. For example a private company that runs a prison is deemed to be exercising a public function and so its actions in the running of the prison are governed by public law.

 

Who can bring a judicial review?

 

You have to have an interest in the decision you are challenging to bring a judicial review, or what is called “standing”. That means you have to have sufficient connection to the subject matter of the claim. If the remedies the court can offer might make a practical difference to you, then the test is likely to be met.

[Ganymede]

Aren't you getting ahead of yourself with the whole JR issue?

 

Aren't you still waiting on the LO decision?

[totally_pennyless]

Yes, to a degree.

 

The SRA has already dismissed my complaint regarding the second matter (when the firm just ignored me and my complaint) on the grounds it felt I did not meet the definition of a "client".

 

They may shed some light on how a "client" is defined, in particular a "prospective client".

 

It seems there may be a process or procedure in place to ask them to review their decision though and they may agree they got it wrong in their initial decision.

 

I'd certainly like some clarity if nothing else.

 

I've not complained about the second matter to the LO yet. I have about the first matter.

[Ganymede]

Ah, ok.

 

So purely talking about the second incident (not accepting your instructions or giving you advice on a new matter) have you made a formal complaint to the firm about their lack of response?

 

Why did you skip the LO and go straight to the SRA about the second issue?

[totally_pennyless]

Yep, they ignored the complaint too.

 

I have to wait 8 weeks before I can complaint to the LO.

 

I complained on 11 October 2017 (less than 8 weeks ago).

 

The LO may also argue I was not a client of theirs, and therefore their actions were acceptable, which is another reason I want clarity on that issue.

[BazzaS]

Why did you skip the LO and go straight to the SRA about the second issue?

 

Back on page one of the thread .....

 

You could have (& probably should have!) gone to the Legal Ombudsman, rather than the SRA.

 

The SRA can't investigate "poor service" if it doesn't involve a breach of the SRA's code of conduct, whereas the LO can, and if it finds breaches of the SRA's code of conduct can refer them to the SRA for you ....

Are you now out of time to refer this to the LO?

 

I have referred the initial issues to the Legal Ombudsman.

 

I have to wait 8 weeks for the firm to respond to my most recent complaint before I refer these issues to the Legal Ombudsman (8 weeks has not elapsed yet).

 

I have referred cases to the Legal Ombudsman before and found they are a complete waste of time and government funds.

[totally_pennyless]

Back on page one of the thread .....

 

Yep, thanks.

[BazzaS]

Aren't you getting ahead of yourself with the whole JR issue?

 

Aren't you still waiting on the LO decision?

 

And any appeal against the SRA saying that they can’t consider any breach of their code of conduct for when the OP wasn’t a client.

 

(I doubt any appeal will succeed, but not having appealed ruled out a JR....., the OP would have to appeal and have the appeal rejected first.)

 

Yes, thanks for the impartial 'advice'.

 

Yes, any advice that doesn’t fit with your pre-formed view can’t be:

a) impartial, and

b) has to be ‘advice’ rather than advice (minus the “ ‘ “).

In a similar vein;

 

It is certainly my impression that certain people are hoping I am unsuccessful in any regard here. So much for being a positive contribution to this forum...

 

Ahem. You seem to be confusing:

“I think you will be unsuccessful “ (and an assiciated explanation of why!) with “I hope you will be unsuccessful”.........

 

Don’t forget: any post that fits your pre-formed view must be correct, no matter how poorly framed / unsupported by logical argument.

Any post that contradicts your pre-formed view must be wrong / wishing you ill / argumentative no matter how well phrased and supported by facts / logic. Simples.

 

Yet, who else thinks you are correct?. Clearly you are correct, and the rest of us are dullards,

Sorry but your grammar isn't the best so I am struggling to understand what you are positing.

 

Or the rest of us can’t compose posts properly.

Mind you, dullard that I am I still find Ford’s posts entirely comprehendable.