Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2334 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

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.

 

As you are already an existing client then the LO might side with you.

 

However, it has been explained to you several times that the law firm has no duty to accept your instructions or act for you on the new second issue if they don't want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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, 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;

 

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,

 

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

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

 

You mean comprehensible?

 

These things are open to interpretation, I am just giving you my subjective interpretation. You are, of course, entitled to disagree with my interpretation and with me altogether, as seems to be the case.

 

As you are already an existing client then the LO might side with you.

 

However, it has been explained to you several times that the law firm has no duty to accept your instructions or act for you on the new second issue if they don't want to.

 

Yeah, it all comes down to how a "client" is defined. If I did meet the definition then they have a duty to provide me with a proper standard of service (as per the SRA code of conduct), which includes assessing my request for assistance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it all comes down to how a "client" is defined. If I did meet the definition then they have a duty to provide me with a proper standard of service (as per the SRA code of conduct), which includes assessing my request for assistance.

 

No they don't need to spend time assessing your second claim and writing to you with any detailed advice.

 

What they should have done is sent a one line letter to you saying "We are not instructed to act for you in relation to X so therefore cannot offer you advice", or something along those lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, indeed. I am only prepared to waste a limited amount of time and energy.

 

The judicial review will take quite some time and energy ..............

 

You mean comprehensible?

 

Synonyms. So, I meant what I typed.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/comprehendible

 

Unless, of course, you want to argue the toss over that, too?.

 

These things are open to interpretation, I am just giving you my subjective interpretation. You are, of course, entitled to disagree with my interpretation and with me altogether, as seems to be the case.

 

Are you a solicitor trained in public law?

 

Ahem.

How do they get to be a solicitor if they haven't studied public law (as part of a LLB or GDL)?.

What is the extra 'training' in public law you are looking for to make them "a solicitor trained in public law" over and above that SRA requirement?

 

Do you just want to know if someone is a solicitor if they are disagreeing with you?. Doesn't it matter if they are are not so long as they are agreeing with you (which is, at the moment, a moot point, as it appears no-one is!)

 

The judicial review will take quite some time and energy ..............

 

Your iniotial application, if you ever get past 'just talking about it', that is ..... there won't be an actual JR, so the High Court won't have to waste time and energy on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Synonyms. So, I meant what I typed.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/comprehendible

 

Unless, of course, you want to argue the toss over that, too?.

 

Ahem.

How do they get to be a solicitor if they haven't studied public law (as part of a LLB or GDL)?.

What is the extra 'training' in public law you are looking for to make them "a solicitor trained in public law" over and above that SRA requirement?

 

Do you just want to know if someone is a solicitor if they are disagreeing with you?. Doesn't it matter if they are are not so long as they are agreeing with you (which is, at the moment, a moot point, as it appears no-one is!)

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another BBC reference from Monty Python this time.

 

Michael Palin points out to John Cleese that an "argument" is not just the automatic gainsaying of what your opponent has said, you need to have a logically (and presumably knowledgeable) reasoned position from which to counter what your opponent claims.

 

No argument (in that meaning of the word, at least) here then.

 

(PS - sgtbush remembers Ever Decreasing Circles then! What about the fundament bit!)

 

Bloody hell! 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?

 

Sorry - meant to quote this post on my earlier Monty Python reference post!

 

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.

 

Re bit I've put in bold: Who's to say? Some people prefer to be advised they are right rather than wrong. I was always taught a good lawyer tells their client when they are wrong - not what they want to hear.

 

FWIW other posters there have pointed out that OP seems very unfortunate in their choice of legal advisors and other professional over some time. Whether that is right or not, I do not know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

The combination of your previous multiple complaints that were found to be unsubstantiated by employers / regulators was what led me to wonder if your were (argumentative with unreasonable expectations) OR “one of the unluckiest people alive” to have met so many malevolent / erring professionals & their aberrant regulators.

 

It was your responses over the last 8 pages that meant I realised it was unlikely to be the later : no pre-judgment.

 

Even so, I don’t dislike you (I don’t know you) : The only thing about you I know well enough to dislike is your approach to this matter and the way you respond to any post disagreeing with you....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The combination of your previous multiple complaints that were found to be unsubstantiated by employers / regulators was what led me to wonder if your were (argumentative with unreasonable expectations) OR “one of the unluckiest people alive” to have met so many malevolent / erring professionals & their aberrant regulators.

 

It was your responses over the last 8 pages that meant I realised it was unlikely to be the later : no pre-judgment.

 

Even so, I don’t dislike you (I don’t know you) : The only thing about you I know well enough to dislike is your approach to this matter and the way you respond to any post disagreeing with you....

 

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 have recently upheld an appeal in relation to one of his cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 have recently upheld an appeal in relation to one of his cases.

 

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Nope, as I said : the indicator is not the number of matters but instead BOTH that, and your behaviour on this thread that lead me to my conclusion.

 

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.

 

Did you get them upheld? Any of them?.

 

Mind you, that might be an indicator of your ability to compose a credible complaint, rather than just “did it occur or not”?.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are on film quotes:

“Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, the third time ......”

 

Which doesn’t then go on and on to the 8th+ occurrence.....

 

So it's all a numbers game for you?

 

Did you get them upheld? Any of them?.

 

Mind you, that might be an indicator of your ability to compose a credible complaint, rather than just “did it occur or not”?.....

 

I don't see any mileage to be gained by discussing this with you.

 

Nope, as I said : the indicator is not the number of matters but instead BOTH that, and your behaviour on this thread that lead me to my conclusion.

 

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

By not necessarily agreeing to your future predictions about how the SRA may respond to requests for information, dealing 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?

 

Say again?

 

So it's all a numbers game for you?

 

See previous answer (well, answered multiple timed!)

 

I don't see any mileage to be gained by discussing this with you.

 

Yet, if you had succeeded, you’d be crowing about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...