Saturday, July 07, 2007

Legal Profession attempts fiddle against new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as wider review required on injustice in Scotland

The Lockerbie trial again makes the headlines, with Dr Hans Köchler, the United Nations observer to the Trial which took place in the Netherlands under a bizarre set up of Scottish Law, calling for an international inquiry into the handling of the case.

Of course, the handling of the case - such as it was, is consistent with Scottish Justice, or should I say Scottish Injustice .. and 'institutions' such as the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which itself has played the major part recently in 'recommending' an appeal into the Lockerbie Trial, leave a lot to be desired in terms of impartiality.

Over the past week, I have had a few emails from solicitors who have identified themselves to ensure their authority in their words. Only a few times over the course of the past year and a half of this blog has that happened, but the past week has certainly broken that record.

One fairly senior solicitor in the profession, willing enough to speak to me but unwilling to speak in public due to what happens to those in the profession who do, said to me "Don't you think it is so telling of Scots Law that our own people who are caught up in injustice have to rely on the faint prospect of an inquiry into a case relating to a terrorist incident on Scottish soil ? ... why can't we do something for our own people without having to be prodded by international agencies ?"

He's right of course. Scotland seems to excel at mistreating it's own people for greed & power when it comes to problems with the Justice system .. and those at the top, seem to go along with it for what motive ? deals to stay in power ? deals to keep the creaky justice system afloat & avoid legal challenges which might strike most of it down ? a cheap house on the side or a scandal swept under the carpet ?

All of those from inside the legal profession contacting me over my well aired sentiments on the leadership of the Law Society of Scotland seem to agree wholeheartedly too .. although I can only assume Douglas Mill's supporters have held their tongues for now, perhaps concocting yet another deviously despicable plan to get back at me later on.

Certainly folks, it seems democracy isn't allowed in the legal profession - something we shouldn't be surprised about, and while they have all these fancy public debates on 'the law', plotting the course of the law, how it should be steered, who should be influenced to do what, who should make a few threatening letters & statements in the press against change, etc ...the legal profession always has it's own interests at heart.

Just the other day, leaks of the formation process of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission reached my eyes, where it seems further discussions have been made over what the Commission should and shouldn't do and who should be appointed and who should not .. and what should be declared ...

Oh yes of course, our new SNP Executive will tackle that one, after all, I did, in a way, as you know, support 'change for the better' - if it was of course, change for the better ... but is it turning out to be change for the better ?

Well, would you believe, the solicitors who are going to sit on the Commission are not to be asked to declare their full regulatory history before being appointed. .. so in effect, we can have some of the worst members of the legal profession sitting on Committees of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, or advising it, while having unsuitable regulatory histories and no one will ever know about it !.

There would be a problem of course, with any declaration of a regulatory history by a solicitor or the Law Society of Scotland. That problem is - they tend to be liars when it comes to telling how badly they have performed in the past, so could anything be believed from a member of Scotland's legal profession so willing to sit on the new 'independent' Scottish Legal Complaints Commission ?

Perhaps an even worse problem has emerged in the formation process of the new SLCC, with the possibility of the infamous insurers to the Law Society of Scotland's Master Insurance Policy, Marsh UK and the many insurance firms who underwrite the infamously corrupt "Professional Indemnity Insurance Scheme of Scotland's legal profession, are vying for the business to provide services to the new independent legal complaints body. Sources within the Executive say this could be on the cards - although it was hoped no one would notice ...

Such are the problems with the new Commission, even before it's got off the ground, I have asked the Justice Secretary to confirm or deny these matters reported to me .. and time will tell on the response from the Scottish Executive on how honest or independent the SLCC will be ... giving an indication of who is interfering, and who is being allowed to interfere with our supposed remedy to the failure of the Law Society of Scotland for decades to regulate complaints from the public against a massively corrupt membership.

I have been running my own tests on the intentions of the Executive to deal with matters of injustice in the field of regulation of the professions, and have to report a rather blunt set of responses, indicating that injustice may well be here to stay for now.

In one instance, John Swinney's Finance Department incredibly choosing to let Westminster make an order there be no inquiry into regulation of accountants for now, and in another instance, when a member of the public who appeared at last year's Justice 2 Committee with evidence of memos written by the Chief Executive of the Law Society himself, interfering in negligence cases against crooked lawyers, has been effectively told to get stuffed and that now there will be no support for any claim against the Scottish Executive - quite a turn around from what was said at the Justice 2 Committee hearings and the confrontation with Chief Executive Douglas Mill over his own written words.

So, will Granny swear by the SNP ? ... because we know from Douglas Mill's own bizarre claims before the Justice 2 Committee last year, that Granny couldn't swear by the Law Society ... We will just have to wait & find out ... I will be publishing this critical material in later articles for you to consider for yourselves.

Getting back to Lockerbie, being but a symptom of the injustice in Scotland felt by many of our own citizens, Dr Hans Köchler and the United Nations might do well to listen to the trials of the Scottish public themselves too, our experiences and victimisation at the hands of our very own legal system, where politicians have stood by and allowed disgraceful & corrupt conduct to become routine, by those who 'serve' the legal system or use it as a business model.

Perhaps there has to be a much wider international inquiry into the fiefdom of Scottish Justice as a whole, not just on Lockerbie ... and the world must find out if our country's justice system can be trusted with anything ? certainly the public of Scotland deserve better.

UN Lockerbie trial observer urges independent inquiry into the case MICHAEL HOWIE HOME AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (

THE United Nations observer appointed to oversee the Lockerbie trial has called on Alex Salmond, the First Minister, to agree to demands for an international inquiry into the handling of the case.

Dr Hans Köchler has written to Mr Salmond and Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, calling for experts from countries not involved in the case to investigate the way the investigation was conducted by UK and US authorities.

His letter follows the decision by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), announced last week, to grant a fresh appeal into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.

In a summary of its 800-page report, released following a three-year review into the case, the SCCRC said it had found six grounds which indicated that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

These concentrated on the evidence of Tony Gauci, the Maltese shopkeeper who said a man resembling Megrahi had bought clothes from his shop which were found to have been wrapped around the bomb that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988, killing 270 people.

The SCCRC also said it rejected nearly 50 other grounds presented by Megrahi's defence team.

It also dismissed claims that Megrahi's original defence team was incompetent and rejected an attack on the credibility of a key witness, forensic expert Allen Feraday. The SCCRC also rejected claims evidence was invented to lead a trail to Libya.

"The commission has found no basis for concluding that evidence in the case was fabricated by the police, the Crown, forensic scientists or any other representatives of official bodies or government agencies," it said.

Such exoneration of the authorities was described as "rather strange" by Dr Köchler, who concluded in an earlier report that the original Camp Zeist trial was "not fair and was not conducted in an objective manner".

In his letter, Dr Köchler called for "a full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case and its handling by the Scottish judiciary as well as the British and US political and intelligence establishments".

He also called for the SCCRC's full report to be made public.

His letter states: "In order to avoid bias, such an investigation will require the participation of additional legal experts, to be appointed by the United Nations Organisation, from countries that are not involved in the Lockerbie dispute.

"Those politicians in the United Kingdom and the United States who have proclaimed an international 'war on terror' will not be credible in their strategy if they prevent a full investigation into the causes of the explosion of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. All those responsible, without exception, must be brought to justice."

His call for an independent inquiry was last night backed by the Reverend John Mosey, whose daughter was killed in the disaster, a member of the support group UK Families Flight 103.

"There has to be some sort of independent inquiry. We have been calling for that for some time. I realise it wouldn't necessarily be a public inquiry at all times because it would have to deal with the dissemination of highly-sensitive intelligence.

"An international panel of experts would guarantee a certain open-mindedness. The problem with an inquiry in Scotland, composed of Scottish legal establishment figures, is who can we trust to chair it? Who is not establishment? This proposal has some mileage in it."

A Scottish Executive spokeswoman said: "Our focus remains fixed on ensuring that justice is done in the public interest. " HEARING WILL BE NEXT YEAR

AN appeal over the conviction of Megrahi will not be heard until well into 2008.

There has been speculation that a hearing could be staged as early as this year, but such a timescale will be impossible to meet for the Libyan's defence team.

Following the move to grant a fresh appeal, Tony Kelly, Megrahi's lawyer, said he had "a blank sheet" upon which to write a new set of grounds to try to have the conviction quashed.

Press Release from Dr. Hans Köchler, the United Nations Observer on the Lockerbie Case follows :

Lockerbie case: Call for independent investigation

United Nations observer Dr. Hans Köchler sends letters to Scottish and British officials

Dr. Hans Köchler, the international observer appointed by the United Nations to the Lockerbie trial in the Netherlands, today reiterated his call for a full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case, a measure which he had initially suggested in April 2002.

In letters sent to the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, the British Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, and the Minister for Africa, Asia and the UN, Mark Malloch Brown, Dr. Köchler transmitted his statement on last week's decision of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), in which he emphasized, inter alia, that, in order to avoid bias, an investigation into the handling of the Lockerbie case by the Scottish and British authorities will require the participation of additional legal experts, to be appointed by the United Nations Organization, from countries other than the UK, US and Libya, i.e. from countries that were not involved in the Lockerbie dispute.

In the statement issued today, the UN observer also expressed his full support for the proposal made by Tam Dalyell, former MP and Father of the House of Commons, to end all doubt with a public inquiry.

In his earlier comprehensive reports on the Lockerbie trial (issued on 3 February 2001) and appeal (issued on 26 March 2002) Dr. Köchler had suspected a miscarriage of justice - a conclusion now also reached by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ("The Commission is of the view ... that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice": Dr Graham Forbes, Chairman of the Commission, according to an SCCRC News Release of 28 June 2007).


Al said...

Insightfully, eloquently and brilliantly argued as ever, Peter.

More on the never-ending injustices being perpetrated by the dirty hands of those who "serve" our Scottish “JUSTICE” system, and the appalling inaction by our new ruling SNP Scottish Executive (Messrs Salmond, MacAskill et al) to those many injustices (miscarriages of “justice”), can be found over here:

R.McDonald said...

No surprise on the new complaints outwit but I'm glad to see you are taking issue with the SNP on things.

They aren't doing terribly well on things so far and I see Nicola Sturgeon's Health Department are still pouring money into keeping the leukaemia stats from Dumfries & Galloway from public gaze.

How long this honeymoon period will last before Scotland cries foul over the Nats ?

Anonymous said...

very pissed off to hear this about the SNP.I voted for Salmond in the hope we were going to get change and now I see its more of the same or worse.JUst take a look at the SCotsman today and see what we have as MSPs now.They wont give a shit for us only interested in building property portfolios and doing for their own.POlitics as usual and Scotland gets shafted again

Anonymous said...

Looks like one for the newspapers Peter.Time to get the public up in arms again ?

Anonymous said...

After reading a piece of yours awhile back at election time I thought the sno would do like this.

Maybe the lawyers have told them if they don't tow the line they will be out for the count.
If so it would be best to get it out in the open so we know who were are really dealing with.

Anonymous said...

bye bye justice for Scotland !

Big Wullie said...

No surprise that Hans finds fault with our judicial system.
I have complained about the conduct of SCCRC since 2003 when they refused to refer my very own case which included also complaints against Taylor QC.
Thanks Peter for linking my blog.
Please find enclosed proof of complaints against Taylor since 1982 at:

Anonymous said...

Quite a hard article against the SNP Peter but can you stop them stuffing their back pockets with brown envelopes from the lawyers ? I doubt it.

I can swear here right ? I see you allow it !

Roll on another fucking election to put this lot out on their arse.They are no better than wee jokes mob and up to the bad old tricks I see from your writing.

Anonymous said...

Yes Sir, looks like they are definitely trying to stuff the complaints commission so get yourself on it and fight back against them !

Anonymous said...

Swinney letting Westminster order him about must be just to suit the occasion otherwise we would have been subject to a barrage of "Don't tell us what to do"

Anonymous said...

Brilliant !! So happy to hear this !!

I hope all you jocks who voted in these bastards get whats coming to you as they line their pockets at your expense.

Don't come crawling back to the Union, we can do fine without you and keep your crooked lawyers up there too.

whatsinaname said...

Who but Cherbi would have thought to ask the lawyers what they had been up to before planting them on this complaints body ?
You must feel a bit let down by Alex Salmomd after finding this out.

Anonymous said...

Law Society of Scotland MkII brought to you by the SNP :) Now lets get ready to fiddle !

The Faculty of Desperados said...

I hope Jennifer Vitch gets all het up in the Scotsman again over you pointing this one out Peter. Its so entertaining !

foggy said...

A hot topic for a Blog Mr Cherbi, hope you get some much needed reforms on lawyers because they are all crooks at the bottom.

Anonymous said...

Seem like all I can say is to agree with everyone else.

Well done for bringing this out Peter Cherbi and keep those nats in the spotlight on stuff like this or they will slip it by unnoticed.

pax romana / somewhere out at sea said...

Peter - out of interest what did the SNP say about your campaign before they got in power ? It seems to be they are full of lawyers themselves so one can hardly expect them to do anything against their crooked chums, don't you agree ?

Anonymous said...

Give MacAskill a chance to respond and put this right before everyone has a go at the SNP over injustice !

Anonymous said...

Peter Cherbi

The Executive are making a thorough mess of forming the new Commission and your friends at the Law Society never stop interfering in the process so much that officials dont know if they are working for a new panel or the old regime !

Email on its way to you.

Anonymous said...

offer to buy him a pint - you might get a faster response !

Anonymous said...

"Who but Cherbi would have thought to ask the lawyers what they had been up to before planting them on this complaints body ?"

All the more reason the lawyers hate him for bringing this kind of information out.

Anonymous said...

Why should we have to tell clients or anyone about the malcontents who complain over frivolous issues neve rmind having to declare it to sit on YOUR slcc Mr Cherbi

Al said...

Anonymous said...
Give MacAskill a chance to respond and put this right before everyone has a go at the SNP over injustice !

SNP supporter per chance ... or McDonald Road calling?!

I think you'll find that MacAskill has had ample opportunity to "respond" and "put this right":

Do pass on my fondest, won't you!?

Anonymous said...

It just goes to show the SNP have no idea how to set up a supposed 'independent' complaints body for lawyers.How then can we expect them to set up an independent inquiry on Lockerbie.

taking bets said...

"anonymous" Give MacAskill a chance to respond and put this right before everyone has a go at the SNP over injustice

How long do yuo want to give him to reply ? 10 years ? He knows all about crooked lawyers and he hates anyone who argues with his legal colleagues.

Who says he doesn't know about this already and was just hoping no one would notice or bring it up ?

Get a grip you SNP supporters. If your party can't do something for Scotlands OWN PEOPLE before having to be told by the bloody UN to do something for a foreigner convicted of a bombing, then your SNP isn't up to much now is it !

Peter Cherbi said...

To all who are commenting, I wish I could unhook comment moderation to allow continual debate, but for the fact that some posts are far too strong against the legal profession to be published, in the interests of those making them. There are also the occasional threats I receive, it seems mostly from lawyers with nothing to do in the mornings after their partner meetings.

#anonymous @5.31am

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice knows this issue full well, as does the First Minister and John Swinney.

I expected more from the Executive on how the workings of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission would be formed, but from what I read in an email from someone I know to be working at the Scottish Executive itself, there is chaos, and the team have had to turn many times to the Law Society, which seems to account for small but significant changes in the make up of the SLCC.

# Anonymous @ 7.21pm

You said "Law Society of Scotland MkII brought to you by the SNP"

It certainly look slike a good attempt from the legal profession to do just that.

Taking Bets @ 5.15pm

Glad you understood my linking the two issues in this article.

The UN have made many comments and taken a hard stand on the Lockerbie Trial and it's outcome. Since the SCCRC recommended the appeal, there have been further press releases calling for an independent inquiry.

The UN must realise that Lockerbie and the injustice it is criticising from that case, occurs many times in the Scottish Justice system to ordinary Scots like you and me. One cannot be looked at without the other and I agree it's about time we did something for our own people. The UN should recognise that and call for a review and help for all those affected by injustice in Scotland, not just the headline cases, because there are many people who suffer justice denied at the hands of Scotland's justice system.

Anonymous said...

Cherbi has a good point about helping fellow Scots who claim injustice just as much as the Lockerbie bomber.
How are the Executive going to spin out this one because its a clear point that needs attention !

Bomber, someone wrongly convicted and sent to jail, or victim of a lawyer. Which one do you support first Alex ? 1 2 3 or all ?

Anonymous said...

really sorry to see the SNP caught up in this with the lawyers but i hope they respond positively and make the changes you point out which anyone would expect them to make if its going to be a fair replacement for the law society

Anonymous said...

"Who says he doesn't know about this already and was just hoping no one would notice or bring it up ?"

If you are referring to Kenny MacAskill he knew all along and everyone was hoping it would go unnoticed.

Peter Cherbi change your comments permissions so we can have a live debate please !

Stewart Telford said...

I would just like to say that I hope the Justice Minister gives you a good reply and pledges to fix these issues you highlighted but I am with the people who say don't let them have too long to delay doing something.Clearly everyone has known about these things for a long time now so cant stand back and say we've just been told etc

Anonymous said...

Thank god I moved to Australia 5 years ago. Can't say I miss Scotland one bit.Nasty wee place full of hate and racism and injustice too.I bet the lawyers stoke up most of it anyway.
If you want to solve the problems these bloody lawyers are causing, deport them all to Gruniard (anthrax) island and I might come back to the old country for a holiday !

Anonymous said...

hah and these guys want to take Scotland independent ! what a joke ! wont even do anything for their own so how cam they be trusted to do anything for anyone.

Anonymous said...

I agree with your reply Mr Cherbi so lets see what Alex & co have to say for themselves.
If they don't come clean we know then they are just as crooked as the rest.

Peter Cherbi said...

To those who enquired of holding a 'live debate' ... Comment moderation remains on people, this isn't an 'anti anyone' site, I report on issues of injustice whether that be about the legal profession or anyone else.

I hope to have a response from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice in due course, and when that comes in, I will report it - that's not to say you all can't tackle the subject along party lines of course, but keep it gentlemanly please !

An individual sent a comment in with some extreme details of what their lawyer did to them and their family after they had made a complaint. I have not published that comment for now as I would like the person who posted the comment at 15:42 to email me, particularly in view of the identity of the politician who was 'supposedly' helping them in their case.

Anonymous said...

I just read what you said about the lawyers tribunal and Angela Baillie.

Spot on as usual but I'm dumbfounded over what you've said about the new Commission.I await to hear with interest on this one.

Good thing you exposed this otherwise I could see your long campaign getting a lot longer !

bernie said...

What next ? If they ever find an honest lawyer in Scotland be sure to write about it please !

Anonymous said...

I appreciate you seem to know all about what's going on on this thing but have you considered the Executive were just too stupid and naive to let the lawyers have their way again on this one ?

Anonymous said...

Testy times for lawyers in Scotland.Good.I have no love for those who live in big houses & have jollies at the expense of clients so ruin a few for me Mr Cherbi.Maybe someone one day will make an example of these legalised criminals.

Anonymous said...

Mr Cherbi -
Getting a lot of coverage and causing problems for the crooks in the legal system is good, but wouldn't you rather be doing something else ?

Alan Smith, Glasgow said...

How can the Scottish Executive allow the same insurers of lawyers access to the new complaints organisation ? I don't believe it.

Peter Cherbi said...

#anonymous @3.57pm

#Alan Smith @4.49pm

The Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman is insured by the same brokers & insurers as the Law Society of Scotland and all Scottish Solicitors, Advocates, members of the Judiciary, etc ...

That insurance is arranged through the Scottish Executive, as the Ombudsman is an appointee of the First Minister.

If an organisation or Ombudsman is to be fully independent of the profession or industry they are regulating, then having the same insurance services and other related services does pose a conflict of interest, wouldn't you agree ? therefore the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission shouldn't be sharing the same arrangements as the legal profession, which have been proved before the Parliament itself, to be subject to professional interference time & again to prevent negligence cases or financial claims against those who pay into it (the solicitors)

Incidentally the some 114 lawyers who work at the Scottish Executive also seem to be covered by the same indemnity insurance arrangements and I note from sources at the Executive itself, some of those lawyers themselves have been subject to complaints over their work which have been prevaricated out to prevent any claims for loss through their actions.

This area of insurance is by no means a clear cut issue, but the SNP should at least be taking steps to separate out some of these glaring conflicts of interest. After all, it's not as if they don't know about it because they are now the Scottish Executive.

Poirot said...


You should check out the insurance arrangements of the FSA and DTI for comparison. Both organisations have equally glaring conflicts of interest in their professional indemnity arrangements & risk coverage.

Many 'indepedent' regulators or Ombudsmen in the UK are insured by the same firms who insure the ones they regulate but trying to get the public to get their brain cells round that one will be a job and a half.

You won't be popular for revealing that one.

Anonymous said...

call me naive but that's seriously fucked up if the ombudsman is insured by the same as the lawyers !

Anonymous said...

Sounds like those insurers are making business markets for themselves too. Who allowed all this to happen, oh let me guess - LABOUR ! so when are the SNP going to do something about it if they dare ?

Anonymous said...

I find your blog depressing in the extreme. Not because of what you report about our legal profession, but the bile you stir up in others in the comments section. At times you do hit the nail on the head, but I feel you encourage people to air the resentment they feel at 'rich' lawyers simply because they themselves are envious of the perceived privilege in the profession. In fact, as you well know, you generalise to a large extent and pour vitriol without full consideration. I think anyone with a brain, and without a chip on the shoulder, can see you are pissing against the wind.

Catherine Clarke said...

I've spent a lot of time tonight reading this blog and come to the conclusion I could never trust a solicitor now.

There is a lot of good information here Mr Cherbi and lots of things I never new about how clients are treated after they complain.Honestly this sounds frightening and something must be done to stop it.

Wishing you well in your work and as others have said good luck to you and help as many people as you can.

Anonymous said...

I actually work at the Scottish Executive and know a lot about what's going on here.

What Cherbi may or may not realise is the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman didn't even have Indemnity Insurance until he threatened to sue the first Ombudsman over the handling of his complaint which anyone who has seen the report knows is a mess. Insurance was assigned to the Ombudsman when Donald Dewar was First Minister and no questions were asked over where that insurance came from which has continued to present.

Mr Cherbi reveals a great many things and for one I'm happy he does.Maybe the public should question more the poor service they get rather than blindly accept incompetence or negligence as something to be expected.It would take a weight off our shoulders too as countless members of the public continue to write in to the Executive and Ministers with stories of poor attention by the Law Society on complaints and a lack of redress.

Peter Cherbi said...

# Poirot @6.25pm

Thanks for that info. I suspected as much.

Maybe some people will turn their attention to that issue - how effective or independent can an Ombudsman or independent regulator be when they have the same financial or insurance services as those they regulate,.

Since any decisions in their reports could cause a financial impact on those they regulate, as well as impacting on the premiums of the regulator's policy via the same financial services, then how can it be said there is no conflict of interest....

#Anonymous @8.48pm

I don't see the SNP doing anything yet with these issues - if they do, I will be sure to report it.

Anonymous @9.11pm

Bile which is being stirred up in the comments section is down to people's feelings on this issue. Would you rather I just delete all the comments ? There are actually far stronger comments made, by both sides, lawyers included, even emailing me from their business email addresses - threats, compliments, and bile far stronger than what makes it through comment moderation.

As I see it, clients who have legitimately complained against their solicitors have a right to contact each other, but the Law Society of Scotland doesn't allow that as everyone well knows - for reasons of confidentiality they say - but for reasons people will find out that their complaint and what happened to them is all too common - I say.

What you are seeing here is probably people airing that resentment that the legal profession, which has had the power to deal with these issues honestly and effectively over the years, has chosen hostility to the client & protect the crooked v resolve complaints compassionately and resolutely.

I'm not against the legal profession as you well know. I'm against the way it is run, and manipulates the law when it stands itself accused of failing to deal with regulatory issues. There are lawyers who contact me who agree with this, but if only they would choose themselves to stand up for what they say and do something about it, then the issues I report on would not be generating so much ill feeling.

#Catherine Clarke @9.37pm

Thank you for your comments & wishes.

#Anonymous @ 10.02pm

I am aware of some of what you write, but please email me on your comments.

Anonymous said...

Makes me wonder about the 'tsars' we have all over Scotland for everything.Same company probably insures them too while they sit in high paid jobs doing sod all right ?

Is this a labour only thing or do the SNP have their noses well and truly in the trough ?

Anonymous said...

put a lawyer in the room with all the clients hes ruined and see how well he does !

Anonymous said...

Lawyers like to talk (lie) but dont want complainers to talk.Do I hear a contradiction ?

far from pissing in the wind obviously the legal fraternity are bothered by the truth of their actions getting out and they don't like criticism do they.

Anonymous said...

"As I see it, clients who have legitimately complained against their solicitors have a right to contact each other, but the Law Society of Scotland doesn't allow that as everyone well knows - for reasons of confidentiality they say - but for reasons people will find out that their complaint and what happened to them is all too common - I say"

Brilliantly put Peter !!. Clients who have to go through the miserable process of dealing with the Law Society over complaints should have a forum for contacting each other. I wonder what would happen to the way complaints would be handled if that were the case ! Why does the Law Society keep the complaints process secret ? Is that to keep the true level of complaints secret ? We all know theres resentment with lawyers but don't they cause that themselves ?

Anonymous said...

Lawyers like to talk (lie) but dont want complainers to talk.Do I hear a contradiction ?

Yes !

Anonymous said...

This insurance racket on all these Ombudsmen needs checking out.Its not fair they have the same insurance as the lawyers etc and no wonder no one gets anywhere with these ombudsmen.

Bert said...

Deafening silence from MacAskill on this and nothing in the press.

Has the Law Society been censoring the media again ?

The Faculty of desperados said...

As a famous QC once said-

Hey Peter it's a bit smokey in here, has another f***ing lawyer been burned in hell ?!!

Archie said...

Hi Pete

Great post and many comments I see.

LOL someone has a sense of humour !!

"Hey Peter it's a bit smokey in here, has another f***ing lawyer been burned in hell ?!!"


Anonymous said...

Scottish injustice at it again I see =

We can all get off with threatening texts now can we ?

Anonymous said...

Amen to the comments from anonymous at 1002pm

Feels like we in the Justice Department have to deal with all the Law Society's dirty linen.

If only you all knew what passes our eyes Mr Cherbi and your readers.

I would love to swap notes with your leak from the Client Relations office !

Anonymous said...

nothing seems to slip past you Mr Cherbi.

fresh air / nowhere interesting said...

Comments for & against lawyers aside the debate has brought up some important issues.

Why should we expect to get anywhere complaining to an Ombudsman when they are insured by the same companies as the ones we are complaining against ? I always felt Ombudsmen were useless or just set up to prolong the process of getting nowhere and now thats clear in reading some of the comments on this blog.

Keep up the good work Peter on this stuff.

Anonymous said...

Scotland has made a huge mistake voting in the SNP and what you are writing here shows that to be true, even if you do support SNP which I doubt you have to admit they are as guilty as the rest for ignoring these problems in the legal system all these years.

Pigs in the trough and this lot are just like the rest with plenty of lawyers in the party I see !

r.mcdonald said...

You may want to take a look at the way some Nats have secured properties with the help of certain legal firms and local branches of banks.

Amazing what some of those lawyers get up to as you know especially when its to do with politicians who travel up the ladder.

Anonymous said...

Your friend is correct on the insurance details of the DTI & FSA but I doubt you will be able to get any information from them on it.If you do, make sure you publish it.

Anonymous said...

The DTI no longer exists. Now called the "Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform"

It's an interesting name change don't you think ? Almost as if they have been reading this blog !

Anonymous said...

Mr Cherbi

You were 110% on this story Peter.

The Law Society have done nothing but bully and interfere with the progress of forming the slcc so far.

Douglas Mill may be saying one thing to the press but he and his colleagues have been working away in the background to make sure they get their people inside the commission.

Keep hammering this home to the public.