Monday, January 07, 2008

Lawyers negligence insurance branded corrupt, anti-consumer as evidence reveals only one per cent of clients get chance of payout

Imagine your house has just been storm damaged. You have insurance so you call the insurers, inform them you need to make a claim, and the process begins of an assessor showing up at your house, estimates being made of the financial cost of the damage, and usually, work is then authorised to repair your home.

Sounds simple enough ? and while there may be some bumps along the way, generally, your home will be repaired under the insurance policy, if it covers the damage.

You would expect nothing less ... paying into an insurance scheme for years, meticulously making sure the policy covered such instances, and making sure you were satisfied with your insurance company and that your policy would be there for you when you needed to depend on it.

Translate this to making a claim for damages against a lawyer though, and the whole claims process turns into a nightmare of corruption, deceit & anti consumerism. In fact, trying to make a claim for damages against a crooked lawyer turns so bad that figures reveal only 1% of financial claims for damages against lawyers even get access to a courtroom, never mind the chance of an actual payout from the much vaunted but usually absent "Master Policy Insurance" for Scotland's legal profession.

Trevor Goddard of Royal Sun Alliance & Law Society Chief Exec. Douglas Mill - 'Only 1% of claims against crooked lawyers ever get a chance'

The "Master Policy", sometimes known as the "Master Fund" has been touted by the Law Society of Scotland as giving "unrivalled consumer protection" for Scotland's enormous solicitor's client base, but in reality, payouts are very few & far between, particularly when it comes to the question of 'negligence' - which is so prevalent in Scotland's vast army of 10,000 solicitors, it almost equates to that 'storm damage' on your home insurance ...

If you thought there was only a 1% chance of you getting 'storm damage' to your home paid for by your insurance policy, or indeed, any other type of damage covered by your insurance policy, would you remain with that Insurer and keep paying for such an insurance policy which would never pay out ? ... Probably not. I know I wouldn't ...

You would rightly go somewhere else and find another insurer, as there would probably be such a high level of bad publicity against your current insurers who never pay out, you would know that blindly handing over money each year for an insurance policy which has a 1% chance of payout, would be a total waste of your money so, why would you use a solicitor whose insurance policy only has a 1% chance of paying you out when you find out your solicitor has ripped you off, or acted negligently, or worse, made off with your family's assets, even your home ?

Well, currently of course, the Scots public has no choice at all in this. Basically, if you want access to legal services, access to the courts, or access to a solicitor, you have to use a solicitor who is insured by the "Master Policy Insurance" of the Law Society of Scotland and if you have any problems with your solicitor which requires you to make a claim for damages against their insurance, you need to hire another solicitor who is also a member of that same insurance scheme.

Alistair Sim, Director Marsh UK (Brokers to the Master Insurance Policy) - You need a lawyer to sue a lawyer

Marsh inquiry page 1Marsh inquiry page 2

A party asserting a claim cannot pursue his or her claim directly with the insurers of the Master Policy. It is for the solicitor concerned to intimate any claim to the Master Policy insurers and to request the benefit of the cover. In simple terms, the Master Policy insurers cannot become involved until the matter is intimated by the practice.

In any claim for alleged negligence, the party asserting the claim [the client] will require to establish :

- Whether a duty of care was owed

- Whether the duty has been breached, and how

- What loss has arisen as a direct result of the breach

For that reason, those pursuing claims against solicitors are advised to seek legal representation in pursuing claims.

As you can see from Marsh's own statement, supported by the Law Society of Scotland, an individual cannot pursue a claim directly with the insurers of Scotland's legal profession. You have to go through a lawyer, spend some more money, and hope against reality, that your new lawyer - if you are even able to get another lawyer to sue a lawyer, will actually do the job properly, and without any outside interference.

Sadly, outside interference, particularly from Law Society officials, is indeed the order of the day, as previous articles I have reported on the lawyers insurance scheme show quite clearly ...

Law Society boss Douglas Mill lied to Swinney, Parliament as secret memos reveal policy of intervention & obstruction on claims, complaints.

Law Society intervention in claims 'commonplace' as ex Chief admits Master Policy protects solicitors against clients

Even worse for you, as the poor client who may have been financially ruined by your solicitors actions, you cannot even being the claims process until the lawyer who ruined you actually tells the insurers he suspects you may make a claim against their actions, and even after that, all the steps you have to go through in the "Master Policy" insurance must be conducted, at significant financial cost, by another firm of solicitors you have to find willing to take on the case.

Using the Master Policy of the Law Society of Scotland to sue a negligent lawyer is impossible

Does any of this so far qualify for "unrivalled consumer protection" ? Probably not.

There is no doubt, the "Master Policy" insurance scheme for the Scottish legal profession is good at what it does best, which is - protecting crooked lawyers, keeping them in practice, and keeping payouts to wronged & ruined clients - you, to a minimum.

This is the sole aim of the "Master Policy" insurance - not to pay out when you need it, rather to ensure you don't get paid anything whatsoever - and there is a trail of thousands of ruined clients of crooked solicitors who have received not a penny from the "Master Policy" insurance, while their crooked lawyers have went on to remain in practice, even ripping off more clients.

Solicitor John O Donnell faces 21 separate negligence claims involving the same insurance scheme and he is still in practice - it could so easily be YOUR solicitor and you know nothing about it ...

Alistair Sim once said, there isn't a lawyer in Scotland who hasn't had a complaint & claim made against their insurance - and he would be correct.

You as the client don't get to know anything about that though .. . indeed, as the above link to an earlier story I covered shows, you could well find that your lawyer has as bad a record as Mr O'Donnell and is facing or has faced multiple claims by ruined clients made against his insurance, and no one has ever been paid out .. and there is no way you can truthfully find out whether that is the case or not ...

The way the "Master Policy" insurance scheme for Scotland's legal profession is sold to the public is under the guise of "unrivalled consumer protection" so let's take a brief look at what Marsh, the Brokers, and the Law Society of Scotland claim you get for your trust in your lawyer ...

Master Policy details - a crooked lawyer's charter, written by crooked lawyers, for the protection of crooked lawyers.

Master Policy for Professional Indemnity Insurance 1

"The Master Policy provides cover for all practice units for the mandatory limit of indemnity - £1.5m. All claims attributable to the same act, error or omission or series of acts, errors or omissions consequently upon or attributable to the same original cause or source will be regarded as one claim., In the event of cover being required in excess of the mandatory limit of indemnity, additional Excess layer ("top-up") cover requires to be arranged which may be taken under the facility provided by the Society's Brokers.

The cover is wide and provides indemnity in respect of claims or alleged claims in respect of "any civil liability (including liability for claimant's costs and expenses) incurred in connection with the Practice ..." The definition of "the Practice" refers to "all manner of business ... which is customarily (but not necessarily exclusively) carried on or transacted by Solicitors in Scotland"."

An amazing claim by the insurers and the legal profession, but one hardly consistent with reality given the fact that a paltry 1% of claims only ever make it to payout ...

The Brokers information then amazingly goes on to claim that "The Master Policy also provides cover for dishonest, fraudulent, criminal or malicious acts or omissions involving clients funds on the part of a partner or member of the firm's staff. This cover in respect of clients funds does not apply if the act or omission was committed or condoned by a sole practitioner or by all principles of a partnership."

An equally further amazing claim by the Brokers, completely inconsistent with reality. Just try making a claim against the "Master Policy" for such things as dishonestly, fraud, criminal or malicious acts, and see if you get any further than the thousands of clients who have tried & failed over the years to make similar claims - only to be denied access to the very legal representation required to make such a claim - and thus denied access to justice.

Notification of Claims and Circumstances - or how to kill off a client's claim ...

Master Policy for Professional Indemnity Insurance 2

Now we come to the real dirty tricks of the claims process ...

Notification of Claims and Circumstances

The Master Policy requires (General Condition 1 of the Certificate of Insurance) practice units to :-

"give written notice to the Brokers (regardless of any Self-Insured Amount) as soon as reasonably practicable after becoming aware of circumstances which might reasonable be expected to produce a claim irrespective of the [practice unit's] views as to the validity of the claim or on receiving information of a claim for which there may be a liability under [the] Certificate."

There is no claim form which requires to be completed in order to intimate a claim or circumstance. All that is required initially is a letter to the Brokers, explaining the factual background. Copies of relevant correspondence should be submitted along with any Legal Aid Application, Writ, or Summons.

If the preparation of a detailed summary of the facts or a statement by those involved is likely to delay matters, the practice should simply write to the Brokers in the first instance with brief particulars of the available information rather than delaying their intimation until more detailed information is available.

Where a Writ, Summons, or notice of a Legal Aid Application has been received, clearly the matter should be intimated immediately, with these items, in order that the insurers may take whatever action is required within the appropriate time limits.

No claim form .. imagine that ... nothing like your house or car insurance now, is it .. preferring to keep everything as convoluted & complicated as possible, ensuring a bare minimum of input from the financially ruined client but obtaining the solicitor's point of view, who obviously will be pleading 'not guilty' to their financial crimes against clients ...

I particularly liked the part about "Where a Writ, Summons, or notice of a Legal Aid Application has been received, clearly the matter should be intimated immediately ... in order that the insurers may take whatever action is required within the appropriate time limits."

Yes, we all know what "the insurers may take whatever action is required" means, and it's not just the insurers who do that - the Law Society of Scotland joins in too, to make sure that anything, even a client's claim for legal aid to begin such an insurance claim against a crooked lawyer is stopped

Douglas Mill [regularly] intervenes with the Legal Aid Board to stop client negligence claims against crooked lawyers

Scotsman 5 June 1998 Law Society accused of closing ranks as claimi fails

oh .. but Douglas Mill testified before the Justice 2 Committee of the Scottish Parliament he never intervened in a legal aid claim against both the Law Society of Scotland and a crooked lawyer, which makes Mr Mill a liar in that case - and a liar which the Scottish Conservatives support in the Parliament via Bill Aitken, Convener of the Parliaments's only Justice Committee ...

Douglas Mill - 'I swear on my granny's grave I'm a liar'

So, not just having to be made do with the Law Society of Scotland's monopoly on the legal services market in Scotland, the Scots public are also forced to make do with a corrupt insurance compensation scheme which the lawyers claim is there to protect the public but which only protects lawyers from the public.

Surely such things are yet good arguments to open up the Scottish legal services market and come away from the hallmarks of monopoly, corruption, lack of accountability and anti client prejudice which have ruled the day for all these years ?

Wait a minute though ... the current Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill is a lawyer.

Mr MacAskill has paid for many years into the same "Master Policy" to protect himself from clients and ensure that if he did wrong, no one would get a penny so it's hardly surprising that Kenny MacAskill wants to preserve a large part of the Law Society's monopoly on legal services in Scotland and also the monopoly of the "Master Policy" insurance scheme which mandates that anyone who wants to practice legal services must pay into it ...

Kenny MacAskill - public can made do with second class rights - better to protect crooked lawyers monopoly on legal services & self regulation

Indeed, Mr MacAskill and the Lord President - another financial contributor to the same "Master Policy" insurance scheme, have been happily dismissing any & all applications for rights of legal representation, made by persons & organisations other than members of the Law Society of Scotland, under the 2006 implementation of Sections 25-29 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990, which was designed eighteen years ago to open up the Scottish legal services market and break the Law Society of Scotland monopoly on the public's access to justice.

Mr MacAskill and the Lord President have cited among their reasons for their dismissal of all applications for rights of legal representation to-date the applicants are not members of the same "Master Policy" insurance scheme which only sees a 1% chance of the public ever getting financial redress for the negligent or crooked actions of their legal representatives. Isn't that a bit strange ?

Kenny MacAskill - If you don't pay into the "Master Policy" and aren't a member of the Law Society, we won't let you practice legal services.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to Cabinet Secretary for Finance John Swinney 26 July 2007

It doesn't stop there though ... the same "Master Policy" insurance for crooked lawyers is also costing the Scottish public a pretty penny as each of you have to food the bill for all of the Scottish Government's GLSS lawyers, who have their "Master Policy" annual subscriptions paid as an 'expense freebie' ... and indeed, many Government departments within the Scottish Government also contract the services of Marsh and similar corrupt insurance schemes which do everything to ensure protection of their departments at any cost while any member of the public who has been wronged or financially affected by negligent decisions, never gets a chance of financial compensation.

Some articles I filed earlier on the Scottish Government's affiliation with Marsh UK and the insurers of the legal profession's anti consumer "Master Policy"

Corrupt Insurers of the Scottish legal profession linked to Scottish Executive

Scottish Executive budget on lawyers salaries revealed at over £5 million pounds while public face restrictions on legal representation

Government Legal Service for Scotland - 'no help to victims of injustice'

A good example of some of the public sector's insurers & lawyers dirty tricks may well be the Hepatitis C infected blood products victims, many of whom have died over the years, and are still battling the Government and these kinds of corrupt insurance schemes for compensation and in that case, where patients Health records were allegedly destroyed, it turns out that many think the order those Health records were destroyed, came from the lawyers and insurers of those Health Boards who infected their patients with the tainted blood products ...

What a coincidence that destroying solicitor & client records and faking up files is also one of the policies of the "Master Policy" insurance for crooked lawyers ... which has permeated Government to the highest level with even Ministerial backing from the Justice Secretary ... and a seemingly happy support from the rest of the SNP Government so far ...

Justice or injustice ? The rights and expectations of the public are certainly being trampled by such corrupt 'consumer protection' practices which in reality are 'consumer attack' practices we can all do without ...

Should it not be that our SNP Scottish Government will end such 'consumer attack' practices immediately and give Scots first class legal services instead of second class rights against Scotland's crooked lawyers ?


just wondering said...

Quite damning the whole thing.I don't think any of these professional types have good negligence insurance when it comes to their clients but the solicitors version of it really takes the biscuit.

Out of interest who else do this lot Marsh handle negligence insurance for and given all that you have written why are the Government lawyers also part of the same scheme ?

Anonymous said...

If my house insurance was as bad as this and I was forced to get a lawyer to put in a claim every time I'd ditch it too.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget that we as solicitors don't get a choice in this matter.

The Law Society does the bargaining with Marsh on behalf of the profession and ensures we all pay into it or lose our place on the roll.

As you might put it a bit undemocratic and shady.

Anonymous said...

The master policy is totally corrupt - only there to protect these crooked lawyers and not to pay out to claimants as you point out

keep up the good work mr cherbi

Anonymous said...

keep up the good work mr cherbi and keep publicising all this corruption in the law society because the newspapers cant do it properly

Anonymous said...

Only 1% of claims ever get to a proof - amazing this is allowed to go on.
No wonder Douglas Mill and the rest of them want to keep all this insurance and legal business for themselves because its a huge money making racket.

Stuart McDonald, Fife said...

Helluva complicated article Peter but I see where you are coming from.

If insurance was this complicated or risky I don't think anyone would buy it.You should try and get a boycott going of those insurers who are part of the lawyers negligence insurance or at least advertise the companies names and I bet people who have insurance policies with those companies might think twice about them and you might just get lucky and put people off doing business with them too because if they are so crooked in this god knows how bad they are on the rest of their insurance products.

Anonymous said...

I have been trying to find out this information for years.Thanks Mr Cherbi.The Law Society always kept refusing to tell me anything about the Master Policy and Marsh refused to answer my letters.

I have a solicitor who tried his best to pursue my former lawyer who was very negligent but he was threatened by a firm of Edinburgh lawyers that if he continued to represent me they would make life very difficult for him at the Court of Session for his other clients and told him he wouldn't be able to get Advocates to represent his clients.I have the letter they said all this to him in writing and will send it to you if you like.

democracy for the masses said...

I agree with Stuart McDonald

Get people to take notice of this and those companies which are part of it and you will do some good.

If they are as crooked on the lawyers insurance you can bet your bottom dollar they are as crooked on all their other policies etc

Anonymous said...

In reply to the third contributor;

Will he/she please inform me what the majoirity of honest, lawabiding solicitors have done to remedy the disgraceful association between, and their reliance upon a company whose notoriously corrupt business practises saw that company forced to admit its 'shameful' and 'unlawful' conduct?

Anonymous said...

Still no answer as to why you wont accept the job offer from the US.Lose the attachment to Scotland kid and get on with your life.These fuckers will be crooks forever the way you portray them.

Anonymous said...

So the lesson is it's a waste of time trying to make a claim against a crooked lawyer.May as well take the other route then and get some instant gratification *wink wink*

Peter Cherbi said...

#Just Wondering @ 11.45am

You may be correct on that.

Marsh handle negligence insurance for a wide range of professionals, including accountants, most of the courts service, housing associations, local government, the Crown Office, Fiscals and others ... quite a long list.

#Anonymous @ 2pm

Well its up to you to do something about it.

I know full well the Law Society of Scotland don't allow their members a vote in anything and the leadership treats the membership as their personal bank - you are after all paying for the Law Society, Douglas Mill and friends to do as they please ...

If only there were some solicitors brave enough to stand up to those who are clearly pursuing policies of personal benefit rather than for the entire profession, and client base ... you may find a willing ear and support among clients who want to heal the legal profession and bring it into a dependable state, not the current one ran by a dictatorship for personal financial gain.

Willing solicitors in such an endeavour can contact me of course ...

#Anonymous @ 3.26pm

Yes I agree.

#Anonymous @ 3.27pm

Remember the newspapers have to write a story the entire readership will understand. The issue of lawyers negligence insurance, is a bit complicated probably for that ...

#Anonymous @ 4.17pm

I completely agree.

#Stuart McDonald, Fife @ 4.41pm

I agree the issue is complicated, I hope I explained it a little better with the comparison on house insurance - which just about everyone has.

Your idea to publicise the names of the companies etc is also agreeable. Anyone who wishes to help can do so and use the documents & information in my article as they see fit.

#Anonymous @ 5.11pm

Interesting story, please send me any documentation to my contact email in my profile.

#Anonymous @ 7.17pm

I await that reply with interest too ... (although I imagine it can only be "nothing")

#Anonymous @ 10.49pm

Will you please stop spamming that question.

I have not refused to take a job offer from an american lawyer.

Rather if they like as I explained, when the legal services market is opened here in Scotland, they can come in, start a firm or two and clean up on the present lot.

If that is possible, or if I am allowed (without too much interference) to help my fellow Scots who have suffered injustice terribly in matters I write about and issues which are drawn to my attention, I will take that job.Satisfied ?

lights out said...

You sound dangerously patriotic Peter.I don't think I've even heard that kind of talk coming from some of the SNP fanatics.

If I were you I'd take the job with the yanks and run.All the better if you can bust up these crooked lawyers monopolies on things afore ye go laddie !

Anonymous said...

wow who would have guessed that - Peter Cherbi might be in a legal firm one day

keep to your word Mr Cherbi and do for people what these crooked lawyers have not and you will be a dead cert for better things

Anonymous said...

Anonymous says ...

In reply to the third contributor;

Will he/she please inform me what the majoirity of honest, lawabiding solicitors have done to remedy the disgraceful association between, and their reliance upon a company whose notoriously corrupt business practises saw that company forced to admit its 'shameful' and 'unlawful' conduct?

Say something against the master policy and you lose your practising certificate.Ask around.

Why do you think it takes a non-lawyer such as cherbi to speak his mind and get away with it?

Anonymous said...

Lawyers will never give up their association with Marsh because it has kept so many of their crooked hides still in their jobs when they should have been thrown in jail !

Anonymous said...

Don't bring any bloody americans over here and dont work for them either.You dont need them Mr Cherbi You can start your own firm if the legal markets are opened up.Dont blame you not wanting to go to the usa who would these days Scotlamd much better choice and we can do it ourselves without dodgy gambling billionaires tryin to buy up Scotland and turn it into the fucked up country they come from.over & out!

Anonymous said...

I agree with the other posters that this lawyers insurance is corrupt.

Mr Cherbi has presented the evidence in such a way that no one alive could be left in any doubt of that !

Anonymous said...

To the reply from the third contributor;

It is understood that individuals who speak out will most likely be subject to the disgraceful intimidation you mention - that is already a matter of record.

However, every solicitor has a duty, and sworn an oath, to represent both the best interests of their client and protect and serve the subject they are priveledged to represent.

Your reply does not explain, or excuse, the stubborn silence of the majority who knowingly and repeatedly abandon these duties, obligations and responsibilities.

Their continuing silence at best demonstrates a miserable, self serving and thoroughly selfish complacency, and at worst, their tacit approval.

Peter Cherbi said...

#Anonymous @ 8.08pm

I completely agree with you.

Regardless of any alleged threat from the Law Society, solicitors must take a stand on the state of Scotland's legal profession & legal services market and do something not only for themselves but also for the public and client base.

The Law Society of Scotland have demonstrated they have no interest in anything other than pursuing their own selfish, corrupt policies which have left not only the legal profession, but also the justice system in the terrible state it is today.

Time to bring all that to an end.

Anonymous said...

I dont buy into the honest lawyers being too afraid to say anything either.Total bollocks and anyway its paying them to shut up about it so they are just as guilty as the rest.

A cure for escaped lawyers :

Anonymous said...

I think this is the most documentation I've ever seen on the Master Policy and I am a solicitor !

If your readers follow your blog regularly they should be in no doubt of the trouble this thing causes to all of us.

Anonymous said...

Almost laughable that no lawyer can come forward and say this Master Policy insurance is totally honest, I suspect because the whole bloody lot of them know it to be the biggest fraud on the go.

and another thing Peter CHerb - you said "Marsh handle negligence insurance for a wide range of professionals, including accountants, most of the courts service, housing associations, local government, the Crown Office, Fiscals and others ... quite a long list."

WHy are the same brokers and insurers allowed to infiltrate almost all government and public services like this? Are some of the politicians getting big fat brown envelopes to keep these insurance contracts going ?

I think someone should be investigating that too because dont you think its a big conflict of interest or even a monopoly on its own to have the same brokers and insurers providing all insurance to all these agencies?

Anonymous said...

last comment :
Almost laughable that no lawyer can come forward and say this Master Policy insurance is totally honest, I suspect because the whole bloody lot of them know it to be the biggest fraud on the go.

Yes very obvious isn't it.Not one of these good or bad lawyers will come forward to defend their beloved negligence insurance.

I smell corruption all over this story and where are the newspapers ?

lawyerwatch said...

Easy to see why ex insurance boy Bill Aitken and his torag friends support lawyers monopoly and fuck the client policy.All about money.Are this lot giving subs to the torags too?

What about Kenny MacAskill? He sounds like paid lobbyist for Marsh now.What was his claims or complaints record like? long as your arm too I wonder???

Anonymous said...

Defending the Master Policy would be "Mission Impossible" only this time it is impossible.

Well written report Mr Cherbi.Keep it up.

Anonymous said...

I don't think we can beat the Cherbi machine on this one.How about someone get an ounce of sense and pay these people off so we can get back to work.

Anonymous said...

I will send you a copy of the Law Society response another journalist passed to me who indended to write a story about the Master Policy.The Editor was called privately and warned not to publish the story by (guess who)

Anonymous said...

I agree this issue must be one of the most divisive between the public and the legal profession and no one should be in any doubt about how far the Law Society will go to protect its position and the "Master Policy" from people such as yourself who have been hard done by solicitors.

I suggest the Master Policy as it is should be scrapped and all legal firms allowed to find their own insurance, then having to advertise who they are insured by and the full terms of their policy to all clients.

Anonymous said...

I saw your comments in the Scotsman on the cops being appointed to this new lawyers complaints body.Completely agree its another fit up just to get lawyers off the hook.

Anonymous said...

I thought I would share with you what happened at our solicitors office today Mr Cherbi.

I read your article and arranged a meeting with our solicitor to ask some details about his charges over handling the estate of my wife's mother.

I asked because like your Mr Penman, the solicitor started an overdraft account with his local bank (completely unnecessary) and ran up £12,600 of charges when there was £65,210 available in case in a current account.

He refused to give us any specific details of the charges but I was able to find out at the Bank there is only £4,010 left in the current account and there are no debts my wife's mother left at all.

The property in which she lived, has been un for sale for 3 years with allegedly no one interested in it but next door the house of similar type and condition has changed hands at least twice for sums approaching £240,000.

I said to the solicitor "I understand you have a Master Policy insurance which settles any claims for poor work or dishonesty.His face went red and he became very anxious.I told him I read it on your blog.

He told us to leave as he had another appointment and when we got home there was a message from him on our answer machine telling us he would no longer be handling the affairs of my wife's late mother.

What do we do now Mr Cherbi ? I think there has been a bit of stealing going on to say the least and the Bank manager at the Branch called us this afternoon late to ask us not to make any trouble and he would see things were sorted out. I don't believe him at all after reading what happened to you and all these other people and I think the Law Society will just gloss over our complaint.

I would like to contact you please.

Anonymous said...

last comment: sounds like your bank manager has been thieving along with your lawyer and they probably want the house for themselves - better report the 2 of them to the cops and BEFORE you do that go to the newspapers or give it to Peter Cherbi so there cant be any of the usual sweeping under the carpet

Anonymous said...

I wonder who insures the thieving bank manager ? Marsh ?

Anonymous said...

I agree with the other comment.Bank Manager and lawyer are probably in it together and is probably a typical story.Think how easy it is for a lawyer to get a Bank Manager in on his rip offs.Lawyer makes a profit and Bank makes a profit so both are happy.

Rope around both their necks please ?

Anonymous said...

Rope sounds good - quickler than claiming from their insurers by the looks of it :)

Peter Cherbi said...

#Anonymous @ 6.42pm

Sorry I didn't reply earlier.

Your case sounds interesting, and as I see others have already commented, it wouldn't be too unusual for your lawyer to be in cahoots with the Bank Manager ... I've seen this a few times in cases, even mentioned by Law Society reporters .. but of course never acted on.

Please contact me via the email in my profile and I also agree with others it would be a good idea for you to tell the media about it before making a complaint to the Law Society.

oh to the first comment, I forgot to mention one of the others Marsh UK insures : The Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman - the person who is supposed to regulate complaints against the Law Society of Scotland ...

Anonymous said...

My own sad brush with solicitors left me entirely disallusioned with the Scottish Legal System. Although the police had clearly and blatantly broken the human rights act and didn't have a leg to stand on legally (there was no crime committed), not a single solicitor was willing to take up the case.

It seems to me Scots law still lives in a time when the English rulers wanted a legal system to "squash the rebellious Scots" and we are not living under a 21st century legal system, not ever 20th or 19th but 18th century law.

Anonymous said...

I fully agree with author opinion.

duluth auto insurance said...

This is a good common sense Blog. Very helpful to one who is just finding the resources about this part. It will certainly help educate me.