Scottish Legal Complaints Commission research reveals a trail of destroyed clients who attempted claims against lawyers. RESEARCH commissioned by the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission will this week reveal a catalogue of dirty tricks employed by the Law Society of Scotland, insurers Marsh UK and Royal Sun Alliance to defeat clients attempts to recoup millions of pounds of money stolen by hundreds of crooked lawyers who are still practising law in Scotland today.
On Friday morning, 26th June, a presentation at the SLCC's Headquarters at the Stamp Office in Edinburgh, will be told of the experiences of members of the public who attempted to recover money and assets which solicitors had either stole for themselves or lost through providing poor & negligent legal service to their clients. This research has been so feared by the Law Society of Scotland, it’s officials demanded early access to the material prior to publication, in an effort, some legal insiders say, is to censor the worst parts of evidence which will show the Master Policy to be “thoroughly corrupt”.
I reported on the Law Society’s attempts to gain early access to the Master Policy research here : Cabinet Chief Swinney intervenes in SLCC investigation of claims against crooked lawyers as Law Society 'fearing worst' demands early secret meetings.
SLCC members will be given presentation on extent of failed claims & corruption within Law Society’s Master Policy & Guarantee Fund. Dr Angela Melville and Professor Frank Stephen, of Manchester University's School of Law will give a presentation to members of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission on the results of their investigation into the workings of the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund client compensation schemes once touted by the Law Society of Scotland as being "the ultimate in consumer protection" but which evidence over the years has revealed, are little more than 'fronts' for a thoroughly corrupt regime bent on ensuring clients claims for compensation against thousands of crooked lawyers over the years, wither & die long before getting access to court.
A Scottish Government insider welcomed the research, which he claimed would have been “… hard to complete under the circumstances, with an air of bitter resentment from the Law Society their much valued Master Policy & Guarantee Fund was at last getting some outside scrutiny. I understand there has been considerable input into the research from clients who effectively had their lives destroyed by the Law Society and those who run the Master Policy.”
He went on : “While it will be interesting to read the final report, I have to wonder if the SLCC will actually do something about it because most of its board & staff complement who came over from the Law Society have been well aware of the controversies surrounding the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund for a number of years and cannot claim ignorance of these problems which to a significant degree were instrumental in creating the legislation which led to the creation of the SLCC itself.”
An official of a consumer organisation involved in the creation of the LPLA Act, which brought about the SLCC’s existence commented : “Now the SLCC have the information its time for them to put up or shut up. We have had long enough of going round & round the mulberry bush on these issues of the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund. If the SLCC don’t take action now then the organisation is effectively a write-off as far as consumer protection goes.”
Former Law Society Chief & serving Sheriff Kenneth Pritchard intervened in claims to Master Policy. Among the revelations will be documents showing that key Law Society officials continually intervened in claims made by ruined clients to the Master Policy & Guarantee Funds, in order to delay by years, the processing of such claims, or even kill off attempts to obtain compensation stone dead. In some of the most severe cases, involving millions of pounds stolen by law firms from clients, Law Society chiefs such as former Law Society Secretary Kenneth Pritchard, were shown to have ordered solicitors to drop their clients for fear of massive payouts in negligence cases, despite ‘fixed’ Law Society investigations which covered up everything from fraud, to acts of potential criminality.
MSPs at Holyrood were intimidated by the legal profession into dropping constituents calls for fairer access to justice and resolution of their cases. Indeed the power and influence of the Law Society of Scotland, backed up by the Scots legal establishment, has in the words of one MSP, “produced a vice like grip on public access to justice and even access to elected representatives”, where routinely, in cases where victims had called on their elected representatives for assistance, the Law Society would "call in" constituent's MSPs for meetings, and attempt to persuade them from dropping their constituent's requests to handle often severe cases involving crooked lawyers and the Law Society’s lack of will to do anything when faced with serious & substantiated complaints.
Cabinet Secretary John Swinney was one of the few who stood up to the Law Society's insistence that all claims against crooked lawyers fail. The Commission will also be shown videos which have been sent to the research team, revealing evidence from the current Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney MSP, that Law Society chiefs routinely intervened in claims & complaints involving crooked lawyers or challenges to the Law Society of Scotland to ensure no success for members of the public who had fell victim to notoriously corrupt law firms and individual solicitors.
Cabinet Secretary John Swinney reveals Law Society Chief Kenneth Pritchard ordered law firms to drop clients who pursued crooked lawyers.
Royal Sun Alliance Claims Manager Trevor Goddard admitted that only 1% of claims against crooked lawyers even make it to court.
Cabinet Secretary John Swinney reveals the Law Society’s resentment to outside regulation of the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund.
Ex Law Society Chief Douglas Mill falls into his Granny’s Grave as John Swinney reveals the Mill & his colleagues operated a policy for protection of crooked lawyers.
You can read more about the impact of the revelations by John Swinney at the Scottish Parliament, which eventually led to the resignation of the Law Society’s then Chief Executive, Douglas Mill, HERE
Petition PE1033 was aimed at resolving failed claims against the Master Policy and crooked lawyers. Of course, the problems with the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund are easy to fix, if minds were focussed on admitting the truth and getting down to resolving the issues everyone knows about but just doesn't want to admit. I proposed a solution to this over two years ago, but the Law Society of Scotland wheeled out its big guns to kill it off at Parliamentary stage, where Petition PE 1033, which you can read more about here : Petition PE 1033 - A call for action, review & settlement for victims of the Scottish legal profession's injustice against client complaints.
It's fate can be read here : Law Society kills Petition PE1033 amid calls for review of injustice & regulatory sins of the past
Law Society Director Michael Clancy stepped in to stop Petition attempt to clean up lawyers corruption cases. The Petition was closed down, after a series of dishonest submissions from the Law Society Scotland, with the Petitions Committee only too eager again to satisfy the desires of a dishonest legal profession, and the ‘over-protective-of-crooked-lawyers’ Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill only too willingly joined in the bitterness against clients interests, and expressed his view here : Truth & reconciliation fails as MacAskill follows Law Society orders to Parliament on attempt to heal public confidence in legal profession
Perhaps someone else would like to take up Petition PE1033 and resubmit it ? as I fear Holyrood is generally too prejudiced against my proposition to clean up the sins of the past of a very dirty legal profession who have grown fatter on the profits of injustice.
The SLCC’s research into Master Policy & Guarantee Fund claims made it to the Scotsman this week, reported here :
On Friday morning, 26th June, a presentation at the SLCC's Headquarters at the Stamp Office in Edinburgh.
ReplyDeleteI might just go along and heckle to be heard !
Anyone care to join me ?
Well I'd like to be in the same room watching Masterman Watson and 'on the razzle' Scanlan if they have to sit down and watch those videos.
ReplyDeleteWhat are they going to do ? deny the whole thing and call Swinney a liar ? or get off their behinds and actually do something for a change !
This research has been so feared by the Law Society of Scotland, it’s officials demanded early access to the material prior to publication, in an effort, some legal insiders say, is to censor the worst parts of evidence which will show the Master Policy to be “thoroughly corrupt”.
ReplyDeleteMacAskill will not go against lawyers. The same principle applies to lawyers within the Law Society, even though they have a statutory duty to protect clients from crooked lawyers. These people are the legal club. Their loyalty to each other is intense, so lawyers must mot be allowed to continue self regulation.
Self regulation means lawyers can do what they want to clients. Marsh UK Royal Sun Alliance like this because the cash flow is always positive. A good business model for them, but criminally one sided and corrupt. As long as this situation remains lawyers are above the law and clients will always suffer injustice.
Allowing corrupt lawyers to keep practicing stains the profession. How do we know who they are? Conclusion they are all corrupt. The Law Society have done the profession no good, on the contrary they have compounded the damaged reputation of the profession by keeping the dirty one's working so they are all dirty corrupt bastards.
SLCC members will be given presentation on extent of failed claims & corruption within Law Society’s Master Policy & Guarantee Fund. Dr Angela Melville and Professor Frank Stephen, of Manchester University's School of Law will give a presentation to members of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission on the results of their investigation into the workings of the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund client compensation schemes once touted by the Law Society of Scotland as being "the ultimate in consumer protection" but which evidence over the years has revealed, are little more than 'fronts' for a thoroughly corrupt regime bent on ensuring clients claims for compensation against thousands of crooked lawyers over the years, wither & die long before getting access to court.
ReplyDeleteYes CORRUPT REGIME, criminals who hold the keys to our courts, and lock the door on anyone who is a threat to a lawyer.
They believe this is their right, to control a legal dictatorship in Scotland and keep their members working with other clients when the reality is they belong in Saughton or Barlinnie to name but two. Next the Law Society will be complaining their human rights have been violated because they cannot see the findings to cover up the worst parts. They are criminals in every sense of that work, filthy self protecting rats who are reaping what they have sown. To quote Pink Floyd "and when you lose control, you'll reap the harvest you have sown". That is happening every day we spread the word about the criminals who self regulate.
Well I read yours and the Scotsman's version but I'd have to ask why didn't the paper interview one of those participating in the research ? They must know plenty victims of crooked lawyers so theirs is a bit weak in my view.
ReplyDeleteAnyway good work keep it up :)
Correct me if I'm wrong please but if I'm reading this posting correctly a bunch of lawyers have commissioned a survey to be told their insurance arrangements are a bit iffy when it comes to someone trying to claim against them ?
ReplyDeleteWill that actually work ? Isn't this just another talking shop ?
How much did this survey cost and what if anything will result from it ?
I think some serious protests on this are needed like in IRAN. Protest against these bloody thieves who call themselves lawyers and stop them getting away with it !
Clancy killed off your petition ? nasty fellow.
ReplyDeleteResubmit it Peter and make it into a campaign like you did with the foi stuff.
Good luck!
I dont doubt the academics but I do doubt the slcc after reading some of your reports about them.
ReplyDeleteStrange isnt it that a new body created to handle complaints against lawyers is now itself as crooked as those it is supposed to be investigating.Now we need a new body again but before that I suspect we need a new Justice Minister to do it and this time not chosen by lawyers chosen by the people !
Interesting development.
ReplyDeleteDoubtless the Law Society will be ripping a few hairs out on Friday morning and then covering their tracks over the weekend.
Keep up the pressure.
John Swinney seems not to have been fooled by the Law Society and these crooks.Good for him but I'd like to see him do more now hes a Minister.
ReplyDeleteWith one call from him I'd suppose this whole mess would be resolved in a jiffy.
Yes I can imagine trying to sue a lawyer is about the most impossible thing on earth.Car insurance is crooked enough but this bunch of hoods really take the biscuit.Make them pay folks and dont be too fussy about how you do it because they wont waste time stepping on you!
ReplyDeleteLooks like they dont need to look for a solution because you came up with it !
ReplyDeleteAll lawyers are bastards and the only way this will be cleaned up is from the outside just like politicians expenses
sounds like just another delaying tactic to me - the slcc are well aware of how bent lawyers are and anyway what will change after this research is (or if it is) published ?
ReplyDeleteJudge claims paedophile victim 'dressed provocatively'.
ReplyDeleteThis guy is not fit to be in a position of power, perhaps he likes children.
Absurd of the SLCC to contend they required - yet more - evidence of how the Master Policy and its disgraced insurance provider Marsh are preceived by the Scottish Public.
ReplyDeleteRead the successive reports by the now defunct Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman.
Meanwhile politicians from every major party continue to 'hear no evil, see no evil......'
We have already seen how the likes of Douglas Mill, Chief Executive of the Law Society, has personally intervened in client complaints to delay & fiddle their outcomes, so much that he lied to a Parliamentary investigation, (TYPICAL LAWYER TRASH NOW WORKING FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW) when faced with contradictory content from his own memos .. but as if to prove such a man's feeling of omnipotence, Mill then went on to threaten the Parliament with legal action if it didn't amend the LPLA Bill to the legal profession's own liking. (DOES THIS BASTARD THINK HE IS HITLER) How can the public deal with such a hateful figure ? a man as Mill, (SHOOT THE BASTARD) who is obviously consumed with hate & ill feeling towards the very clients who provide his membership with their income ...THAT IS RIGHT, OUTSIDERS DO NOT CRITISIZE SCOTLANDS TEFLON NAZI'S, BUT THE LATTER PREY ON CLIENTS LIKE CARRION ON CARCASSES.
ReplyDeleteMill must have many friends in the Scottish Government, excluding John Swinney of course. This Mill like the bastards he protected is a criminal with horrific power.
But one thing he has in common with all other distorters of the truth,
HIS LIES WERE IS DOWNFALL, CANNOT UNDERSTAND GLASGOW UNIVERSITY ACCEPTING THE STIGMA OF EMPLOYING SUCH A CRIMINAL. WELL MILL I HOPE YOU GET CANCER, SOMETHING YOUR CROOKED FIDDLING CANNOT FIX. THAT WOULD BE NICE.
BBC NEWS Why I gave away my kidney'
ReplyDeletePaul van den Bosch
Paul hopes more people will consider becoming a living donor
Paul van den Bosch is a 54-year-old GP based in Surrey. He became a "living donor" in April 2008, giving one of his kidneys to someone he had never met. Here he describes how he made the decision, and shares his thoughts a year on.
===================================
Well Paul, I do not like doctors, but I have to say I admire you for your selflessness regarding this issue. Not many people would do this, so let us be fair, you are clearly a decent man. Best wishes to you are your recipient.
BBC NEWS
ReplyDeleteTory MPs pay back £125,000 more
All Conservative MPs were told to submit their expenses for scrutiny.
Conservative MPs are to pay back another £125,000 in expenses as a result of the party's scrutiny review of claims, David Cameron has confirmed.
STEALING OUR MONEY IS HOW SELF REGULATORS OPERATE.
Thanks for all your comments on this article.
ReplyDeleteI heard late last night that at least one member of the public asked to attend the presentation at the SLCC on Friday by Dr Melville & Professor Stephen on their research into the Master Policy & Guarantee Fund but I doubt anyone will be given admission, since the SLCC believe the public are not stakeholders in their cosy little set up at the Stamp Office, despite having received over 2.5 million pounds of taxpayers money.
A number of comments came in last night & today of a slightly strong variety ... suffice to say, while they cannot be published, there are many who would sympathise with such views on how badly lawyers treat their clients and what should be done about it.
I also note those comments this afternoon relating to Conservative MPs having to pay back more money.
I did actually try and seek an interview with David Cameron on his views on self regulation, and whether it should also be ended for the professions, given that self regulation is supposedly going to be ended at Westminster.
Mr Cameron has not replied .. leading one to conclude we are in for more of the usual political spin which goes something like do as we say and not as we do ...
It is also of note that the Scottish Parliament itself is self regulatory .. and not much has been said about that .. but it should.
People who fall out with their MSPs over bad service or their politicians cosying up to the legal profession should have someone else to go to than the "Scottish Parliament Standards Commissioner" but of course, Holyrood wrote its own rules on that one too ...
I note your comments Peter, and the most important principle is that the decision makers on self regulation all self regulate. They will therefore protect their powerbase, so they can line their pockets.
ReplyDeleteClearly from what you tell us, David Cameron does not want to be interviewed by you because the questioning quite rightly would be awkward for him. Well David, we think you should discuss your views on self regulation, because the public relations disaster at Westminster has damaged the integrity of parliament and the public's opinion of politicians. Spare us the bullshit, is the proper word. You are either serious on this issue or you are happy with the status quo.
If you are determined to restore the public's faith in the political and legal systems, self regulation must end for everyone. Anything less is self protectionism, and that David is why you politicians are in this mess in the first place.
Good work Peter, I look forward to your next report.
Fat chance you will get any interview with Cameron.The Tories are too snot nosed to do anything about self regulation of industry because they rely on the same industries for donations (thousands of just below the registrable total amount kind).
ReplyDeleteAnd another thing if the Tories do get in we may as well all slit our own throats because their last government was a free for all nest of vipers that gave us the Poll Tax.No more of that please!
New visitors to this site please note even if you have never dealt with a lawyer you are at risk if someday you need a lawyer. Tell all of your family, friends so that they can see what they are up against. I hope you never have to deal with Scotland's Nazi's.
ReplyDeleteLawyers in the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is like Stalin placing spies in the German Reichstag. The lawyers are there to undermine the fight for an independent complaints body.
In truth, one cannot be a lawyer and be honest.
Interesting that people are asking to go to this presentation and since Peter told us we have funded the slcc why not ?
ReplyDeleteI think Peter is also dead right about the Scottish Parliament and self regulation.It has to go but no one has been talking about it during the Westminster scandal but we should because they are not whiter than white either in Edinburgh.
I heard late last night that at least one member of the public asked to attend the presentation at the SLCC on Friday by Dr Melville & Professor Stephen.
ReplyDeleteAs you said Peter you do not think any member of the public will be allowed to attend the meeting, I think you are correct. This is prejudice from the SLCC. The money we taxpayers have poured into the commission makes us stakeholders. The SLCC should remember it was set up to protect us (but it does not). Clearly if the evidence from the academics supported the Law Societies position the SLCC would be throwing the doors of the meeting open for us. It does not so they want to do a MacAskill hush hush on the academics findings.
Lawyers revenues are at stake, that is why there is massive resistance to ending self regulation.
Its no big surprise to me Cameron didn't reply.Look at his Tory pals in Scotland with Bill Aitken slavering all over Douglas Mill & MacAskill during debates.
ReplyDeleteGood then, I wont bother voting Tory.
Royal Sun Alliance Claims Manager Trevor Goddard admitted that only 1% of claims against crooked lawyers even make it to court.
ReplyDeleteWell this is revealing but not surprising. Clearly a hell of a lot more clients are being ripped off because our free press report on this every day somewhere in the country.
Well this is because the lawyers are protecting their insurers, a cosy business arrangement which allows lawyers to steal from clients. How did this 1% get a lawyer to represent them?
Royal Sun Alliance are a lot of crooked bastards too. It is some world we live in, a lot of filth who are above the law but not the pressure groups.
Of the 1% who get to court, what percentage of them win damages?
In 100 years we will all be dead but the human conflict will still prevail. The world is a stage. We the cast change, but the conflict and turmoil will not, because of that incurable cancer, HUMAN GREED.
Yes gotta agree with others about the torags.We dont want them in Scotland with their fake promises and u better not expect any answers from Cameron cause he ait givin any!
ReplyDeleteDavid Cameron has to be seen to do the right thing. But political parties need money to function so party donations and MP's expenses must all be subject to public scrutiny. We need independent regulation to look at these issues, so will we be able to trust the regulators?
ReplyDeleteHow many people believe the Cash for Honours Scandal was a cover up. I believe it was, and we had a two lawyers in No 10 at the time, and the Police could not get all the e mails they wanted from Downing Street. Was Blair putting pressure on the Police to back off?
We also have.
Peers suspected of taking money to try and change the law in favour of their financiers.
MP's claiming for everything from dry rot to porn films.
None of them have done anything wrong. I can tell the public where the rot is and it is not dry rot. We have self rewarding criminals running the country who have operated under the umbrella of self regulation too long. They have a lot in common with the Law Society, General Medical Council, Institute of Chartered Accountants, in that they do what all self regulating humans do, reward and protect themselves. They do not live in the real world because self regulation makes them immune from it. The legal system turns a blind eye to a lot of injustice, because it is financially rewarding to do so. That is the root of this problem. A cover for criminality and exploitation.
We have another cover for criminality, it is black ink covering all the information they want to keep secret, yes the SLCC too. We should have followed the French example long ago, and got rid of these parasites.
Ask yourselves this question, will voting at the next general election change anything? I think not, changing the MP's is like being able to change the lawyers in the Law Society/SLCC, if we had to replace them with other lawyers. People in an independent system should be members of the public, not MP's or professionals because it is the public who are at risk in this situation. The professionals would say people would not understand the issues involved. Incorrect we would understand if a doctor produced conflicting medical evidence about the same patient, telling the court they had seen a psychiatrist for twenty years, and telling the benefits agency the same patient had no mental illness, which was the case. He tried to stop the case in court and tried to stop incapacity benefit at the same time, to starve the litigant into submission. That is how your average GP operates in litigation cases.
well its not like there isn't any evidence about what you are saying !
ReplyDeleteSwinney says most of it in the clips anyway and we all know that lawyers are crooked (probably from the start) so its about time something was done about their bent insurance protection.
Keep up the good work !
Douglas Mill was forced out of Law Society top job by John Swinney’s revelations of a claims fixing policy. Well done John.
ReplyDeleteWell Douglas that is what happens to people who lie, they trip themselves up, your disgrace is not enough for the pain you have inflicted on your club's victims.
I know a doctor like you who lies and he has paid the price too. We told his patients about him, and he could do nothing about it, because our defence to defamation is a word you know well (VERITAS) the accuser was telling the truth.
I hear you hate clients, well Martin Luther King said "He who hates only hurts himself". Like I have said before, lawyers and honesty are mutually exclusive, and you are a perfect example of that fact.
Mr Cherbi.
ReplyDeleteI have read your blog with interest and this latest post on the Master Policy.For the avoidance of any doubt I am a solicitor with 25 years of good service to my clients.
I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt the most difficult cases my firm has ever handled are negligence claims against other solicitors.
It is true that few such claims result in a success for the client which leads me to support your idea that a different mechanism must be put in place to resolve negligence and other similar type claims.
You are well aware of the pressure the Law Society puts on any open debate of the Master Policy although you seem to have overcome that boundary with flying colours.Slowly but surely I believe you are encouraging others to consider their positions on these issues which may benefit change in the long run.
Any updates to what happened today at the slcc ?
ReplyDeleteEx Law Society Chief Douglas Mill falls into his Granny’s Grave as John Swinney reveals the Mill & his colleagues operated a policy for protection of crooked lawyers.
ReplyDeletePeople of Scotland, this is evidence enough that the masters of the crooked band of 10,000 Scottish lawyers are liars. Mill had to resign and he got a job at Glasgow University.
People get stung by crooked lawyers, and then the Law Society cover everything up. Self regulation protects the guilty and crushes the victims. Yes Douglas Mill you are a lawyer loving crook. Perhaps one day you will get a nice disease to send you slowly to the other side, as an Irish friend of mine used to say "he won't be missed".
My dictionary states
Scum--worthless evil people.
This sums up self regulators the world over. Some dirt about lawyers will come out of the meeting at the SLCC today.
There is no difference between having Kenny MacAskill or Douglas Mill as Justice Minister. Both of these men are the same, against the clients they relied on for their daily bread (and a lot more) before one went to the Law Society and the other the Scottish Parliament.
ReplyDeleteHow can MacAskill possibly be a neutral justice minister when he states "we owe a great debt to the legal profession". We owe this profession nothing. It beggars belief that a man with such attitudes can have this post. He is there for the same reason Masterman is in the SLCC, to undermine any rights the public should have, and keep their criminals above the law. Rats the lot of them.
When you have dealt with a corrupt self regulator you realise they can do what they want because of self protectionism. If new readers trust lawyers, doctors, accountants you deserve everything they do to you. They are all scum.
Mr Cherbi.
ReplyDeleteI have read your blog with interest and this latest post on the Master Policy.For the avoidance of any doubt I am a solicitor with 25 years of good service to my clients.
I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt the most difficult cases my firm has ever handled are negligence claims against other solicitors. (WE UNDERESTAND THIS, PROFESSIONAL LOYALTIES, PUNISHING YOUR INSURERS IF CASES ARE SUCCESSFULL)?
It is true that few such claims result in a success for the client which leads me to support your idea that a different mechanism must be put in place to resolve negligence and other similar type claims. (WELL SOLICITOR, I AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE THIS SITUATION IS DESTROYING THE REPUTATIONS OF ALL SOLICITORS. WE WILL NEVER GIVE UP ON THE ISSUE OF SELF REGULATION. IT IS AS PETER STATES "A COVER FOR CRIMINALITY" AND WHEN WE SEE DOUGLAS MILL'S LIES ABOUT NOT BLOCKING CLAIMS AGAINST SOLICITORS, IT MAKES US FIGHT HARDER.
WHEN PROFESSIONALS ARE STEALING, DISTORTING MEDICAL EVIDENCE, THEY MUST BE EXPOSED BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IN MY VIEW THEY ARE CRIMINALS, AND MILL PROTECTED THEM AT THE LAW SOCIETY. HE RESIGNED LIKE MANY CROOKED LAWYERS, AND INNOCENT PEOPLE STAND AND FIGHT. IT IS GOOD YOU SAY A DIFFERENT MECHANISM MUST BE PUT IN PLACE TO RESOLVE NEGLIGENCE ETC. IF YOU ARE A GOOD FAIR LAWYER, YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THE CLIENTS VIEWPOINT AND I BELIEVE YOU DO. BUT WE FIGHT ON, THE ISSUES AND CONSEQUENCES ARE TOO IMPORTANT FOR US.