Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission misled media over taxpayer funding as calls grow for accountability over anti-client policies

SLCC squareScottish Legal Complaints Commission were told to hide the fact they receive public funds. Revelations today from interviews with senior legal insiders and documents obtained under Freedom of Information legislation show the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has been ordered around by the Scottish Government and the Law Society on many of its key decisions to-date affecting its consideration of complaints against ‘crooked lawyers, even to the extent the Commission was ordered to publicly conceal the fact it has so far consumed well over £2 million of taxpayers money.

SLCC Public FundingSLCC told the media it was not publicly funded while actually receiving £2 million from the Scottish Government. While minutes obtained from the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission show they had deliberately misinformed enquiring newspapers the Commission was not publicly funded, a disclosure received from the Scottish Government admitted that at least £1.7 million of taxpayers money had been lavished on the underperforming law complaints quango up to 29 September 2008, insisting that "...as the budget of up to 2 million at the time was managed by the Scottish Government, there was no need for the SLCC to provide accounting of how this money was spent.". The documents also contain references to questions asked by MSP William Coffey (SNP) in the Scottish Parliament on the SLCC’s performance, questions which rattled the SLCC’s board members.

A breakdown of the costs of the alleged ‘non existent’ public funding revealed that £608,991 was spent on staff & training, a further £245,165 was spent on furniture, £290,523 went on buying computers & information technology, £122,979 was used up on legal costs, a staggering £370,092 of taxpayers money was spent on rent of the SLCC's operational base - the Stamp Office at Waterloo Place, Edinburgh, and £72,977 bought advertising for the SLCC. This coming on top of the salaries of up to £100,000 & staggering expenses claims of up to £350 a day for SLCC Board members & officials.

ScottishGovernmentScottish Government civil servants blocked help for consumers with grievances against Law Society. However, a legal insider has today sensationally revealed the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission was ordered by the Justice Department to conceal the fact it had received public funds to avoid any calls for public accountability over how the money had been spent. Even worse, the insider has also revealed the SLCC's controversial decision not to look at historical cases of complaints against crooked lawyers & the Law Society of Scotland which occurred before 1st October 2008 actually came about after civil servants at the Scottish Government and Law Society officials apparently insisted that people with long standing claims & complaints "should be brushed aside and given no help by the SLCC."

The source said : "The funding subject has provoked a number of enquiries from the media on how much public money the commission received after journalists had quoted online sources claiming around 2.5 million had come in from the taxpayer. Orders were given out not to admit to any public funding, and those in the know were told that such enquiries should be rebuffed by stating the SLCC is funded solely by levies from the legal profession itself."

She went on : "I think the public should also be concerned to hear that decisions such as refusing to look at complaints before 1st October 2008 are linked to the SLCC’s policy of avoiding mention of their public funding, because some felt if the Commission admitted to being publicly funded but had refused to investigate public complaints, there would be calls for accountability. While that may be bad enough, it is also true the proposal not to investigate complaints before October 2008 came from the current Scottish Executive and the Law Society who specifically did not want the Commission to become a gateway to resolving clients cases of long standing grievances against the legal profession."

"I personally found the momentum & discussions on that subject very bitter. It was clear many who took part in the decision to block the investigation of historical complaints had an axe to grind in preventing the resolution of cases which have haunted us for years. I do not believe this kind of decision would have been taken under the previous administration, who created the legislation and the SLCC in good faith to clear up the problems of poor regulation of solicitors in Scotland past & present."

A Scottish Government insider today confirmed the running total of taxpayers money thrown at the SLCC was in reality much higher than officials were willing to publicly admit. He alleged the true figure to be in the order of £2.5 million and continuing to rise, given the massive work that civil servants in the Justice Department have had to put in on hundreds of issues which have cropped up since the SLCC officially began its work on 1st October 2008.

He said : "It is shameful to see the SLCC trying to deny the incredible level of financial support they received from the Government. Taxpayers should be up in arms over the public money wasted on the SLCC, especially since the Commission has now had two years worth of complaints levies paid by the legal profession amounting to about £5 million which should enable repayment to the public purse."

He continued : "If the public had a vote on demanding back their money from some underperforming, credibility lacking lawyer complaints quango I'd say you might get a 99.9% 'Yes' ! £2 million of public funds spent on mishandling complaints against rogue lawyers could be better used elsewhere in Scotland especially since the economy is so bad and public services are facing cuts."

A spokesman for one of Scotland's consumer organisations also waded into the argument over the SLCC's funding by saying : "Until the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission pay back all the money it received from the taxpayer, which it can certainly now afford to do, it is perfectly reasonable to conclude the SLCC is jointly funded by the taxpayer and legal profession."

She went on : "However, it is very disturbing to learn that decisions taken by the commission such as their refusal to look at complaints involving legal issues which took place before 1st October 2008 apparently have a party political dimension to them. I can only conclude the present administration has no real wish to see the legal profession cleaned up in any way whatsoever. Consumers should be on their guard against their lack of rights with their errant solicitors and the rather unhelpful SLCC.”

It is of little surprise to me the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has, evidently a policy of dishonesty with the media and the public in all things from its funding to what it can and cannot investigate. So far the SLCC has consistently demonstrated it cannot be trusted to independently investigate complaints against the legal profession, and its attitudes towards the public as I have previously reported can only be described as anti-client, and most definitely, hostile.

John SwinneyCabinet Finance Chief John Swinney expected the SLCC would look at historical complaints against the Law Society. At least one voice in the current Scottish Government, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney, has expressed his dismay to constituents over the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission’s refusal to investigate historical cases of complaints against the legal profession, as Mr Swinney had fully expected the SLCC to address many long standing cases which brought about the Commission’s very existence in the first place. These apparent differences in Ministerial expectations do lead to the feeling there are divisions in the Government on how the SLCC should implement its duties towards the public, and why ‘saving lawyers from complaints’ shouldn’t be such an apparent top priority for some in this administration.

This afternoon, a source close to Mr Swinney expressed anger over the denials the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission had made regarding its public funding, which was of course paid out by Mr Swinney in his role as the Scottish Government’s Cabinet Finance Chief.

He said : “Mr Swinney has as you know, written to the SLCC on several occasions taking the view that members of the public are stakeholders in the organisation due in no small part to the huge financial input by the Scottish Government into the SLCC itself. I think it is very deceitful of the SLCC to try to conceal their debt to the public in this regard and I can imagine John will not be impressed with their conduct on this matter.”

“Perhaps as some are already saying it is time for the SLCC to pay the public back for the costs of creating the Commission, which the legal profession brought on itself.”

Giving a taxpayer funded £2 million gift to the Scottish legal profession is bad enough, but then having that gift turned around and used by the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission to dodge & avoid all the duties expected of it .. well, that in itself shows us there is long way yet to protect consumers from Scotland’s increasing ranks of ‘crooked lawyers’ out to ruin their clients for anything they can get.

74 comments:

Anonymous said...

£245,165 had been spent on furniture ???

I could buy a house for that!

Anonymous said...

The Law Society should be repaying the public funds, because this SLCC will not investigate complaints before October 2008 anyway.

The Scottish Government, Law Society, SLCC, Justice Department, and MacAskill's lawyer colleagues are a disgrace.

The way things are at present we would be as well filling the posts in Government, and the justice department with, Yelland, Mill, Pritchard, Masterman, Scanlan, and the other crooks. The SLCC, an independent complaints commission. Lies, lies, lies, another level of protection for lawyers.

There are many crooked lawyers practising today, kept outside the net because the SLCC will not investigate clients complaints before October 2008. The public money would be as well poured into the Law Society of Scotland because this money is for the protection of the legal establishment. A disgrace, these lawyers, many politicians, and civil servants should be employed by the Law Society, SLCC, that is where their loyalties lie.

Anonymous said...

Put simply, this is legalised corruption, because the criminals involved are immune from any prosecution.

The system is culturally hostile to clients, one law for the many, immunity from prosecution for the few.

The commission should be scrapped, the Scottish Government taken to the European Court of Human Rights, because it wants no investigations of corrupt lawyers, where the corruption occured before October 2008. What is happening here is criminal, because the lawyers decide who can and cannot have access to the courts.

There are too many decision makers in the Scottish Parliament in bed with the lawyers. It is a matter for Supra National Law.

Anonymous said...

I am at a loss to understand why a quango created by parliament would wish to deny they were set up with public funds ?
Clearly something underhanded going on there since as you say they wouldnt have existed if it were not for the likes of Swinney in the first place !

Anonymous said...

The clown who wrote the SG FOI must surely regret the phrase "so there was no need for the SLCC to provide accounting how this money was spent"

They just handed it over and let them get on with it ? Sheer madness.

Anonymous said...

I'd say that letter from Julie Muir puts an end to the SLCC's credibility for good.

Anonymous said...

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, Masterman paid to do what Douglas Mill did which cost him his job at the Law Society.

It seems to me this (independent commission) is more bent than the corrupt lawyers it is meant to protect clients from. No complaints body will ever do a fair unbiased job unless it is devoid of lawyers and those who seek to protect them. It is an expensive farce, keeping crooks in jobs that should not be on the payrole in the first place.

I am sure if Mr MacAskill could do this he would draft legislation which would make complaints against lawyers illegal. That is how much he wants to protect his colleagues, because he like Yelland and the rest, do not care what happens to clients. The latter are just money to lawyers, and with no independent complaints system, the lights are still green for those who want to exploit their clients to the maximum.

Anonymous said...

A breakdown of the costs of the alleged ‘non existent’ public funding revealed that £608,991 had been spent on Staff & training, a further £245,165 had been spent on furniture, £290,523 had gone on computers & information technology, £122,979 had been used up on legal costs, a staggering £370,092 of taxpayers money had been spent on rent of the Stamp Office, and £72,977 had went on advertising the SLCC. This coming on top of the salaries of up to £100,000 & staggering expenses claims of up to £350 a day for SLCC Board members & officials.

DISGUSTING WASTE OF PUBLIC MONEY PROTECTING LEECH SCUM LAWYERS

Anonymous said...

Kenny MacAskill: "The website of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is fully operational and can be located at www.scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk. The website is constantly under review and further adjustments are expected to be completed by the autumn".

Mr MacAskill please remove the words, independent, impartial.

If the commission will not investigate complaints before October 2008, what is the point in it's creation?

Anonymous said...

Isnt it comical that civil serpent trying to justify the waste of money on this quango in the letter ?
This is why we actually need cuts in public services because clearly there are people working in govt that are surplus to the public good.

Anonymous said...

Eileen Masterman should resign over this matter, because the organisation she is in charge of is dishonest. The buck stops with her and Kenny MacAskill.

No surprise really, they are both lawyers, the scourge of humanity.

Anonymous said...

Attorney General Baroness Scotland is clinging to her job after she was fined £5,000 for hiring an illegal immigrant as her housekeeper.

Gordon Brown insisted he would not sack the peer, despite her being forced to apologise for "technically" breaking a law she had helped pass.
=====================================
Another politician looking after a lawyer, and Harriet Harman is another lawyer standing by the Baroness.

Anonymous said...

If Jane Irvine and her gang are so ashamed to receive public funds may I recommend they donate them to a more worthy cause than feathering the nests of people who protect crooked lawyers.

Cancer Research,The Beatson or Capability Scotland could do with the money more than a few overpaid servants of the legal profession !

Anonymous said...

As a lawyer I would be quite happy for the commission to deal with a complaint about me.

Anonymous said...

The Scottish Government, another layer of protection for the Law Society of Scotland and it's membership.

Anonymous said...

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is a lawyer loving corrupt facade. It is no different from the criminals outlined below.


Glasgow Office
The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS)
Mackintosh House
120 Blythswood Street
Glasgow
G2 4EA

London Office
The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS)
1 Bell Yard
London
WC2A 2JR

The Legal Defence Union Ltd
a Company Limited by Guarantee
Registered in Scotland
Company No 106696
Professor David O'Donnell
Athas House
Inchbare
By Edzell
Angus
DD9 7QL

All self regulators, waiting to crush clients and patients who dare complain.

People of Scotland these are the people who will take legal action against you if you upset their members. There is a Legal Catch 22, they can take you to court, but you cannot take them to court because you will need a lawyer who is a paid up member of the crooked Law Society of Scotland.

So doctors and lawyers can basically treat you any way they want. This arrangement ensures they are licenced for corruption because they know they are immune from prosecution. Think about this the next time you book an appointment, with your GP or lawyer. I can tell you if you want to warn patients or clients about a corrupt professional you will need to do this yourselves. These crooks are quite happy to leave their crooks working with you.

Anonymous said...

Can Mr Swinney recover the public money pumped into the commission and start again, without lawyers involved?

The ecomony is on it's knees and these lawyers have received a £2,000,000.00 gift because the money has not been used to protect the public.

The commission then attempts to cover up the injection of public money, covers up meetings with Marsh UK over the Master Policy. This is a lawyers protection commission, it has nothing to do with clients justice. The Law Society certainly have immense control of Parliament, so much that they are running the country. Money talks.

Anonymous said...

BBC NEWS

NHS complaint response 'failing'.

Patients are being let down by the way NHS trusts in England handle complaints, a watchdog has found.

The Healthcare Commission found wide variation in the way complaints were dealt with - and a failure to act on any problems they threw up.
----------------------------------
My experience of the NHS Local Resolution system in Motherwell, Lanarkshire is that corrupt GP's are left practising. There are documents to prove this.

These self regulators and their employers protect each other. A Lanarkshire family doctor was caught distorting medical records, what did the NHS Clinical Risk Mamager in Motherwell do about that, nothing. This is happening everywhere, no different from the Law Society of Scotland. It allows individuals to keep their reputations when they should be jailed.

Anonymous said...

I just want to say I find it disgusting these people are getting £100,000 and £350 a day expenses in a recession !

Worse than the banks and thats saying something !

Anonymous said...

A legal insider has today sensationally revealed the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission was ordered by the Justice Department to conceal the fact it had received public funds to avoid any calls for public accountability over how the money had been spent. (WE NEED THE REMOVAL OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS) Even worse, the insider has also revealed the SLCC's controversial decision not to look at historical cases of complaints against crooked lawyers & the Law Society of Scotland which occurred before 1st October 2008 actually came about after civil servants at the Scottish Government and Law Society officials apparently insisted that people with long standing claims & complaints "should be brushed aside and given no help by the SLCC." (THIS NEEDS CHALLENGED BUT BY WHOME, THIS KIND OF LOYALTY IS DUE TO MONEY NOTHING ELSE, PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY AND THAT IS WHY THEY WANT TO PROTECT SCOTLAND'S LAWYERS. THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE WOUND UP BECAUSE IT WILL NEVER HELP CLIENTS, NEVER.

Anonymous said...

and while leeches get 100K a year and 350 a day cancer sufferers have to fight for their medication

The SNP should change their name to Scottish Disgusting Party

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/04/17/cancer-treatment-battle-hero-mike-gray-dies-53-86908-20385296/

Cancer treatment battle hero Mike Gray dies 53

Apr 17 2008 By Reg McKay

BATTLING cancer hero Mike Gray died yesterday aged 53.

When told he had terminal bowel cancer, Mike met the challenge with bravery and good humour.

And when told one drug could extend his life but the NHS would not fund it because of cost, that the same rule killed thousands of Scots too early every year, he responded with outrage and determination to change the rules.

No one would blame any terminally ill person for resting, taking care of themselves and spending every last minute of their lives with those they loved doing whatever they wanted.

That wasn't Mike's way when there was injustice to fight.

Even when he knew he would get the drug, Cetuximab, after wife Tina's family made the £40,000 available to buy it privately, that still wasn't good enough.

"What about those with no money?" he demanded. "Is it one rule for the poor and another for us?"

After only three courses of Cetuximab his doctors told him the treatment was working for him.

On the day he went to an appeal against NHS Grampian's decision not to fund his treatment, Mike said: "If it had been left to the health authorities I wouldn't be here. I would be dead."

Mike won, opening the door for thousands of others in Scotland to have similar drugs funded by the NHS.

Anonymous said...

Whats driving Mr Coffey in his qs to MacAskill ??
All very mysterious and not one nat lunatic in sight to defend handing over 2mil from the taxpayer to a bunch of self serving lawyers !

Anonymous said...

So the SLCC is not as 'independent' as we were led to believe, but dances to the tune of the Law Society and Co.

No surprise there given that many SLCC staff were transferred over from the Law Society in the first place.

A sham from start to finish - just like the SNP.

Anonymous said...

While most consumer organisations such as Which?, the Scottish Consumer Council, many campaigners & consumer groups, and even the Office of Fair Trading wish to see the Law Society's monopoly on access to justice curtailed, the legal profession have unsurprisingly, clung to their policy of retaining as much control as possible within their proposals, even citing themselves as being best placed to retain regulation of the legal services market in-house, keeping the spectre of lawyers investigating lawyers to the fore which has become one of the professions biggest burdens, and greatest liability.
==================================
Lawyers do not investigate lawyers, lawyers protect lawyers, the public must treat lawyers like rattlesnakes, where possible stay well clear. This profession are very dangerous, ruthless and cunning, please never trust a lawyer.

Anonymous said...

Clients need to start thinking in the following terms,

A white person has been murdered and the Klu Klux Klan know a white person is the murderer. They can put a white man or a black man on trial, so the innocent black man hangs.

This is the client, lawyer, mentality of the Law Society of Scotland. Their lawyer has robbed the client, and they know this. But they cannot bring themselves to prosecute the lawyer. The Law Society is Scotland's Klu Klux Klan, they do not want the truth, they want lawyers cleared.

Phillip Yelland does not care about the farmer who committed suicide because of Yelland, any more than the Klu Klux Klan hanging an innocent black man. We are dealing with a professional body that see only what they want to see, they have Hitler's views of people, Untermenschen (subhumans, inferior people) that is how the Law Society see clients, Untermenschen that must be tortured to keep the gods that pay for their practising certificates clean, no matter which crimes they commit. These Law Society people cannot be cured, they are driven to protect their own. The complaints system must be totally seperate from lawyers influence, and those who support them. This is why Scotland's lawyers are Nazis, they see clients as inferior beings like Hitler saw the Jewish people, and I have no doubt they would gas us if they could.

Anonymous said...

I think your Scottish Govt official is trying to justify the 1.7m spend as an acceptable outlay.
No matter,it is still public money and we are after all talking about an organisation to regulate complaints which sees an annual income of over 2m from the complaints levy.
If therefore someone such as Mr Swinney did not ask the slcc to repay the public funds it received I would say serious questions need to be asked.

Keep up the good work!

Anonymous said...

Julie Muir seems to have spent more time trying to justify the spend than detailing the actual amounts.
Could this be yet another example of civil servants supporting the nationalist agenda which in this case is clearly to ruin any chance of someone having a fair hearing against a lawyer.

Anonymous said...

The amounts of money sloshing around for this lawyers quango are a damned disgrace

PAY IT BACK SLCC !

Anonymous said...

12pm

I was thinking much the same while reading it.

http://news.scotsman.com/scottishnationalparty/Pressure-piles-on-Scotland39s-top.5666456.jp

Anonymous said...

A case of a blank cheque from the taxpayer being given to undeserving people.

No wonder people are disgusted.I certainly am.

Anonymous said...

"Orders were given out not to admit to any public funding, and those in the know were told that such enquiries should be rebuffed by stating the SLCC is funded solely by levies from the legal profession itself"

Really ? Well sack the scumbag who ever suggested that.The money that Salmond used to shower on the slcc came from taxpayers who dont earn 100K a year.If they are denying they got it just to avoid being held to account it should be taken back now !

Anonymous said...

7:31 AM

I agree.Make them pay it back.

Anonymous said...

Just to agree with everyone else here and I think any normal person would probably agree that taxpayers money should be recovered from the SLCC.

Anonymous said...

I've spent 4 months writing back and forth to 5 people at this SLCC and still no further forward with my complaint.they wanted to pass it to the Law Society then decided they should investigsate it and now its supposed to be on hold while they go away and make up their minds again
Terrible service and to think all this money went on them its a disgrace

Anonymous said...

Is Swinney waiting on it hitting the newspapers before he does something ?

Anonymous said...

The lies from the SLCC are to be expected. Lawyers from the Law Society are not going to look after clients interests, on the contrary they are there to protect their club.

I take the view that every lawyer is a criminal, simply because there is nothing to stop lawyer criminality when a complaint is made. These people are above the law and they will fight to remain so. It beggars belief that a university degree can create legal criminals, with great power, but the degree is not the problem, it is self regulation.

Lord Hamilton for example, a man answerable to himself, like Henry VIII, a despot and this is in 2009. The legal system protects it's own and there is nothing to hold these people to account. It is a disgrace. I think people like Hamilton are criminals for the simple reason they have despotic power. That is potentially dangerous.

Anonymous said...

I think all western countries have anti lawyer websites now. Never has a profession been hated so much as this lawyer scum. If there is an afterlife you should all burn in hell, because you are evil incarnate.

I would like to see your reactions if you were on the receiving end of your treatment of clients. That is the mistake Hitler made, he should have put lawyers and only lawyers in the gas chambers. Purge the world of you crooks.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I've spent 4 months writing back and forth to 5 people at this SLCC and still no further forward with my complaint.they wanted to pass it to the Law Society then decided they should investigsate it and now its supposed to be on hold while they go away and make up their minds again

Terrible service and to think all this money went on them its a disgrace.

THIS ORGANISATION IS THERE TO PROTECT LAWYERS. MASTERMAN SHOULD BE DISMISSED, THE LAWYERS KICKED OUT, AND THE SLCC SET UP WITH TEETH, NO LAWYERS OR SUPPORTERS OF LAWYERS. WITH THE LAW SOCIETY RUNNING THE SHOW THERE IS LITTLE CHANCE OF THAT.

Anonymous said...

Obviously just an expensive rubber stamp for the Law Society ?

Anonymous said...

A WARNING TO THE PUBLIC,

YOU CANNOT FIND OUT IF YOUR LAWYER HAS A CRIMINAL RECORD IN SCOTLAND.

THIS SO CALLED PROFESSION HANDLE CLIENT'S BUSINESS, WHERE THE RESULTS CAN BE HORRENDOUS IF THEY GET IT WRONG BY NEGLIGENCE, OR MORE COMMONLY CORRUPTION.

YOU RISK YOUR LIFE EVERY TIME YOU GO TO A LAWYER, MORE SO THAN SMOKING A CIGARETTE.

THE GESTAPO UNDER THE COMMAND OF LORNA JACK WILL SHRED YOUR DOCUMENTS IF YOU COMPLAIN TO THE LAW SOCIETY, BECAUSE THEY SHOULD BE RENAMED, THE LAWYER PROTECTION SOCIETY.

THE LAW SOCIETY AND SCOTTISH LEGAL COMPLAINTS COMMISSION ARE POISON.

Anonymous said...

Too much money being thrown at this mob for my liking but it does prove your point all along that lawyers will do anything at any cost to protect each other !

Anonymous said...

Why did taxpayers have to fork out 370K to a private landlord for Jane Irvine and her posse of malcontents to play house ?

Anonymous said...

No doubt in my mind after reading this the SLCC is as crooked as the Law Society.Shut it down and send in the cops!

Anonymous said...

MacAskill should be prosecuted, he is no justice minister unless you are a lawyer. This man is being paid by taxpayers to deliver justice, but is incapable of this because he wants to protect lawyers. The latter have criminal levels of power and MacAskill pours public money into a new Law Society called the SLCC.

I do not want public money being used to keep Masterman and her lot in comfort, sack the lot of them, and get the money back. They are making a mockery of the LPLA Act, which was meant to protect clients.

It would be nice if MacAskill's higher power gave him something terminal, for all the good he is to clients. The Law Society can send him a nice wreath.

Anonymous said...

Hi Peter

Its easy to see a lot of money has been thrown at the legal profession with not much result.
I agree with your conclusion but I also think there should now be an investigation or inquiry into just how bad the SLCC has become.

Keep up the good work !

Anonymous said...

Perhaps only one word is needed to describe the slcc. "Fraud" seems to fit well.

Anonymous said...

'A law unto herself.'

Lady Smith abuses her judicial position to protect and promote private vested interests - such as law firm Shepherd & Wedderburn (her husband is the Chairman) Hubby has also landed a nice little number on the SLCC.

Her disgraceful treatment of a party litigant who has been the victim of crooked lawyers is currently under investigation. She has already assisted the crooked lawyers by ensuring the proceedings were heard in a closed court.
-----------------------------------
Another one of Scotland's supercillious few, who's husband is at the SLCC. The legal establishment, people of Scotland are there to jail those who break the law, when they are above the law themselves. They call this a justice system?

Anonymous said...

www.sacl/info

We have received over 100 complaints about the conduct of Philip Yelland in his capacity as Law Society 'Client Relations Director'. Victims of crooked solicitors refer to him as "the most corrupt man in Scotland" and such strong feelings are supported by overwhelming statistical, documentary and eyewitness evidence. The evidence proves, beyond any doubt, the Law Society deny victims justice by protecting rogue solicitors from the consequences of misconduct and collude with the Insurers to limit or negate payouts to victims.
-----------------------------------
Never trust any lawyer.

Anonymous said...

Lawyers ruin clients because of self regulation. They know the Law Society and Scottish Legal Complaints Commission will protect them. Look at the woman in charge of the Commission, she said "campaigners were offensive" which means she also thinks ruined clients are offensive. What chance do people who complain to the Commission have with attitudes like Masterman's.

Like all hypocrites, Masterman never talks about criminals within the legal profession because to her, these people do not exsist. Clients are dealing with people who are so biased and warped they refuse to see what the reality is. Lawyers could not be corrupt if the complaint went to others outside the profession.

On Question time last night, one Lib Dem politician, talked to Harriet Harman a minister in the current government, about her attempt to stop the public finding out about MP's expenses, by trying to prevent the FOI Act applying to MP's. She is also a lawyer, who thinks self regulation is good because she defends it. The panel spoke about Baroness Scotland, who pushed the law through parliament but did no keep photocopies of documents, relating to her housekeeper. Harman said the Baroness made a genuine mistake.

It seems to me lawyers, politicians, are exonerated, when the s*** hits the fan but members of the public would be prosecuted.
Here are a few examples,

Lawyers paying back legal aid money, no lawyers charged and prosecuted.

MP's expenses, to date no charges, and there will be none.

Douglas Mill, Phillip Yelland, Kenneth Pritchard, blocking clients access to justice against corrupt lawyers, no charges.

Blair's government, (another lawyer) Cash for Honours.

I believe this to be the tip of the iceberg, and this is the part I find incredulous,

None of them have done anything wrong, they all acted in good faith, give us a break, one law for the rulers, a different application of law for the ruled.

This Miss Masterman is the attitude self regulation creates, even wheh you people are a mile out, it is always a mistake, as Harman said last night, the Baroness did not break the criminal law.

In this country it is not so much what you do that determines whether you are prosecuted, it is who you are and I see a rabble of self regulators who are above the criminal law. Why because they have friends in the right places to prevent the legal process from starting.

Lawyers clients should consider what happened to them when complaining about a lawyer, perhaps the CPS told the detective investigating Cash for Honours to water down his evidence. Like the Law Society, SLCC, Number 10 were secretive about certain e mails relating to the scandal.

Self regulation encourages professional criminals called lawyers and politicians, and lawyers ensure they are covered up at all costs.

Some justice system, these people do not know the meaning of the word justice.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Why did taxpayers have to fork out 370K to a private landlord for Jane Irvine and her posse of malcontents to play house ?

1:55 PM

Yes good point and you should take a look at just WHO that landlord IS !

Anonymous said...

NAME AND SHAME SCOTLKAND WEBSITE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

HBM Sayers, Glasgow based Solicitors specializing in high profile incidents involving multiple injuries or fatalities. We have documented evidence this firm work with doctors such as Dr Dorward above and do little to prevent them from producing evidence they are not qualified to produce. This looks like corruption at the highest level and that it could be them that actually encourage the doctors to produce corrupt evidence.

Hi Peter,

When you have time can you look into this one.

Great work.

Thanks

Anonymous said...

The Law Society of Scotland.

The Faculty of Advocates.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.


What do they have in common, all corrupt, all self regulating, all had things their own way far too long. It is barking mad that anyone should expect fair treatment from a self regulator, they cover up what their colleagues do to you and this culture is reciprocated.

Anonymous said...

Justice Secretary MacAskill is blamed by legal insiders for allowing the SLCC to fall victim to Law Society bullying.
-------------------------------------
I believe Mr MacAskill to be the most corrupt justice minister Scotland has ever had.

Anonymous said...

It seems the Law Society has wasted a lot of money trying to make joe public believe they get protection from these hoods.
Wake up you Scots and do something about it !

Anonymous said...

These justice committees at the parliament are useless, how can they allow this joke of a complaints system?

Anonymous said...

Human rights warning over plan for new legal watchdog
PAUL ROGERSON and ROBBIE DINWOODIE April 11 2006

Proposals to introduce an independent system for handling complaints about Scotland's 10,000 lawyers are "flawed and wrong in law", a leading human rights authority has warned.

Liberal Democrat peer Lord Lester of Herne Hill was asked for his opinion on the executive's plans by the Law Society of Scotland, the representative body for the nation's 9000 solicitors.

The cornerstone of the legislation is the creation of a watchdog to handle complaints – the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission – which will comprise a majority of non-lawyers and end centuries of self-regulation.

The society warned in March the new complaints- handling body could breach the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). WHAT ABOUT CLIENTS HUMAN RIGHTS YOU SELFISH FOOLS?

In a statement yesterday, the society said: "Lord Lester concludes that the proposals, which include setting up a new quango to handle service complaints about lawyers, would not be compatible with human rights law, saying that a right of appeal to a court or tribunal would have to be available for clients and solicitors."

NEVER TRUST A LAWYER, THEY THINK THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED BECAUSE THE PUBLIC WANT AN END TO SELF REGULATION. LOONIES THEY ARE, THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND.

Anonymous said...

THE WHISTLEBLOWERS IN THE SLCC ARE BRAVE AND CORRECT AND THEY HAVE RIGHT ON THEIR SIDE. BUT WHAT IS THE POSITION OF OUR SO CALLED JUSTICE MINISTER?

MacAskill demanded leaks be plugged "or else". After the spectacular intervention from the Justice Department on behalf of Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, members of the commission's staff were allegedly given a 'friendly word in their ear', where the implication was that if anyone told the outside world, including the media, and me, what was really going on inside the SLCC, they would be sacked and possibly face prosecution for their whistle blowing.

SACKING AND PROSECUTING PEOPLE FOR TELLING THE TRUTH, AND PROTECTING LAWYERS WHO SHOULD BE BEHIND BARS. GOOD EVENING MR MACASKILL, WHAT CAN I SAY, SHAME ON YOU SIR. YOU ARE THE MOST USELESS JUSTICE MINISTER BECAUSE YOU ARE A LAWYER.

Anonymous said...

MacAskill a message for you, try and prosecute whistleblowers in the SLCC and we will be all over you. This SLCC of yours was created to PROTECT THE PUBLIC. REMEMBER.

Like Dr Goebbles you better control the press because if any whistleblower is prosecuted it will be seen for what it will be, a justice minister protecting his lawyer colleagues.

I do not see you as justice minister taking Yelland, Smart, Mill or Pritchard to task. The latter is a Sheriff, and you justice minister will prosecute a whistleblower and leave a liar in charge of court proceedings. If I had my way you would be behind bars, you justice minister for lawyers.

Anonymous said...

To all of the members of the public out there being put through hell by lawyer trash, their day is coming. On our own we cannot beat them but together we can and we will. Post your comments, I am sure Peter will agree with this.

Five million Scots can crush ten thousand self regulating criminals, so tell everyone you know, because they could be next.

To you lawyer trash, try and use your grey matter for once. What would you want done if your client could do to you, what you have done to them? Do not do a John Wayne Gacy or a Shipman and kid yourself you are clean. What would you want done to someone who had ruined your life and other lawyers protect that person? You would want justice. So do we, and we are growing in numbers every day, your days for ruining people without consequences are numbered.

Anonymous said...

I think all self regualtors have mental health problems, and I am not a doctor.

The attitude is that colleagues do nothing wrong. This attitude is the reason self regulation must end.

Anonymous said...

I hope Lord Gill has seen things from a clients perspective when he publishes his review?

Anonymous said...

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill : Puppet of the legal profession or legal services consumer protection champion for Scotland.

The man is a puppet of the Law Society, the majority of Scottish politicians drag their heels with all the delays to justice reforms, so that when they are in legal trouble favours are granted.

Anonymous said...

Clementi reforms,

If the proposed access to legal services reforms go ahead, lawyers lose their monopoly on legal services, and you can go to a local supermarket to see an off the shelf legal representative, who may only charge you £20 to handle an item of advice which a solicitor member of the Law Society can currently charge you £150 +VAT ... and of course, currently, you don't have anywhere else to go to get that legal advice other than a solicitors office ... so, as is plain for all to see ... lawyers do not want to give that up.


LEGAL CHOICE, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OR SOMEONE IN A SUPERMARKET. I HAVE DEALT WITH THE CRIMINALS SCOTLANDS LAWYERS PAY EACH YEAR FOR THEIR CERTIFICATES, THE LAW SOCIETY, I WILL TAKE THE TESCO LAW OPTION ANYTIME, AT LEAST I WILL BE FREE OF LORNA JACK'S BAND OF CROOKS AND REPROBATES, BECAUSE THE LAW SOCIETY WILL NOT BE REGULATING TESCO LAW.

SCOTLANDS LAWYERS, YOU TAUGHT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHAT SCUM YOU ARE.

YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW, SOONER OR LATER RIGHT OVERCOMES INJUSTICE, TRUTH CRUSHES LIES, AND CRIMINALS ARE PUNISHED.

DEATH TO ALL OF YOU.

Anonymous said...

I would be hesitant to believe any body set up and paid for by lawyers to investigate themselves.

Anonymous said...

Published Date: 27 September 2009
By Chris Mackie

JUSTICE Secretary Kenny MacAskill has attacked universities for luring students into law courses when only one in four trainee lawyers can find work.
The minister said he was "unimpressed" by the attitude of law schools and expressed concern they were not putting the needs of students first. (Just like you Mr MacAskill you put lawyers first, not clients).

New government statistics revealed the depths of an employment crisis facing trainee lawyers in Scotland, some of whom pay £5,000 for their courses. (What's the work, tough).

MacAskill made his remarks during a meeting with the Law Society of Scotland, which represents solicitors. His concerns emerged in minutes obtained under Freedom of Information legislation.

Anonymous said...

SOME LEGAL SYSTEM, READ THIS ONE. JULLAIN DANSKIN THE PREVERT.

This paedophile lawyer served a paltry 9 MONTHS in prison for abusing young boys in his care. One of his victims committed suicide, meanwhile the others continue to serve life sentences.

Two thiefs who blackmailed Danskin received 10 YEARS in jail. Scotland's courts routinely protect child abusers and crooked lawyers - but are merciless when dealing with petty offenders and legal profession whistleblowers.

PERHAPS THE JUDGES LIKE CHILDREN TOO. THESE LEGALLY QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS ARE WARPED, AND CHILD WELFARE IS NOT HIGH ON THEIR AGENDA, 9 MONTHS IN COMPARISON WITH 10 YEARS, SOME MESSAGE THIS CASE SENDS OUT.

Anonymous said...

Cabinet Finance Chief John Swinney expected the SLCC would look at historical complaints against the Law Society.

Mr Swinney should recoup all of the public money paid to this quango, and let the lawyers pay, after all it is protecting them. The public are paying for a service, and are not getting the service they need.

Anonymous said...

I have never heard any lawyer critizise, the likes of Haggarty, Julian Danskin, John O'Donnell, Penmann, or any of the countless other criminals in the Scottish legal system.

Ten thousand of them in Scotland, a cottage industry with total power and total protection.

There are people deny the holocaust happened, the same mindset a lawyers, they never thing they do wrong to clients.

Anonymous said...

One Lawyer said,

"The way the Law Society handled the scandal surrounding Andrew Penman in the 1990s, and derailed his prosecution before the SSDT has cost us all dearly." (YOU ARE CORRECT).

He went on :“Saving Private Penman has led to a slew of media coverage of cases involving rogue solicitors and huge corruption scandals within the profession which has tarnished us all for life, (YES STAINED BEYOND CLEANSING, LAWYERS REPUTATIONS ARE IN THE GUTTER) ultimately costing all members our reputations and incalculable lost business while the staff within the Society award themselves promotions and huge salaries out of our contributions. They have obviously caused the profession much more harm than good and now be forced out."

(YES MR SOLICITOR, YOUR PRACTISING CERTIFICATE FEE IS PAYING CRIMINALS WHO ARE SINKING YOU ALL, AS PETER STATES ABOUT PHILLIP YELLAND "IF HE TOLD ME THE SKY WAS BLUE I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AND CHECK FOR MYSELF". I GO FURTHER AND APPLY PETER'S COMMENT TO ALL LAWYERS, NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAID TO ME I WOULD NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK IT. I HAVE NEVER MET PEOPLE SO CRIMINALLY ONE SIDED AND CORRUPT AS LAWYERS).

Anonymous said...

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scotland/Anger-as-new-law-graduates.5681971.jp

Anger as new law graduates can't get work

Published Date: 27 September 2009
By Christopher Mackie

ONLY one in four Scottish law graduates can expect to find a job as a solicitor in the current economic climate, government figures have revealed.

The stark statistic reveals the depths of an employment crisis facing trainee lawyers in Scotland, many of whom are paying more than £5,000 for a diploma in legal practice only to have their training contracts torn up or be released by firms after qualifyi


GREAT NEWS ! THE LEECH SCUM OF THE EARTH ARE FINALLY LOSING THEIR JOBS TOO !!!

HOPE THEY ALL TAKE A ONE WAY TICKET TO SWITZERLAND AND ENJOY SOME OF THAT FINE MOUNTAIN AIR BEFORE ***

Anonymous said...

Self regulation is the way lawyers avoid the consequences of their actions.

Anonymous said...

“Saving Private Penman has led to a slew of media coverage of cases involving rogue solicitors and huge corruption scandals within the profession which has tarnished us all for life".

-----------------------------------

if ever a lawyer made one honest statement it is the person who stated the above. the protection of lawyers by the law society has encouraged lawyer corruption, and client distrust of the profession.

my advice from personal experience to members of the public who have never dealt with a lawyer, beware, these people are dangerous, evil and ruthless. the law society and now the commission will save the next penman, you will have no legal rights and no lawyer to help you, because all lawyers want to save the penmans of the profession. so the lawyer who left this statement you could have helped penmens clients, but the culture as you know is protect the lawyer, f**k the client.

you are dangerous evil people, who can do what you want to the public because complaints about lawyers go to lawyers, or in the case of the commission, lawyers and their sympathisers. i do not see macaskill as the man to change this.

to the lawyer who left the above statement, how would you feel if you were one of penmans clients, perhaps you could let us know, after all you do not need to identify yourself.

Anonymous said...

Anger as new law graduates can't get work

Published Date: 27 September 2009
By Christopher Mackie

ONLY one in four Scottish law graduates can expect to find a job as a solicitor in the current economic climate, government figures have revealed. (75% fewer criminals to treat clients like S++T)

The stark statistic reveals the depths of an employment crisis facing trainee lawyers in Scotland, many of whom are paying more than £5,000 for a diploma in legal practice (MY HEART BLEEDS FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU) only to have their training contracts torn up or be released by firms after qualifying.
-----------------------------------
Economics that wonderful social science, that was created to study scarce resources and infinite human wants. Yes there is falling demand for lawyers, because the housing market, construction industry are in trouble, as are other areas of the economy. By the time we are finished economics will be less important than trust. Lawyers are a rat race rabble, filthy trash that ruin people. They feel no guilt, like serial killers.

My views were shaped by dealing with lawyers. The £5,000.00 you bums paid for your diploma in legal practice is chicken feed, many clients have lost a lot more, even their lives. If I had my way you lot would go from university to Auchwitz, Xyklon B to paralise your breathing, and the world would be a better place for it. You lawyers made me feel this way, so do not tell me to get a grip on my views. You can sleep at night because you are scum.

Anonymous said...

Hell theres too much money sloshing around at this slcc.Sack the lot of them and give the whole thing over to Cherbi and Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers ! Hopefully we will then get some lynchings instead of soft soap cover ups and scented pillows for the rent boy brigade at the Law Society !