Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Paid Pipers Required : MacAskill & Scottish Legal Complaints Commission seek extra quangocrats, lawyers, ex-Police for ‘cash happy’ quango boardroom

SLCCMore stooges sought for board of anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. FRESH from a recent recruitment drive which took in one parachuted-in advocate who happened to be a Scottish Government lawyer, and three ‘lay’ members which included yet another ex senior Police Officer, a barrister and an NHS Orkney official who resigned her post “for personal reasons”, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) and Scottish Government are again on the hunt for more quangocrats & members of Scotland’s legal profession to fill the SLCC’s bursting at the seams £150k+ expenses claiming boardroom, this despite the hapless anti-client law complaints quango being told to save money and downsize its costs in the face of falling complaints numbers & dwindling public confidence.

The new posts at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission , which include at least two non lawyers, and a further two lawyers, all of whom will be personally appointed to the SLCC by Scotland’s Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, will enjoy exquisite salaries, perks & expenses claims, with a basic remuneration of £212 per day for a meagre time commitment of up to 6 days per month. a basic The term of appointment is 5 years.

While the advertisements for the latest positions have just gone live today, it is already rumoured more retiring Police officers & quangocrats, who, having unexplainably been forewarned of the new posts, are already showing tentative interest in the well paid positions at the SLCC. It has also been revealed this afternoon certain members of Law Society committees are being encouraged to apply to join the SLCC, doubtless to keep the Law Society in their now familiar position as a fly on the wall during SLCC board meetings.

The latest round of appointments come in the face of mounting criticism of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission which has failed to make any inroads into its expected duties including monitoring of the controversial Law Society controlled client compensation schemes, the  Master Policy & Guarantee Fund, as defined in the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007, which itself struggled to pass through the Scottish Parliament in 2006 after threats from the then Chief Executive of the Law Society of Scotland, Douglas Mill to block Holyrood’s attempt at legal complaints reform with court action on Human Rights grounds arguing that it was a lawyer’s ‘Human Right’ to regulate cover up for their own colleagues.

So far, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in its three years of existence, has managed to uphold only one single complaint against an unidentified solicitor, having passed most complaints it received back to the Law Society of Scotland, after its board members took a controversial decision not to investigate any cases where instructions to solicitors began prior to 1st October 2008, the official start date of the SLCC.

Law Society & Scottish GovernmentConsumer Unfriendly : Scottish Government & Law Society intervened with a new law to block any attempt to use SLCC to look at historic complaints. The SLCC’s decision to refuse to look at any pre 2008 cases was taken after Petition PE1033 was lodged at the Scottish Parliament in January 2007 calling for the SLCC to investigate & adjudicate on long running cases of injustice caused by the highly prejudiced nature of the Law Society of Scotland’s regulation of complaints against solicitors. However, the Scottish Government, with the quiet support of the SLCC & Law Society of Scotland introduced a legislative amendment to the LPLA Act, the Legal Services Act 2007 (Transitional, Savings and Consequential Provisions) (Scotland) Order 2008 which included a section on the SLCC’s investigation of historical complaints. The law was presented by the Scottish Government to the Justice Committee in September 2008 and passed by the Scottish Parliament to block any further attempts to use the SLCC to investigate how poorly the Law Society had treated Scots over the years.

The official line being put out today on the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission’s latest recruitment drive for new board members is that with many of the current board members terms coming to an end, their positions need to be filled.

A Scottish Government spokesman commenting on the new recruitment round, which will see Scotland’s Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill appoint a new group of like minded individuals to the SLCC’s board, said : “The four appointments being advertised are to replace members due to step down at the end of their normal service period.  Four members are due to demit office in six months having served their allotted time.”

However, rumours are rife in the legal world that much of the current board membership of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission who had been expected to remain in position for at least two terms, want out of the controversial law complaints quango, which, rather than repaying a staggering two million pounds of public money received from the Scottish Government, board members recently decided to reduce its vast £1.8 million cash surplus by giving back a whopping £1 million back to Scottish lawyers by way of a complaints levy cut.

An insider close to the SLCC commenting on the latest recruitment drive for new board members said “Had it not been for the barrage of online analysis of the SLCC, highlighting the poor performance of the organisation to live up to public expectations, much of the SLCC’s current board may well have remained in place for another term.”

The insider continued : “Lets be clear about this. When you have reports in the media of board members exhibiting such vile anti consumer sentiment within emails and  other venues, many people will rightly question their ability to remain impartial and independent when making policy decisions or dealing with complaints against the legal profession. Little wonder no one is choosing to renew their terms on the board.”

A senior solicitor speaking this morning on the SLCC’s hunt for new board members called for the quango to be scrapped and replaced with a Legal Ombudsman & Legal Services Consumer Panel style organisation as in England & Wales, a proposal I wholeheartedly agree with.

He said : “Even if the SLCC had fifty board members the organisation has managed to prove only one solitary thing in the past three years, that it has no credibility whatsoever as a regulator. If everyone took three years to get up and running to do their job, the country would be a shambles. This is exactly what has happened to regulation of the legal profession in Scotland, and quite frankly, the SLCC is now just an expensive embarrassment.”

He continued : “If there is to be any real attempt at cleaning up the image of the Scottish legal profession & the complaints regime, I put to you the SLCC should be scrapped, the Law Society should have all its regulatory & disciplinary functions removed, allowing it to be a representative of the profession only, and a Legal Ombudsman style office should be created along with a Legal Services Consumer Panel as exists in England & Wales. This way consumers will have their voice and representative in legal services, as will the profession, while regulation & discipline will be removed from both camps.”

I reported on the SLCC’s disastrous attempt to beef up the anti-consumer law quango in a series of reports, starting in November 2010, here : Quangocrats wanted : Scottish Legal Complaints Commission seek ‘non-lawyer’ board members with legal & ‘consumer’ backgrounds at £209+ a day.

In early February of this year, I revealed how the take-up of the lawyer position had been so poor, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill was forced to appoint one of his own Scottish Government counsel to the ‘lawyer only’ position, reported here : Poisoned Chalice : MacAskill forced to parachute Government’s own lawyer onto Scottish Legal Complaints Commission after Advocates shun job offer.

Later in March, the new non-lawyer recruits to the SLCC’s Board, which, bizarrely for ‘non lawyer’ positions included a qualified Barrister, a third retired senior Police Officer, and an NHS Orkney official who resigned her post “for personal reasons”, covered here : One more ex-cop for anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as Justice Secretary hands out five year quango jobs at £212 per day

Margaret Scanlan - Called to the Bars - Sunday Mail  15 March 2009 emailNo more tequila nights or frequent flyers for now – Many consumers will wonder what changes if any will occur with new recruits at anti-client booze fuelled Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. An investigation by Diary of Injustice into the SLCC’s board recruitment methods, using sources & Freedom of Information legislation revealed in May of this year at least eighty nine applications from a plethora of senior Police officers, quangocrats already enjoying multiple positions on other organisations, individuals linked to the Law Society & legal profession & other like minded individuals tried to get onto the notoriously anti-client lawyer watchdog, reported here : CALLED TO THE BOARD : Documents reveal 89 applications from quangocrats to join £2 MILLION cash stash Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

The initial recruitment round to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, was covered during 2008 in the following reports :

Call for MacAskill appointments 'sleaze investigation' as revelations show Legal Complaints Commission member was subject of Police inquiry

Law Society staff secretly migrating into 'independent' complaints commission will ensure continuing problems of regulating Scottish lawyers

Calls for full disclosure on legal complaints commission members as Justice Department 'covers up' conflicts of interest in appointments scandal

The SLCC were asked for comment on the latest round of Board member recruitment, however no statement was received by time of publication. Interestingly the SLCC is also looking to hire an Information Officer, a position which seems to replace the role of its Head of Communications, who is no longer replying to emails or Freedom of Information enquiries.

JOBSEEKING FOR GREEDY QUANGOCRATS & ‘LAWYER GROUPIES’ KEEN ON £15k A YEAR EXPENSES :

Today, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has advertised for two lawyers & at least two non lawyers, on the appointed for Scotland website, in the following terms :

The main functions of the Commission are to resolve complaints alleging inadequate professional service or negligence by legal practitioners, to refer complaints which allege professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct to the relevant professional body and to promote good practice in complaints handling. 

The Role involves:

• Working with the Chairing Member, other Commission Members and the Chief Executive to provide strategic direction to the SLCC.

• Chairing Determination Committees, manage oral hearings and provide final, reasoned decisions. 

• Using objective and impartial judgement in adjudicating and resolving disputes about complaints. 

• Working with the Chairing Member, other Commission Members and the Chief Executive to contribute to the development of the organisation and its effectiveness, including oversight of financial and resource management.

• Accepting responsibility for decisions of the Commission, ensuring that they are implemented and ensuring appropriate standard of corporate governance in the work of the SLCC.

• Contributing to an effective team to achieve results by providing mutual support to colleagues, to challenge and to respond to challenge constructively. 

• Assisting the Chairing Member in overseeing the promotion of standards within complaints handling and agreeing the annual report.

For lawyers, the successful Candidates must either be : a solicitor, a conveyancing or executry practitioner or have acquired rights to conduct litigation or a right of audience by virtue of section 27 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990.

Amongst other essential skills, the successful lawyer Candidates will have : The professional standing and experience to provide strategic direction in an organisational capacity, The ability to chair meetings leading to dispute resolution, The ability to achieve high standards in performance in an organisational environment.

For non-lawyers (former Police, quangocrats, relatives of lawyers, even their pet poodles & gerbils with a taste for £15K a year plus in expenses may apply etc), the SLCC are looking for at least two lay members, for appointment in October, and for any other lay member vacancy which may arise within 6 months of the interviews. 

Amongst other essential skills, the successful Candidates will have : The ability to apply objective and impartial judgement to the resolution of disputes, the ability to  work collaboratively to achieve a positive outcome. Specialist experience of one or both of the following : Driving organisational performance with a customer focus preferably in a private sector environment or Experience of ethics in a regulatory environment.

These “essential skills” do not exist and never have existed in regulation of the legal profession in Scotland. They never will, as long as the Law Society of Scotland effectively controls regulation of the legal profession in Scotland.

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is thoroughly incapable of delivering “Customer Focus” to consumers, however it is certainly capable of delivering “Customer Focus” to the legal profession as it continues to do in the model of the “Front company for the Law Society” which it was always planned and turned out in the end, to be.

As Scotland’s Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill recently said in his criticism of the UK's Supreme Court rulings which did not suit his political viewpoint, “He who pays the piper, as they say, calls the tune.” Clearly the new recruits to the SLCC’s board, like those before them, will be required to be paid pipers who will dance to the Law Society and Mr MacAskill’s tune, rather than the tune of ordinary Scots who expect better quality and more honest legal services.

46 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not for you then by the sounds of it!

Any clues as to which gerbils or poodles will be joining up?

Anonymous said...

Great headline and so true.

Keep up the good work matey!

Anonymous said...

"While the advertisements for the latest positions have just gone live today, it is already rumoured more retiring Police officers & quangocrats, who, having unexplainably been forewarned of the new posts, are already showing tentative interest in the well paid positions at the SLCC. It has also been revealed this afternoon certain members of Law Society committees are being encouraged to apply to join the SLCC, doubtless to keep the Law Society in their now familiar position as a fly on the wall during SLCC board meetings. "

Clearly the news of £212 a day for 6 days per month for the next 5 years is too good to pass up!

Aren't we supposed to be in a recession or something?

Anonymous said...

Roll up Roll up for the new jobs at the SLCC

Get your snouts in the trough as soon as possible all you lousy leeches

Anonymous said...

had enough money out of it now have they?
off to another quango where they will be less written about are they?

Anonymous said...

As Scotland’s Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill recently said in his criticism of the UK's Supreme Court rulings which did not suit his political viewpoint, “He who pays the piper, as they say, calls the tune.” Clearly the new recruits to the SLCC’s board, like those before them, will be required to be paid pipers who will dance to the Law Society and Mr MacAskill’s tune, rather than the tune of ordinary Scots who expect better quality and more honest legal services.

EXACTLY!

Anonymous said...

LOL @ No more tequila nights or frequent flyers for now !!!

Anonymous said...

The gravy train has clearly parked itself at the Stamp Office in Edinburgh.

How many jobs is it Jane Irvine does as well as this? and the rest?

Anonymous said...

Another Lawyer Scam Peter.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14028214

Amid the recent publicity about legal referral fees relating to car insurance claims, there has been more heat than light.

Critics of the practice, such as Jack Straw MP, have described it as a "racket" and a "dirty little secret".

In theory it should be neither.

The referrals system is essentially another way for law firms to market their services.

But it remains intensely controversial, and the government has pledged to reform it.
How does the system work?

The principle is simple - a law firm agrees to pay a fee in return for being passed the contact details of someone who might be interested in their services.

The deals are usually between lawyers and insurance companies, but estate agents and trade unions often refer their customers onto law firms too.

Law firms will pay up to several hundred pounds when someone who has been referred to them goes on to engage their services.

With sums like this involved, it is not surprising a whole industry has sprung up around it.

There are now claims-management companies who act as middlemen, buying contact details and then selling them on to law firms.

Anonymous said...

How many ex Police do they want before they end up having to call it the Scottish Legal ex Police officers Association?

Anonymous said...

In view of what you wrote about Eileen Masterman getting some gigantic payment what are the odds this departing lot will end up getting the same payoff for services rendered to the crooked Law Society?

Get digging although I'm sure I don't need to give you any encouragement Peter!

Fantastic work!

Bone idle said...

Quite a detailed if lengthy piece on the SLCC to remind us of how blatant all of this is.I an beginning to think it was created with the sole intention to go around your exposes of the legal profession.Clearly in this regard it has failed.Good work!

Anonymous said...

CALLED TO THE BARS will probably be back out on the razzle to celebrate hahaha

SCOTTISH LEGAL COVERUP COMMISSION said...

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission
Appointment of 2 Lawyer Members

The main functions of the Commission are to resolve complaints alleging inadequate professional service or negligence by legal practitioners, to refer complaints which allege professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct to the relevant professional body and to promote good practice in complaints handling.
================================
Bullshit Protecting lawyers is their function. Since the SLCC was created in October 2008 they have not protected one client. They are bare faced liars. Spin doctor bullshit.

Anonymous said...

Have you read this ?

http://wearesnook.com/snook/2011/06/21/how-to-turn-public-sector-complaints-into-service-improvements/

Jane Irvine, Chair of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission raised some serious questions for me when advising the audience on how to deal with people who ‘enjoy complaining’ usually suffering form paranoia and suicidal thoughts.

If I could wave a magic wand I would ban the word complain and focus on the word feedback. Feedback is about listening and problem solving and I believe thats where our focus should be.

Sounds like the author knows a hell of a lot more about dealing with people than Irvine and her SLCC board do in the typical p*ss off reality they clothe themselves in.

Anonymous said...

Why no exposure in the national press given all the taxpayers millions wasted on this quango?
It must have taken the Law Society a lot of favours to keep this one out of the papers all this time.

Anonymous said...

http://www.intmensorg.info/political.htm

What spending cuts? PM splashes out £700k of YOUR money on Downing Street

David Cameron has splashed out nearly £700,000 of taxpayers’ cash to revamp Downing Street this year, a sum that even members of his own party will find hard to stomach given the cuts the government is asking the British public to endure. The Prime Minister’s expenditure on his historic residence includes £30,000 for upgrading the larger flat above Number 11 where he and wife Samantha and their children live. The couple spent even more of their own money installing a designer kitchen and recreating the sleek décor of their much-missed family home, on the border of trendy Notting Hill in London.

But taxpayers helped subsidise some of the work on the four bedroom apartment included rewiring, plumbing and energy efficiency improvements. A spokesman said that the couple paid for the kitchen and all furniture and fittings themselves. The other £653,192.34 was spent on work to the Grade One listed offices and reception rooms inside the Georgian house.

The Cameron’s revamp of their own flat was unveiled this week when Samantha Cameron was pictured with Michelle Obama sitting on a mustard, designer sofa in the new Number 10 kitchen. The expenditure is controversial, as it comes at a time of austerity cuts across government. Mr Cameron has ordered all departments to rein in their expenditure and has even resorted to buying his own Christmas tree to cut costs.

Even council house tenants have been encouraged by the government to pitch in and carry out their own repairs, to save money on costly contractors. But it seems that the family has not refused the annual grant available to prime minister’s to do up their grace-and-favour apartment. Since the election, taxpayers have had to fund a refurbishment of Number 10 totalling at least £683,102.34.

The expenditure is revealed in Cabinet Office lists which only record any spending above £25,000. Even more may have been spent on individual works, however, as only items costing more than £25,000 are listed. Michael Dugher, a Labour MP who used to work inside Number 10, said he was astonished at the costs.

He said: ‘It is not as though the place was falling down, I am not sure what the money is being spent on. ‘At the same time as they are asking ordinary people to tighten their belts, the Camerons are splashing taxpayers’ cash on doing up their own flat. Meanwhile people in council houses are seeing their repairs cut.’ Tom Watson, the Labour MP for West Bromwich East, who has been a prominent voice in the fight for greater government transparency, added: 'When David Cameron entered Downing Street last year he heralded the new age of transparency. Yet when we ask simple questions about what walls he has demolished in a grade one listed building and how much the taxpayer has paid to do this, he refuses to answer.

AYE DAVE WE ARE ALL IN IT TOGETHER ALRIGHT?

Anonymous said...

So I have to ask the question.Given your obvious expertise in detecting crooked lawyers why are you not on this commission?
Do you intend to put in for one of the board jobs?

Anonymous said...

Clients will end up paying for it yet again

Anonymous said...

Yes Peter the board members leaving the SLCC (and probably heading straight back to the Law Society) will be replaced with even more Law Society lackies to keep complaints down and debate useless issues for years on end.What a circus MacAskill created with the SLCC but we now know why its that way dont we - to protect crooked lawyers.

Anonymous said...

David Cameron's barrister brother is at the centre of a row over how much he has been paid in legal aid fees after Ministers blocked attempts to publish details of his public earnings.

Alex Cameron QC is a leading criminal lawyer who heads his chambers in London. But a request to disclose his fees under Freedom of Information laws has been blocked by the Justice Ministry.

Last night, Tory MP Stuart Jackson said that it was ‘inappropriate’ that 500 barristers earn more than the Prime Minister’s £142,500. A legal source said Alex Cameron, 47, earned up to £1 million a year from a mix of publicly funded and private work.

Mr Jackson said: ‘It should not be necessary to go through Freedom of Information laws to find information about barristers. I shall be taking this further to ensure it is a matter of transparency.’

Alex Cameron and other members of his chambers have written to the Ministry of Justice to raise concerns about the Prime Minister’s plans to cut the legal aid budget by £350 million. .

Alex Cameron’s chambers declined to reveal his legal aid fees. Clerks passed details to the Ministry of Justice a month ago. Correspondence seen by The Mail on Sunday shows the Ministry of Justice’s failure to release those details is now being investigated by the Information Commissioner.

Father-of-two Alex Cameron was voted head of chambers a few weeks before his brother, 44, was elected Prime Minister.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010690/Legal-aid-fees-David-Camerons-older-lawyer-brother-hushed-up.html#ixzz1RLnAYqRO

Anonymous said...

What is the difference between board members and some of their snotty staff who write the letters saying they wont do anything?
Maybe they should just scrap it as your lawyer friend says because we have wasted a year at the slcc and got nowhere with our complaint.Can you do something about it for us?

Anonymous said...

READ THIS!

MacAskill & Masterman welcome the opening of the SLCC.She's gone now the board members are bailing out instead of scooping up another few years of expenses claims at our cost.Who next to go I wonder oh and the slcc has done BUGGER ALL in 3 YEARS!

http://www.scottishlegalcomplaints.com/news/slcc-opens.aspx

SLCC Opens
The Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill welcomed the formation of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as the office opened its doors for business on 1 October.

Commission Opens for Business
01/10/2008

The Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill welcomed the formation of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as the office opened its doors for business on 1 October.

SLCC Chief Executive Eileen Masterman commented: "As an organisation that is structured to be completely independent, impartial and accessible, it will bring a different approach to addressing legal complaints in Scotland. The complaint handling procedure has been drawn up from a 'clean sheet' and anyone taking a complaint forward will benefit from a single gateway approach and the opportunity to use the services of trained mediators at every stage."

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission was set up under the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007. The Commission is governed by a board composed of a non-lawyer chair plus four non-lawyer members and four lawyer members who are appointed by Scottish Ministers after consultation with the Lord President of the Court of Session.

Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary said: "I want to congratulate everyone who has worked hard to get this new organisation off the ground. The Commission was an initiative of the previous administration, but one we were happy to support. I am determined to ensure that the legal profession in Scotland continues to thrive, and receive the respect it deserves for the good work it does. A modern, transparent, independent complaints resolution system is a key part of that. I have no doubt that the Commission will play a valuable role in safeguarding the rights of both the legal profession and users of the services they provide throughout Scotland."

Anonymous said...

Historically complaints against lawyers have been mishandled and the general public perception is the whole thing is a cover up by the legal profession whether right or wrong.
So with this in mind one must ask the motives of these people willing to join the board of the slcc when the organisation is so very clearly unfit for purpose.
Just another job to add to the list to be used on the ladder to fame and quango heaven?
If so,they are playing with people's lives for profit and are no better than the crooked lawyers they are supposed to be regulating.

Anonymous said...

Thankfully we have Peter Cherbi to keep tabs on these people and what they get up to!

Anonymous said...

Just think for a minute if the SLCC is as bad as this how horrible and corrupt the Law Society must be under its hood where we never get to see much of what goes on unless its written about here.

Anonymous said...

Given your writing style and evident fame in reporting on the legal system I'd imagine you are probably on some phone hacking list too?

Anonymous said...

A justice system unfit for purpose, just the way the Law Society want it.

Anonymous said...

Lawyers are not regulated, they are protected and that is why they can get away with anything, perhaps even murder.

Anonymous said...

Very good Peter.The SLCC has zero credibility after reading your blog!

Anonymous said...

I think I'll give the SLCC a miss.Too much potential dishonesty included in the job from what I read about it.

Anonymous said...

Excellent article, and no doubt your previous investigative reports have played a significant part in persuading some to jump ship from the SLCC. Good riddance!

Anonymous said...

The usual suspects need apply only..

Anonymous said...

Your headline is just excellent Peter "Paid Pipers Required" indeed!!!!

The Law Society will toss some coins into their caps every time they come down in favour of a bent lawyer!!

THEY COVER IT UP said...

A young woman injured due to prolonged standing and stenciling at a Bakers.

Her lawyer, all doctors, her GP for over thirty years covered up what happened to her.

Her lawyer (well known in Glasgow) got three years legal aid money, and we found out later the all lawyers and doctors were insured by the same company as her employer.

So the doctors and lawyers insurers would have been paying her damages.

She has not worked for years due to these ruthless criminals.

Occupational injury where legally privileged criminal doctors cover everything up encourage employers to injure others.

Her GP, made out to the court she had been seeing a psychiatrist for over twenty years, a lie and put a straight line through the box on the benefits agency form which asked if there were any psychiatric problems. The psychiatrist did not exist.

She does not have psychiatric problems.

So at least he told the benefits agency the truth, but of course he wanted her money stopped, so he avoided telling them about her injuries her employer caused too.

Simple strategy, stop her money from the benefits agency by stating there is nothing wrong with her (she had no money for 5 months until her employer terminated her contract) her GP sent her back to work for the third time her employer would not let her into work, the GP refused to give her another medical certificate and the Glasgow lawyer did not help her because his insurers would have been paying her damages, a total nightmare.

The employer, lawyer and GP cut off her money to starve her into submission.

This is the reality of the self regulators.

I beg every member of the public reading this please do not get injured at work, all of the lawyers, doctors, sheriffs are working for the insurers you are suing. THEY PAY INTO THE INSURANCE COMPANY YOU ARE SEEKING DAMAGES FROM. THAT IS HOW HONEST LAWYERS DOCTORS, SHERIFFS, ARE SO DO NOT GO TO A LAWYER TO SEEK DAMAGES, YOU WILL WIN £0.00. THEY WILL GET PAID LEGAL AID MONEY TO COVER EVERYTHING UP.

What did Motherwell primary care do to him, nothing. The complaints letters we still have prove the GP was a criminal.

The Law Society refused to investigate the lawyer. 5 months with no money and they will not investigate this. They are interested in consumers I do not think. But of course the Law Society shared the same insurers too. The same causal link for a cover up.

Yes these professions have horrendous power, they are nothing short of evil incarnate, do not try to sue your employer, you will lose, that is a promise.

People are genuinely getting injured and they are covering it up.


Yes your GP can write anything he wants about you and if you are a threat to his insurers or to the reputation of another doctor he will turn on you.

Forget the GMC, Law Society, Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, NHS Complaints system, if you want to expose a corrupt lawyer or doctor only one person can do this, YOU. The system is a protection racket that wants to kick you aside if you are not a member of it. There is nowhere you can go for a fair unbiased hearing when these gods are corrupt, indeed that is why they are corrupt.

If you have ever tried to sue an employer for damages and failed now you know the odds were totally against you. They take your case to make money and the decision to cover up injuries is made before your first meeting with a lawyer. This is how honest your average so called professional is.

Anonymous said...

Money going straight into the pockets of people agreeable to the legal profession.
You are also spot on about the SLCC and the public money which they should be forced to repay IMMEDIATELY

Anonymous said...

Yet more jobs for the boys :

http://www.journalonline.co.uk/News/1009958.aspx

Firms win through in Government tender exercise
Today
Twelve win four-year contracts

Twelve of Scotland's best known legal firms have won places on the panel to provide legal services to the Scottish Government over the next four years.

The firms will operate under a new framework agreement across five legal subject areas, complementing the work of the Scottish Government Legal Directorate (SGLD), which also manages the outsourcing of legal work. The agreement will also be used, through the Office of the Solicitor to the Advocate General, to source advice on Scots law for UK Government departments, agencies and NDPBs.

Categories and successful tenderers are:

* Contract, commercial and corporate – Dundas & Wilson CS; DLA Piper Scotland; Morton Fraser; MacRoberts; Pinsent Masons
* Debt recovery: Harper Macleod; Maclay Murray & Spens; McGrigors; MacRoberts; Morton Fraser
* Litigation, inquiries and employment: Anderson Strathern; Brodies; DLA Piper Scotland; Ledingham Chalmers; Morton Fraser
* Major projects: Biggart Baillie; Dundas & Wilson CS; DLA Piper Scotland; MacRoberts; Pinsent Masons
* Property: Harper Macleod; DLA Piper Scotland; Ledingham Chalmers; McGrigors; Morton Fraser

Anonymous said...

Clearly just about money and keeping people in jobs rather than making a difference to the lives of clients or solicitors.

I know someone who asked one of their number about how much public money they had from the Scottish Government.The nutcase went into a frenzy and accused him of being a liar yet I've read a letter you obtained from the Scottish Government in one of your earlier stories confirming the SLCC had about 2 million so we know who the liars are.

Anonymous said...

The Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill welcomed the formation of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as the office opened its doors for business on 1 October 2008.

OF COURSE HE DID BECAUSE HE KNEW IT WOULD PROTECT HIS COLLEAGUES IN THE LEGAL ESTABLISHMENT. I AM SURE MACASKILL HATES CLIENTS AS MUCH AS DOUGLAS MILL.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Money going straight into the pockets of people agreeable to the legal profession.
You are also spot on about the SLCC and the public money which they should be forced to repay IMMEDIATELY

7 July 2011 14:14

Yes quite right and if they dont pay it back surcharge the board members because they seem to have plenty money and jobs anyway!

Anonymous said...

Maybe Irvine's dog will apply for one of the posts?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for bringing this out in the open Peter because I'm sure they would prefer to quietly slip some of their own into the jobs without any debate or any of us knowing about it!

Good work as always!

Anonymous said...

Yes I can imagine these kinds of jobs will already have certain people's names on them even before the interviews begin

Anonymous said...

The phone hacking scandal, why is it the weak always pay the price, never the scum at the top. Jail them.

Anonymous said...

I wonder what the motives are of people rushing to join this slcc?
How do you treat these people who are jumping up and down desperate to get into the world of protecting bent lawyers?

Peter Cherbi said...

Thanks for all your comments on this article.

It appears there is an ever updating list flying around of names of people who are in the process of applying to join the SLCC...

However, I will report further on the SLCC's most recent recruitment process when the positions are filled.