A solicitor who ruined pensioner's legal affairs is given slap on the wrist by law complaints regulator SLCC. KILMARNOCK solicitor Niels S Lockhart, who was accused by the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) of making dodgy claims for legal aid work and who then went on to ruin the legal affairs of a pensioner and other clients is to be allowed to continue working as a lawyer after the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC), the ‘independent’ regulator of solicitors decided his firm NS Lockhart Solicitors need only pay a meagre fine of ONE HUNDRED POUNDS to a victim who had complained about the legal nightmare she had been put through.
Esther Francis (aged 70), who was made homeless as a result of Mr Lockhart’s inaction over her legal problems and was then forced to starve herself to pay Lockhart’s demands for legal fees is to be given a derisory £100 in compensation and a £230 rebate of fees against sole practising solicitor Lockhart who raked in SIX HUNDRED & SEVENTY THOUSAND POUNDS of taxpayer funded legal aid in just three years. More on Esther’s nightmare at the hands of Mr Lockhart can be read in an earlier report by Diary of Injustice, here : Legal Aid officials hid details of dodgy claims scandal as ‘Pay-Up threats’ from £600K legal aid rogue lawyer leaves pensioner, 70, starving, homeless
Niels Lockhart was the subject of lengthy investigations by the Scottish Legal Aid Board which were uncovered by Diary of Injustice & the Sunday Mail newspaper, reported earlier here : One law for lawyers : Secret Report reveals Legal Aid Board, Law Society & Legal Defence Union ‘cosy relationship’ in Lockhart case
Today, Diary of Injustice is able to publish the investigation carried out by the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission into Niels S Lockhart. The report, now in the hands of media outlets, can be viewed online here : SLCC Investigation of complaint against Niels S Lockhart of NS Lockhart Solicitors, Kilmarnock.
Esther Francis was hassled by Lockhart over bill yet her legal case had been ruined and she’d been made homeless. In the SLCC report, investigators found Mr Lockhart had provided an inadequate professional service to Mrs Francis, however the investigator for the SLCC then went onto recommend sanction only be applied to the firm rather than Mr Lockhart himself. No disciplinary measures were recommended by the SLCC, allowing Mr Lockhart’s firm to continue working after facing little more than a slap on the wrist.
It can also be revealed the SLCC DENIED Mrs Francis any access to submissions made by the LEGAL DEFENCE UNION (LDU) who were called in to intervene in the complaint on Mr Lockhart’s behalf. Diary of Injustice earlier reported on the LDU’s intervention in the complaint made against Mr Lockhart, and terse resistance from the SLCC to disclose the contact, here : SCANDAL : Legal Defence Union intervene in SLCC investigation over £670K Legal Aid lawyer who made Pensioner HOMELESS, STARVED to pay legal bills
There has also been no comment from the SLCC on the production to their office of the full investigation carried out by the Scottish Legal Aid Board into Lockhart’s actions, which Diary of Injustice published after a Freedom of Information disclosure, here : SCOTTISH LEGAL AID BOARD S31 COMPLAINT REPORT TO THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND : NIELS S LOCKHART
A legal insider told Diary of Injustice today : “If there are other clients of NS Lockhart solicitors who feel they have been mistreated, now is the time to make a complaint to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.”
Diary of Injustice would also like to hear from any clients who feel they are being mistreated by their solicitors and would like to remind readers that media coverage may benefit the progress of their complaints, and help prevent other consumers from being ripped off by ‘crooked lawyers’ Readers can send details of dealings with solicitors to Diary of Injustice via scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
The Sunday Mail has covered the latest development in the Lockhart case, reporting here :
OAP's fury as rogue lawyer is let off.
By: Lauren Crooks Jun 3, 2012 Sunday Mail
Rogue lawyer Niels Lockhart has escaped punishment for mistreating an elderly client - after legal watchdogs decided his firm were to blame instead.
Furious Esther Francis, 70, complained to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission over claims Lockhart failed to make any progress in her case and threatened her over bills she could not afford.
But after investigating, they decided it was the whole firm N S Lockhart - based in Kilmarnock - at fault, rather than Lockhart himself.
They wrote to Esther telling her the firm would refund £230 in fees she paid, plus £100 compensation. But Esther says she can't believe Lockhart is still allowed to work as a lawyer.
Esther, who has rejected the settlement, said: "I got the letter last week. I wrote back and told them I wasn't accepting the payment."
Last year Lockhart was rapped by the Scottish Legal Aid Board for raking in 600,000 pounds of taxpayers' cash over two years through "unnecessary and excessive" claims.
Esther reported Lockhart to the watchdog last September amid claims he had failed to progress with her case, despite several meetings with him.
Their decision states: "N S Lockhart's failure to progress Mrs Francis's claim in the 12 months that they acted for her amounted to an inadequate professional service."
BACKGROUND : LOCKHART, LEGAL AID & THE LEGAL DEFENCE UNION
The long story of Mr Lockhart’s legal aid claims began nearly ten years ago, although it took the Scottish Legal Aid Board years to catch up with him, when eventually on 5 June 2005 the Scottish Legal Aid Board sent a report to the Law Society of Scotland in terms of S32 of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 against the sole practitioner firm of Niels S Lockhart, 71 King Street, Kilmarnock. The secret report on Niels S Lockhart, obtained in 2011 by Diary of Injustice under Freedom of Information laws, can be downloaded here : SCOTTISH LEGAL AID BOARD S31 COMPLAINT REPORT TO THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND : NIELS S LOCKHART (pdf) The Scottish Legal Aid Board’s report outlined a number of issues that had been identified during the review of case files & accounts which raised concern about Mr Lockhart’s conduct and which fell to be considered as a breach of either Regulation 31 (3) (a) & (b), relating to his conduct when acting or selected to act for persons to whom legal aid or advice and assistance is made available, and his professional conduct generally. These issues illustrated the repetitious nature of Mr Lockhart’s failure to charge fees “actually, necessarily and reasonable incurred, due regard being bad to economy”
The heads of complaint submitted by the Scottish Legal Aid Board to the Law Society of Scotland were :
(1) Excessive attendances, (2) Lack of Progress, (3) Splitting/Repeating Subject Matters, (4) Inappropriate Requests for Increases in Authorised Expenditure, (5) Matters resubmitted under a different guise, (6) Standard Attendance Times, (7) Attendances for Matters Not Related to the Subject Matter of the Case, (8) Unreasonable Charges, (9) Double Charging for Correspondence, (10) Account entries not supported by Client Files, (11) Attempt to Circumvent Statutory Payment Procedure for Property Recovered or Preserved, (12) Continued Failure to act with Due Regard to Economy.
The Scottish Legal Aid Board report also revealed : “From April 2002—March 2005, Niels S Lockhart was paid £672,585 from the Legal Aid Fund. Of this, £596,734 (89%) was in relation to Advice and Assistance cases, with £570,528 (85%) solely in relation to Civil Advice and Assistance. In the Board’s view, the ranges of actions taken by Niels S. Lockhart towards achieving those payments are not those appropriate to a competent and reputable solicitor.”
“Based on the supporting evidence he arranges for, or permits, his clients to attend his office on numerous occasions for excessive, unnecessary and often irrelevant meetings. In the main, these do not appear to have advantages for their further welfare or advance their case, but merely act as a mechanism for the firm to exploit the Legal Aid Fund by charging for these unnecessary and unproductive meetings. The nature of subject matters is often repeated, resulting in numerous duplicate/multiple/consecutive grants submitted under various guises, thus avoiding the Board’s computerised checks on subject matter. This pattern of conduct is deliberate,recurring and persistent, serving—in the Board’s view—as a device to generate considerable additional income for the firm to the detriment of the Scottish Legal Aid Fund.”
However, in October 2010, Mr Lockhart’s legal representative James McCann of the Legal Defence Union approached SLAB with a prospective offer that Mr Lockhart would withdraw fully from providing legal aid if SLAB’s S31 complaint was withdrawn. A Minute of Agreement was drafter and agreed with Niels Lockhart & the Legal Defence Union outlining the voluntary and irrevocable withdrawal by Mr Lockhart and the firm from the provision of all firms of legal assistance (funded by legal aid). The Minute of Agreement also outlined the Board’s intention to make a press release detailing that following SLAB’s investigation into the firm and their subsequent complaint to the Law Society of Scotland, SLAB had accepted this permanent withdrawal by Mr Lockhart and the firm from providing all forms of legal assistance.
Diary of Injustice continued to report on allegations surrounding Mr Lockhart and the Law Society of Scotland’s efforts to avoid a prosecution. All previous reports can be viewed HERE.
71 comments:
The usual whitewash then?
Their new Chief Executive has really made a difference lol
Esther Francis was hassled by Lockhart over bill yet her legal case had been ruined and she’d been made homeless. In the SLCC report, investigators found Mr Lockhart had provided an inadequate professional service to Mrs Francis, however the investigator for the SLCC then went onto recommend sanction only be applied to the firm rather than Mr Lockhart himself. No disciplinary measures were recommended by the SLCC, allowing Mr Lockhart’s firm to continue working after facing little more than a slap on the wrist.
===================================
Self regulation in a nutshell.
There is always a pattern to these cases, and the client is always the victim.
Clearly self regulation is an illusion. The Law Society and SLCC are simply protectors of their own and the obligation to look after the public is nonsense.
Lockhart has been given the green light to carry on as before.
and to think some loon suggested merging the Scottish Legal Aid Board with the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission..
Clearly the SLCC and SLAB are both unfit to protect the public purse and the public interest!
Just a short comment sorry it is not related to this article. Hope you can publish? Please see link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/interactive/2012/jun/20/dwp-memo-mental-health-risks
Thank you DOI team.
Now I know you are no great fan of SLAB but if you compare the SLCC report and the S31 from SLAB clearly SLAB had more of an intent to do something against Lockhart than the SLCC.
I hope to see more of these complaints reports from the SLCC published online.If anything it shows the public what they are up against at that overpriced,over paid and work shy Stamp Office of theirs.
Keep up the good work!
Now we know why Austin Lafferty's 'ideal client' is an old lady http://scottishlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bbc-show-heard-little-old-lady-with.html - because lawyers can rip them off and get away with it.
How many pensioners have the Law Society of Scotland and Irvine's mob at the SLCC allowed to be ripped off??
I'll say this Peter there's no one can write about lawyers and expose their dirty dealings like you can.These parasites must hate your guts!
Yes this is how its going to be in a MacAskill run justice system for all you pensioners getting ripped off and made homeless by his lawyer brethren out to make a fast buck and steal everyone's home for themselves and all supported by his boss Al Capone Salmond.
The report on Lockhart is a bit of a joke to be honest although since lawyers are paying for it we cant expect any great shakes from the SLCC.He who pays the piper and all that etc..
I recall you wrote earlier the SLCC has cost clients/solicitors/taxpayers about £14 million or so.Well if this report is anything to go by and the final result we have all been sold down the river.
My message to clients of solicitors in Scotland is to walk out of their office immediately taking your business away because you are going to get nowhere and be treated just like Esther Francis and all the other ruined clients ever year.
Wake up everyone for Christ's sake and see what is going on.It's so obvious!
Good to see the DOI team on the case exposing this menace of a profession who have the full support of Salmond and his minister of injustice. As Peter said the Law Society and SLCC do not want to be prosecuting lawyers so the reality is that clients have no protection whatsoever.
I trusted a lawyer once and I learned never to trust another one, when the client is getting tortured the rest gloat. Vile human beings that is what they are.
Sign another Legal Aid form the £100.00 paid by the taxpayer.
Social Darwinism is generally understood to use the concepts of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest to justify social policies which make no distinction between those able to support themselves and those unable to support themselves.
Just like the Law Society Social Darwinists, ensure the survival of lawyers and have no compunction about abusing the weak to make a quick buck.
And thanks to Peter everyone knows about Lockhart's tricks on the old lady so be warned and stay away from plenty of lawyers who will do the same to you all!
My old guitar teacher said to me, "when you find out how the system really is, it makes you feel like giving up". I told old F that is exactly what they want.
I don't know how these people sleep at night. But I do know one thing for certain, as far as is practicable I will never go to another lawyer, the thought of it turns my stomach. What has happened to this pensioner is the norm, not the exception.
Quite a horrific story I wonder how often this type of thing is going on with these crooked lawyers?
Very interesting report.So let me get this straight - this lawyer working on his own took over half a million of legal aid in three years and legal aid decide to drop the case in some grotty deal with the Law Society?
Who was pulling strings for him to get away with this?
I stopped voting because of the Lockhart's, let's face it there are no MSP's who will fight for their constituents against these rotten lawyers.
A vote for any candidate in Scottish Parliamentary elections is a vote for the Law Society, a union infamous for its corruption.
My MSP is Christina McKelvie, I did not vote at all in the last election. I am sure she is a nice woman but I would not go to her about a lawyer. I have learned the hard way, as soon as you say corrupt lawyer those in a position of power repudiate you. Sorry Christina but from my experience that is the way it is, even although I have not, and will not approach you. The Law Society of Scotland run the Scottish Parliament, [it belongs to them] because policy making is all geared towards their interests. Democracy as John Stuart Mill pointed out does not necessarily provide freedom. Clients without legal rights proves this fact.
This blog is about free riders who are legally free to do whatever they want to their clients, they free ride on the Legal Aid system £670K, have a free ride on the complaints system, because the punishments [if they can be called that] never mirror the crime, and they free ride on the mental anguish of people who trust them. Basically they are free to abuse people, the tax system.
And the biggest free rider is Alex Salmond, a man paid by the taxpayer to protect the lawyer free riders. It is an utter disgrace.
Mr Lockhart is a lucky man, no individual responsibility in law, his firm gets the blame.
I got a letter from a construction company today and I was unsuccessful in my application for a job. I am not moaning {I am lucky, no mortgage, no cars, to pay up,]there are millions of people worse off than me. There were two hundred applicants for this vacancy.
Should have studied Law rather than Surveying. If I embezzled £670,000.00 from a construction company I would be in jail. I am not surprised these people have zero credibility. It seems from the DOI blog lawyers are not subjected to any laws due to self regulation which imposes a £100.00 fine on a man who ruthlessly terrorised an old lady. What manner of people are these lawyers? Do they have any sense of morallity? Be wise and never trust them.
Esther Francis (aged 70), who was made homeless as a result of Mr Lockhart’s inaction over her legal problems and was then forced to starve herself to pay Lockhart’s demands for legal fees is to be given a derisory £100 in compensation and a £230 rebate of fees against sole practising solicitor Lockhart who raked in SIX HUNDRED & SEVENTY THOUSAND POUNDS of taxpayer funded legal aid in just three years.
================================
A friend of mine has a cousin who is a lawyer. He told her to approach a lawyer only as a last resort, becasue some of them are "criminals" his discription not ours.
When a practicing member of the legal profession gives advice like this and the reports on this blog show the endemic corruption within the profession no one should trust a lawyer. I know this lawyers name but due to the inevitable Law Society repercussions I cannot say anything. I never though I would see the day when I wanted to protect the identity of a lawyer.
This case is but one of many that proves a Prime Facie case that the Law Society of Scotland, the SLCC & the SLAB are willfully and consistently committing fraud and are defeating the ends of justice and in doing so are deliberately choosing to cause damage to the Public?
This is Theft. pure and Simple?
The £100 compensation by the SLCC is what it is. It is a deliberate intention to rub salt into the poor victims open and gaping wounds and to humiliate them and to make an example of them for having the timerity to complain against a Scottish lawyer?
This case is an obvious one for the police to intervene and investigate those Office Bearers at all of these organisations, including the Crown Office and the SSDT with a view to jailing them?
Scotland is a small country, we cannot support a completey corrupt judicial and regulatory system notwithstanding the damage done to the fabric of Society when these injustices are not only allowed but are celebrated by these crooks?
How many of the crooks at the Law Society of Scotland, the SLCC & the SLAB have been laughing at poor Esther Francis and sharing a drink over the damage they have caused her?
What is going on in Scotland?
Why are these criminals allowed to get away with being above the law?
What the hell are the police doing?
If you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem!
Yet more proof that the SLCC are the Law Society of Scotland and that the bill enacted to bring them into the statutory framework is a sham and a fraud and therefore every single MSP is guilty of being a party to fraud and and that the Scottish Parliament is against the people of Scotland?
I hope Esther Francis reports the SLCC, the SLAB & the Law Society of Scotland to the police for their party to this fraud?
Another job well done by the Law Society of Scotland?
To cause as much damage to the client victim as they can in an attempt to destroy them for being brave enough to complain against their lawyer?
Scotland is going down the tubes!
Esther Francis (aged 70), who was made homeless as a result of Mr Lockhart’s inaction over her legal problems and was then forced to starve herself to pay Lockhart’s demands for legal fees.
Hello Mrs Francis I just wanted to say I know it is the innocent trusting people like you who end up un the sharp end of a lawyers schemes. Mr MacAskill likes this happening to you because as Justice Minister he can stop it. But MacAskill is 100% lawyer, he cannot bear to see lawyers careers ruined even for elderly people. He and Salmond are the Law Society. As you have learned like us the hard way trusting a lawyer is a dangerous thing to do. He makes you homeless for £100.00 and gets find £100.00 and he keeps working. Clearly the scales of justice are always weighted in the lawyers favour. And MacAskill and Salmond will keep it that way. Our MSP are not interested in controlling this vile profession and they do not care who they ruin.
Independence anyone? The SNP rely on the votes of the unthinking mob.
That's it, I am going to retrain to be a Scottish lawyer.
It is clear that as a Scottish lawyer you are allowed to fill your boots and to steal as much money as you want and there are no consequences to pay...?
Instead of being sent to jail for many years, you get to be totally above the law....?
This is an utter disgrace, as is the fact that there is not a peep from the BBC or STV about the scottish legal profeesions catalogue of criminal behaviour.
And let us not forget we have the SNP to thank for a third world system which they foster, serve and protect.
These people think their clients are superfluous. They think they can treat human beings like animals, kick them aside and then look for their [next client] no next victim.
They way complaints are handled and [punishments that is a joke] imposed clients have much to fear and lawyers nothing to fear. Say there was a trial at Greenock Sheriff court where a lawyer was charged with embezzlement and the jury was full of lawyers. This is self regulation. It would never be tolerated in a public court so why is it allowed in a private office Mr MacAskill? Would we have a paedophile on trial and a jury of paedophiles delivering the verdict. I am not by this analogy saying lawyers are paedophiles by any means but the principle of bias is applicable in both cases.
This system is designed to protect corrupt lawyers, it will not change unless emough of the public demand change. As Karl Marx wrote "ideas gain their material force when appropriated by the masses". Look at the debate on Cameron's Incapacity Benefit Reforms all over the news, because it affects many.
The way this world is going perhaps one day Hannah Arendt's prediction will unfold when she wrote "where there are great masses of superfluous people governments may be tempted to build new gas factories". I wonder how far those in government (throughout the world] would go? Let us hope she is wrong as I am sure she would have greed with.
Wonder how many others are walking around with a tale about Lockhart?
Time for some more headlines methinks!
Anonymous said...
Now we know why Austin Lafferty's 'ideal client' is an old lady http://scottishlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bbc-show-heard-little-old-lady-with.html - because lawyers can rip them off and get away with it.
How many pensioners have the Law Society of Scotland and Irvine's mob at the SLCC allowed to be ripped off??
22 June 2012 17:48
LOL !!!!!!!! I'd like to hear this too !!!!!!
Their decision states: "N S Lockhart's failure to progress Mrs Francis's claim in the 12 months that they acted for her amounted to an inadequate professional service."
=================================
This is matched by inadequate professional regulation, the people who made this decision about Lockhart and his firm are the real criminals in this case. They clearly have the attitude Mrs Francis is unimportant and the lawyer is. But of course this is what we have come to expect from a profession who are simply criminals who avoid punishment. I have dealt with some of Mr Lockhart's profession and they are simply without morals and any form of decency. Those doing the so called regulating are an affront to justice. Mabe it is the one who called clients "frequent flyers". Pure scum the SLCC and Law Society, masters of injustice. We are under no illusions regarding their ideology.
"Action expresses priorities". Ghandi.
"It is good to harm others provided we do not suffer harm". Plato's character Glaucon from the Republic.
This should be the motto of the SLCC and Law Society. They certainly live up to it.
Mr Cameron is due to deliver a speech next week.
The measures said to be under consideration include:
:: Scrapping most of the £1.8 billion in housing benefits paid to 380,000 under 25s, worth an average £90 a week, forcing them to support themselves or live with mum and dad instead.
:: Stopping the £70-a-week dole payment for individuals who do not try hard enough to get work.
:: Forcing a hard core of unemployed to do community work after two years - or lose all their benefits.
---------------------------------
I was first a joiner and now a surveyor. I have numerous letters and e mails from employers stating "unsuccessful" I am not a free rider but I have been unable to find a job. I just wonder how far this guy will go? Cameron is going to increase homelessness but at least he can be voted out. Not so with Mr Lockhart, rough justice I think.
However, in October 2010, Mr Lockhart’s legal representative James McCann of the Legal Defence Union approached SLAB with a prospective offer that Mr Lockhart would withdraw fully from providing legal aid if SLAB’s S31 complaint was withdrawn.
Criminal in nature and underhand and shady in practice. Legal Defence Union, we need a Client Protection Union.
Have any of the DOI team considered writing a book about all this corruption, perhaps called.
Are You Safe from Corrupt Lawyers?
This is SICK.
What kind of a Society have we in Scotland when we allow these mendacious crooked Scottish lawyers to be above the law?
One Scottish lawyer (A) to another Scottish lawyer (B)
"Tell me Crawford, what are you using your fraudulent earnings for this coming year?"
"Well Farquhar, I have only defrauded the SLAB by £100,000.00 this year as I want it to buy myself a brand new Porsche Turbo..."
"That is very civic spirited of you Crawford? Due to the SLAB's decision not to involve the police for crooked Scottish lawyers and that our Union the Law Society Of Scotland are openly encouraging us to defraud as much as we can from our SLAB allowance by protecting crooked Scottish lawyers from the jail, I have upped my fraudulent cash grab allowance from the SLAB to £600,000.00, which only seems fair as I want a second holiday home in the South of France, a top of the range Mercedes as well as put my kids through private school?"
"you would be a fool not to do the same in such a climate within Scotland where we must be one of the most crooked countries in the world?"
Court proceedings with public juries and galleries are visible, self regulation is invisible. That is the key difference, and it is how the Legal Establishment who have infiltrated the Scottish press to a horrific extent control everything. A wall of silence from the BBC, STV, and most newspapers. The tenticles of self regulation go far, even into Hamilton and other Citizen Advice Bureaus.
Any member of the public would get fried for what is reported on the DOI blog, but if you have an LLB you have a stay out of jail, keep your job card no matter what you do. It is little wonder some lawyer told his cousin to avoid lawyers altogether.
And our First Minister of this legal dictatorship sits on his fat ass and does nothing. What if it was your mother Salmond? No it would not happen to her because she would be treated differently. We are not all equal befoer the law.
Well,at the very least we all now know how worthless the SLCC is after reading their report on Lockhart.
The message clearly is don't come to us with your complaints about lawyers.
Anonymous said...
However, in October 2010, Mr Lockhart’s legal representative James McCann of the Legal Defence Union approached SLAB with a prospective offer that Mr Lockhart would withdraw fully from providing legal aid if SLAB’s S31 complaint was withdrawn.
Criminal in nature and underhand and shady in practice. Legal Defence Union, we need a Client Protection Union.
Have any of the DOI team considered writing a book about all this corruption, perhaps called.
Are You Safe from Corrupt Lawyers?
24 June 2012 01:28
===========================================
What you must remember is that plea bargaining in Scotland is itself a criminal offence?
This criminal offence committed by the crooked lawyers advisers (legal defence union) was done with the overt approval by the Law Society of Scotland and for the SLAB to 'drop all charges' against Lockhart is a criminal offence and is against the public interest?
This criminality is totally out of control?
It is like Al Capone and his gang doing as they please knowing that they have bought off the police and prosecuting authorities so that they can conduct their criminal behaviour totally unhindered?
If you wrote a screenplay about this story and submitted it to Hollywood executives they would probably reject it due to not being realistic and being made-up because this does not happen in reality?
Well it is our reality in Scotland. We have a large group in Society (Scottish lawyers) who are freely allowed to break the law knowing that they have got no chance of being prosecuted?
Remember the SSDT's classification of theft by a Scottish Lawyer is 'BORROWING WITHOUT CONSENT'.
(See page 7 of SSDT Report for 2010 on the SSDT's website)
Has Mrs Francis reported Flockart, the SLCC, the SLAB & the Law Society of Scotland to the police yet for their complicity in this fraud?
Surely there must be criminal action taken against Office Bearers at the SLAB for covering up a criminal offence and willfully defeating the ends of justice?
Imagine: A bank robber breaks into a bank and steals £600,000.00+ and gets caught red-handed?
Then the police & the Crown Office gets together and has a chat and tells this bank robber, OK you have stolen all of this money but I tell you what, you can keep it all and we will let you off Scot-Free if you promise not to steal anymore money from this bank?
Unbelievable!
Can you please publish those Office Bearers at the Law Society of Scotland, the SLAB, the SLCC and the Crown Office who are directly culpable for allowing this criminal offence to go unpunished?
Why have the police not made arrests yet?
Hard hitting story especially those two reports you have on Lockhart and the SLAB S31 is a heck of a scandal waiting to break.I noticed you said the SLCC have not reacted to SLAB's complaint.Do you expect them to or just cover it up more?
Imagine these lawyers called Rick Kordowski a criminal.
Beware of any profession that cannot handle the truth and accuse people of harassment when the real criminals are the Law Societies of the United Kingdom. The Law Societies do not think the Mr Lockhart's ever do anything wrong.
Imagine forcing a pensioner that you've also made homeless to starve herself to pay bills for shoddy work.Sounds like a cowboy builder at least and the BBC have plenty follow ups on these rip off merchants but not one report on the beeb about a crooked lawyer molesting a pensioner right because it's not allowed.Getting very obvious there's a censorship in the media about mentioning the corrupt ones in the legal world so it's a good thing we can come here to read about them and also in the Sunday Mail.Keep up the good work Peter!
OAP's fury as rogue lawyer is let off.
=================================
Mrs Francis, they always get let off. We have a prejudiced corrupt justice system in this country, and MacAskill and fat face Salmond will keep it thet way.
This case shows just how easy it is for these rotten institutions in our society to get away with committing criminal offences against the public and humiliating their victim in the process?
If the police do not do the right thing by protecting the public then the public will be forced into protecting themselves?
Cameron wants a nightwatchman state. NO NHS, no welfare provision. Childern die in the USA because there is no NHS. Get Cameron out, he will indirectly kill the poor by removing medical provision, starve them by removing benefits. He is rich because of a natural lottery others are poor for the same reason.
These people need put on a run down council estate stripped of their wealth and give £70.00 a week unemployment benefit. They do not live on the sharp end of their policies. We cannot all claim £670K or have rich parents when things get tough.
No need to wonder why the BBC are deliberately not following up on crooked lawyer rogue traders and all their frauds!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-18592468
BBC Rogue Traders' Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud
A presenter on the BBC consumer affairs programme Rogue Traders has admitted illegally claiming housing and council tax benefits totalling £24,000.
Dan Penteado, 40, from Westbourne, Bournemouth, admitted eight offences of dishonestly or knowingly claiming housing and council tax benefits.
Bournemouth Magistrates' Court heard he failed to declare his BBC earnings.
Penteado has been the motorbike-riding on-screen sidekick of Rogue Traders star Matt Allwright since 2001.
He was warned he could face jail and was granted bail while a pre-sentence report is prepared. The case was adjourned until 17 July.
The biggest crooks in this scenario are the politicains - of all parties - who allow this to continue and who act as nothing more than glove puppets for the Law Society of Scotland.
No doubt they too have lots of skeletons in the cupboard.
Where does the moral responsibility lie for a faction of office based criminals to dominate innocent pensioners and mahe them homeless? It lies with every MSP in the Scottish Parliament.
The Law Society can only maintain their power through controlling policymaking and the policymakers are the people you vote for. Democratic rights are being trampled especially with the approval of the SNP. But make no mistake all MSP's are more guilty that the Law Society, SLCC and Neil's Lockhart because they condone this. My sisters litigation case was the same in that they cut off her money supply to protect the Law Societies insurers.
Mrs Francis like my sister and thousands of others are victims of a legal dictatorship who control all power in a so called democratic country. The question is this, do you want to be next. Yoy go to a lawyer for some problem and end up tortured like Mrs Francis. Who is their next victim? As the national lottery slogan states "it could be you" or one of your children in future.
DOI Team I like Scottish Law Reported too, megacool teamwork.
You see Mrs Francis you need a lawyer to stop a bad lawyer. This is the reason all lawyers are bad, as there is a common bond between them there is no punishment for criminality pure or moral.
Anonymous said...
No need to wonder why the BBC are deliberately not following up on crooked lawyer rogue traders and all their frauds!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-18592468
BBC Rogue Traders' Dan Penteado admits benefit fraud
A presenter on the BBC consumer affairs programme Rogue Traders has admitted illegally claiming housing and council tax benefits totalling £24,000.
Dan Penteado, 40, from Westbourne, Bournemouth, admitted eight offences of dishonestly or knowingly claiming housing and council tax benefits.
Bournemouth Magistrates' Court heard he failed to declare his BBC earnings.
Penteado has been the motorbike-riding on-screen sidekick of Rogue Traders star Matt Allwright since 2001.
He was warned he could face jail and was granted bail while a pre-sentence report is prepared. The case was adjourned until 17 July.
26 June 2012 13:25
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
OK, everyone would agree that Penteado is wrong but what about the scale and seriousness of the offence?
One man defrauds the State by £24,000 and is told he could go to jail?
The other man (A crooked Scottish lawyer) is involved in serious and continual fraud of hundreds of thousands of pounds from the State and causes direct harm to his clients in the process and not only does he get let off Scot Free but the Law Society of Scotland allow him to continue to defraud the State and to continue to damage members of the public by allowing this suspended crooked Scottish lawyer to practice whilst suspended?
The Law Society of Scotland should be struck-out as a criminal organisation and those acting for the Law Society of Scotland defeat the ends of justice should be jailed?
If the police do not investigate the Law Society of Scotland, the SLCC, the SSDT and the Crown Office for criminal acts perpetrated against the public then the public will inevitably have to act according to natural justice and tear those buildings down brick by brick....?
This isn't Tunisa it is Scotland!
A presenter on the BBC consumer affairs programme Rogue Traders has admitted illegally claiming housing and council tax benefits totalling £24,000.
He should be jailed but if British Justice means universality what about Lockhart and the £670K, or the fourteen lawyers over five years the Scottish legal establishment decided "not enough admissible evidence to prosecute". The old pattern emerges again.
Kant wrote in his essay on enlightenment "dare to be wise." Put it this way they want you to be intimidated because if you are you will never question them.
And after all they ain't special they are only lawyers. Hundreds of years ago they were only clergy.
Freedom means eternal scrutiny of those in power. We only support legitimate power. Where MSP's or MP's protect corrupt factions we have the right to withdraw assent.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/disgraced-wakefield-judge-who-hit-wife-can-work-in-court-again-1-4685870
Another disgraceful story.
Well Law Society, LDU, SLCC and with headlines like this you are being shown for the ruthless calculating criminals you are.
I know someone who was suicidal dealing with LLB trash. The consequences for members of the public are profound and as your profession are human rights abusers long may the reports continue.
My teenage son and daughter are told repeatedly never to trust lawyers.
£100 compensation awarded by the SLCC is a sick joke?
The SLCC is a sham organisation designed to torture and humiliate victims of crooked Scottish lawyers?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/neil-scott/titanic-2-the-condemnatio_b_1391637.html
Have a read at this.
http://petercherbi.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Douglas%20Mill
Law Society Crooks, Gangsters who use bureaucracy rather than guns.
Who headed the hacking ? Law Society’s now former Chief Executive Douglas Mill & Philip Yelland, head of Client Relations. Regular readers will be well aware I was significantly targeted by both Douglas Mill who personally blocked my legal aid (or access to justice, same thing, and the Law Society of Scotland’s Director of Regulation, Philip Yelland, who personally intervened with my solicitor at the time and ordered him not to take my instructions, (legal dictatorship because you have no rights). Correspondence which revealed the actions of Mill & Yelland against me, can be viewed HERE & HERE. I can assure you all, these people and agents working for their “Master Policy” made my family life and my access to justice, a living hell, and they would not have given a F**k if you had resorted to suicide. Almost, a death sentence, (Yes Peter these trolls kill a part of us who have been through the legal torture machine) all in the name of protecting crooked Borders solicitor Andrew Penman of Stormonth Darling Solicitors, Kelso. The Andrew Penman scandal was heavily reported in the Scotsman newspaper during the 1990s.
-----------------------------
Yes Peter if ever a group of people deserved the label, "dictators" in a so called democracy they are it.
They were interfering with your drive for justice, but what would they want to do to you if you Directed the Law Society. They are not just lawyers, they are devious criminals but self regulation removes the law because they have no laws applicable to them.
Any dirty trick, I have been there and in my opinion all members of this profession think clients are superfluous things to make money from. Well Penman's action and his buddies Yelland and the lying Mill prove that theft is legal in Scotland if the their is a lawyer.
Walk into any law firms office and if it goes wrong welcome to the Torture Chamber, a place called legal hell where nothing is legal, and the lawyer gets rewarded for his or her crimes. That is what poor Mrs Francis did, she trusted a member of our own ruthless unnacountable Legal Mafia.
The problem is that when it comes to the relative weight of logic (i.e. the truth) and interest (i.e. lies), it is usually the latter that wins unless there is a mass movement behind logic.
Thank goodness sites like this expose the truth and allow the public to consider the matter for themselves - free of the censorship which pervades the 'mainstream press'.
The state is there to protect the weak from the strong, the law abiding from law breakers. This case proves that Mrs Francis has had her legal rights removed and Mr Lockhart has had his reinforced. This is a manifestation of self regulation because an office of lawyers has made these decisions.
If they will not stop a lawyer working who makes a vulnerable old lady homeless they have no morals or laws. Lawyers have a system where there is no law because they can move the legal boundaries as they see fit. Self regulation means no public courts for the Mr Lockharts. Put it this was if Mrs Francis could claim £670k in dodgy Legal Aid Claims where would she be now?
In Scotland the Legal Establishment use a system of self regulation which is a stay out of jail card because it ensures they will not face trial in a public court. It is a stay out of court card and we see the results of this here.
"Evil in the human mind....is a never failing source of satisfaction. Everyone reads the accidents and offences in the newspapers as the cream of the jest; a whole town runs to be present at a fire. If there were an execution going on in the next street.....the theatre would be left empty. An idiot, a crazy woman are set upon and baited by the whole community".
William Hazlitt [1826] pp 308-310.
Yes the mob love the misfortune of others, as I am sure many in the legal profession enjoy their omnipotence. No doubt they enjoyed slapping this lawyer with a pittance of a fine when he should be blocked from working as a lawyer ever again.
Philip Yelland, the Law Society of Scotland’s Director of Regulation for over 20 years. Philip Yelland, the Law Society of Scotland’s director of standards, said: “The Law Society of Scotland acted to protect the firm’s clients and Ms Macadam has not been able to practise as a solicitor in Scotland since 2004.
Solicitors are trusted to handle millions of pounds of client funds each year. Honesty and integrity are absolutely paramount within the solicitors' profession. Those who are suspected of stealing from clients will be investigated and, if they are found to be acting dishonestly or fraudulently, strong action will be taken against them, both by the Society and the courts.”
===============================
You are a sophist Phil, a spin doctor who's medicine is poison. Your buddy Mill, was higher up than you and he had to resign for his lies. I will give you some advice. You keep believing what you say because I genuinely believe you do believe what you say, and we clients will LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE.
In the private court called the Law Society there are no laws, and where there are no laws no one can be wrong.
Self regulation = no illegality, and that is why you and your corrupt MSP's want to keep it that way. Stealing is legal in Scotland if you are a lawyer. Don't see you permanently or temporarily removing Lockharts practicing certificate. Old lady out of her house. Oh you are strick with lawyers alright. This system was set up to protect lawyers, not clients. And you know the truth Phil, only clients can regulate lawyers, most businesses are not afraid of feedback these days but you are.
'Honesty and integrity are absolutely paramount within the solicitors' profession. Those who are suspected of stealing from clients will be investigated and, if they are found to be acting dishonestly or fraudulently, strong action will be taken against them, both by the Society and the courts.”
This is an utter lie?
This man should be arrested for his part in promoting criminality?
It’s the matter of big money where lots of pensioners money on the risk, this legal aid case should be solved as soon as possible.
Post a Comment