Friday, June 15, 2012

Vested interests ‘run Scotland’s courts’ as judges rule £90K & £120K civil jury awards over accident deaths ‘were excessive’

Lord_Hamilton_03Decision to ‘guide’ juries on civil awards shows vested interests have free run of our courts. A RULING in Scotland’s Court of Session by a five judge bench under the retiring Lord President, Lord Hamilton that damages awards made by civil juries to relatives of two people killed in separate accidents ‘were excessive and the claims should be heard again’ will prove to many that vested interests of professions, big business & insurance firms have the ability to skew justice in their favour in Scotland’s courts. The ruling, made earlier this week is seen by some as the thin end of the wedge to ending civil juries in damages awards in Scotland’s courts are over ‘paltry’ sums which not even a Banker would accept as a bonus or a judge would accept as an annual salary or retirement pension..

Previously, civil juries at the court of Session had found negligence on the part of the defenders had caused the deaths, where in the first case, KIRSTY MAY HAMILTON Pursuer and Respondent; against FERGUSON TRANSPORT (SPEAN BRIDGE) LTD Applicant and Defender: jurors awarded Kirsty Hamilton £120,000 after her mother, Caroline (aged 50) died in a road traffic accident when her car was crushed by a lorry near Fort William. Ms Hamilton was 17 at the time of her mother’s death. In the second case, GILBERT DENNIS THOMSON Pursuer and Respondent; against DENNIS THOMSON BUILDERS LTD Applicant and Defender, Dennis Thomson, was awarded £90,000 by a civil jury for the death of his son James, then aged 26, who died in an accident on a building site. Mr Thomson senior was 57 at the time of his son’s death.

However, the five judge bench - Lord Eassie, Lord Clarke, Lord Emslie, Lord Brodie and Lord Hamilton who heard the appeals of the companies previously found to be liable for the cause of the two fatalities, have now decided the compensation claims of the relatives should be heard again, and this time, the jurors should be given “guidance” from the presiding judge in assessing damages, with the judge suggesting a spectrum in which the award might lie.

The implication of the judges decision is that any further awards made in the cases should be much less than originally made by the earlier jury, leading many to conclude that vested interests are controlling the Scottish courts and the public’s access to justice.

In a telling excerpt from the opinion of the court, Lord Hamilton, sounding more like he was more concerned with curtailing publicity & growing enquiries over the disparity of justice where the amount of financial awards made by judges in damages actions without juries are falling well short of awards made in cases where a civil jury has made it’s decision, said : "If greater regard than hitherto is not had by judges to jury awards then the disparity between the judicial and jury awards is likely to remain.” Lord Hamilton went onto claim such a “state of affairs which lacks the consistency which is one of the hallmarks of a mature system"

The now retired Lord President commented that the absence of directions about sums awarded in similar cases by a civil jury, as opposed to that awarded by a judge was a "less than satisfactory aspect of civil jury trials". Lord Hamilton went onto say it was time "to set a framework for civil juries against which they can address levels of damages"which may easily be interpreted as an attempt to deprive a civil jury from making any kind of award which does not sit easily with a judge, or the vested interests of insurers & big business.

Lord Hamilton suggested several ways to address the disparities between awards made by judges & civil juries in Scotland’s Courts, saying : “The objective must now be to seek to narrow that disparity and to eliminate, in so far as practical, that lack of consistency. That can be done by three measures: first, by judges, sitting alone or in the Inner House, having significantly more regard to available jury awards (particularly where they demonstrate a pattern); secondly, by juries being given by the presiding judge fuller guidance than hitherto as to the level of damages which, consistently with other cases, might reasonably be awarded by them; and, thirdly, by appellate courts continuing to intervene, where necessary, on comparative justice grounds as envisaged under statute since 1815. This is a process which will take time and experience to mature.”

In what some may interpret as comments intended to stave off any intervention by the Scottish Parliament (similar to the asbestos damages bill) to remedy what many will perceive as a huge injustice in the cases of the deaths of the two persons, Lord Hamilton wrote in his opinion : “There is no reason to suppose that Parliament intended that awards by juries should have priority over awards by judges - or vice versa. Judicial and jury awards give different but complementary guidance for what is a just award of damages. In an age when life may be thought to be more precious than it may have been thought to be by earlier generations, and where consequentially the loss of the life of a close relative may seem a greater loss than it might have seemed earlier, the input of jury awards, reflective of the views of the community, may, in death cases, be particularly important.”

Lord Hamilton continued : “While awards made by juries without the benefit of judicial guidance may be at greater risk of being arbitrary or of having been influenced by illegitimate factors, those made with that (non-prescriptive) benefit are likely to be a valuable source for assessment in future cases. As to the second element, some suggestions are made below (para [76]) as to what procedural arrangements might be put in hand. The objective should be to eliminate, or at least reduce, the disparity between judicial and jury awards while at the same time securing that "awards ... in comparable cases ... bear a coherent relationship with each other" (Girvan, per Lord Clyde at page 25). If that objective is achieved, then parties whose disputes over damages are litigated can be better satisfied that they have had a fair trial - whether the adjudicating body is a judge or a jury.”

The size of the awards made by the civil juries in Scottish courts may surprise international readers, particularly those from the United States where awards in similar cases would normally run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, or even millions of dollars. However, Scotland’s justice system has yet to catch up, if ever, with other jurisdictions who allow greater access to justice to victims of injustice, rather than what is seen as the regular influence of vested interests in Scotland’s courts which limits justice, and punishment over the loss of loved ones, to what amounts to little more than a few pennies after legal fees are paid.

As as happened in so many cases before in Scotland’s courts, bankers, politicians and judges can expect bigger bonuses & retirement pensions than any relative can expect via a future award made by a judge or civil jury in a case in a Scottish court.

The full details of the opinion can be read here : CSIH 52 PD2039/09 and PD1444/09 OPINION OF THE LORD PRESIDENT in motions for new trials in causis (1) KIRSTY MAY HAMILTON Pursuer and Respondent; against FERGUSON TRANSPORT (SPEAN BRIDGE) LTD Applicant and Defender and (2) GILBERT DENNIS THOMSON Pursuer and Respondent; against DENNIS THOMSON BUILDERS LTD Applicant and Defender

Of note is the inclusion in the hearing of counsel from the Scottish Government Legal Directorate appearing for Scottish Ministers.

BBC News reported on the case here : Awards in Highland and Shetland accidents 'excessive' judges rule


Anonymous said...

Why bother with a jury if the judge is going to dictate the size of any award?

Are they worried high compensation will prevent them getting a directorship with the insurance company post retirement of their 200K a year taxpayer funded jobs?

Anonymous said...

Death means nothing to the Arthur Hamilton brigade, no doubt he and his colleagues have shares and insurance interests in the companies paying the damages.

White price for a human life Arthur? Are you indirectly saving your own money, perhaps a little less dividend from your shares?

Anonymous said...

The Law Lords insurers Royal Sun Alliance will be paying the damages, hey presto the Law Lords want to limit the amount payable.

Anonymous said...

It's called "loading the dice"

Anonymous said...

What would the judges be asking for if it were there mother who died?
For sure more than was awarded.
Welcome to Scotland's judiciary - getting a great name as the great protection racket for insurance companies and dodgy lawyers.

Anonymous said...

If Hamilton and his henchmen want to control the amount of damages awarded there (to use the phrase from the law of Delict Arthur) must be a "causal link." How much is heading into your bank account Arthur, after all who will do anything about it, the Crown Office against one of it's former judges. Don't think so.

Lets face it judges you are a law unto yourselves so if you were augmenting your bank balances I would not be surprised. Innocent people's deaths mean nothing to you people.

Anonymous said...

According to the web site below the salaries in 2011 per annum for Directors and chief executives of major organisations was £112,157.00. Looking at this the damages awarded in Scotland in these cases are a pittance especially when people have died.

These judges are as bent as the the rest of the legal establishment. Their priority is protecting wrongdoers like themselves not justice.

Read more:

Anonymous said...

I remember at university our alcoholic law lecturer smelling of Whiskey taught us about the law we needed for our construction related degrees. He said nothing about the corruption of this rotten vile profession and I have learnt from a number of situations our system has nothing to do with the attainment of justice. It is one law for the public and another law for the Lord Hamilton's of this world. I wonder what Lord (what a title in this day and age for an ass hole like him) Hamilton would want in damages if one of his family was a victim of negligence? His colleagues would want to direct the juries to award millions.

Hamilton's faction are vile human beings, utter trash who should be jailed and the doors welded shut. That would be a just sentence in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Good way of putting it re old duffer judges on huge salaries & pensions slashing jury awards just because some insurer comes along and tugs at their coattails.

Nice to see a fine law block as this hitting back against a very odious justice system.

Anonymous said...

Damages awarded to relatives of two people killed in separate accidents were excessive and the claims should be heard again, appeal judges have ruled.

Civil juries awarded Kirsty Hamilton £120,000 after her mother, Caroline, 50, died when her car was crushed by a lorry on the A82 near Fort William.

Dennis Thomson was awarded £90,000 following the death of his son on a building site in Lerwick, Shetland.

The new juries will be given additional guidance to what was offered before.

Ms Hamilton, from Ballchulish, was 17 when a lorry toppled over in the accident on December 2007 and killed her mother.

She sued Ferguson Transport (Spean Bridge) Ltd at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

Mr Thomson, from Brae, in Shetland, sued Dennis Thomson Builders Ltd, where he was sole director, following the death of his son James in March 2007.

The 26-year-old died after a canister of expanding foam exploded.
It is a pity the lorry did not crush Lord Hamilton.

Anonymous said...

Nothing short of judicial interference with the jury here and this must NOT be tolerated in what purports to be a democracy.What do you think should be done to bring more attention to this?

Anonymous said...

£120,000 is not even $200,000 and this is called "excessive" in Scotland for an avoidable road death?


You need new courts and new judges and your jurors need to GROW UP,award more and tell the judges to stick their perp sponsored guidance!

Anonymous said...

They might as well have five directors of insurance companies responsible for paying the damages because the five Law Lords are the same.

Reward the lawyers and Lord Hamilton's and big business and their insurers will save millions. It is no accident that some of the worse criminals in this country are the ones the law does not touch. They watch us, who watches them?

Anonymous said...

There were two judges in America who jailed innocent teenagers because they were part of a private prison set up and the judges and private company gained millions of dollars.

The £90K and £120K are clearly hitting Scottish judges in the pocket in some way. They must have the same arrangement with insurance companies and if so they should be jailed. The legal profession are protectors of insurance companies, that is becoming common knowledge to anyone in the know. Hamilton and his legal chums must want Penman crucified because they are reaping what Penman had sown, great work Diary of Injustice Team.

Anonymous said...

It is well known that the Judiciary do everything in their power to prevent juries sitting in civil trials and it is all about protecting their own little empire and ringfrncing power and influence.

Just another disgrace in the history of Scotland's 'justice' system. No wonder the UN Advisor on Human Rights Dr. Hans Kochler compared it to that of a 'Banana Republic' - never a truer word spoken.

Anonymous said...

It is the Judiciary who are out of touch - and out of date - not the Juries. I hope the juries in these cases lay down a marker for their own independence and double each award.

Anonymous said...

Gandhi said that a society is judged by how it treats its weak and its frail.

A legal system can be judged by how it treats it's victims.

Anonymous said...

It is good to harm others provided our membership do not suffer harm. Harm here means non violent harm. A fitting mission statement for the Law Society of Scotland.

Anonymous said...

Scotland is not a democracy, it is a country for the mob. The MSP's loyalty is with vested interests not the voters. And the latter are blind to a fault. Anyone can vote, most do not think.

Anonymous said...

The way the Scottish Legal profession operate I think the phrase access to justice is dangerous. The reality is more access to risk because that is what happens when any member of the public goes to a lawyer.

Anonymous said...

Lawyers manufacturers of despair.

Anonymous said...

The Legal Profession have powerful links to the insurance companies. These two factions with their medical colleagues when required engineer things so they share the clients damages. If anyone out there wants to trust a Scottish Lawyer after reading internet blogs you are crazy who deserve all you get. Personally I hate lawyer bastards.

Anonymous said...

If you are killed at work Lord Hamilton wants to reduce your damages because his insurers will be paying them.

If your injuries are not visible you will need doctors reports, so the doctors insurers are responsible for your damages so there will be no medical evidence against your employer.

The moto, do not believe what any lawyer tells you. They are interested in you for legal aid money, nothing else. You will not get a penny, and if you do attempt to sue your employer remember when your lawyer tells you there is no medical evidence against your employer (I told you this would happen) he has covered up your injuries for his insurers.

Anonymous said...

Judges in the same tent as the insurers. We should not be shocked by this. Look at the Law society and Marsh UK Royal Sun Alliance. This Law Society makes sure no one can claim the Master Policy, and now the criminals at the top want to curb the level of damages when people are killed.

We have a legal oligarchy controlling the Scottish Parliament, actually the Law Societies Parliament and the professions MSP's and business control everything. I would not be surprised if some of the bigger companies have special life insurance policies (as in the States) when their people died they were making £100,000.00. The managers of these schemes were complaining not enough of their employees were passing away. It was happening on Michael Moore's Capitalism A Love Story. And on Michael's Sicko doctor's got large bonuses to write condition not treatable when American patients had life threatening conditions. Perhaps Michael Moore should do a documentary on the Scottish Legal Profession. Any possibility of this Michael?

Arthur Hamilton the same arrangements apply, links between you all so you are more interested in the insurers than the victim and his or her family. The only way you will ever know how these families feel is for one of yours to be crushed by a truck. Clearly you don't give a F**k.

Anonymous said...

Arthur are you not ashamed that Scotland's international reputation is in the gutter because of the fact that a legal dictatorship exists where powerful business and legal interests defeat the ends of justice so that your faction can augment your insurers bank balances.

Are you not ashamed that people are left with no legal rights against lawyers because they are cleared by bureaucracy (Douglas Mill) called us "thorns in the lawyers flesh" but he has no compunction about those same thorns funding the Law Society through hyped up legal fees. I can tell you Arthur there is no complaints structure in Scotland to get a fair hearing against a lawyer. The complaints system is a protection racket. The only free space unless the press publish corruption cases is the internet. And you would silence us online if you could.

I bring my children up not to trust lawyers. I do not want them anywhere near a law firms office where they will be treated like dirt because the lawyer always knows a Douglas Mill will save his career. It is nothing short of criminal what you people do to members of the public, but the real criminal fact is that the client is always left ruined. It will not continue, I promise you that. The days for ruining innocent clients will come top an end because there are too many of us now.

Anonymous said...

Lord Hamilton suggested several ways to address the disparities between awards made by judges & civil juries in Scotland’s Courts, saying : “The objective must now be to seek to narrow that disparity and to eliminate, in so far as practical, that lack of consistency. That can be done by three measures: first, by judges, sitting alone or in the Inner House, having significantly more regard to available jury awards (particularly where they demonstrate a pattern);

Oh patterns Mr Hamilton, well I can tell you about those, the ones you know are there but do not want to discuss. Here goes,

Patterns of the Law Society SLCC protecting crooked lawyers. The latter done nothing since it commenced activities since October 2008.

Patterns of occupational injury cover ups because the employer, medical consultants and your lawyers are insured by Royal Sun Alliance. Your law of Delict Hamilton stipulates a causal link must be established in the form of medical evidence but you know the insurance arrangements are the stronger causal link which ensures genuine occupational injury is covered up.

Patterns of families such as Peter's family ripped off and the Law Society stops his Legal Aid.

Patterns of lawyer victims being denied legal rights against their crooked lawyer.

Patterns of protecting the Penman's.

Patterns of law reforms such as the Legal Profession and Legal Aid Bill having the teeth ripped out of it by our MSP's because the Law Society protect their colleagues.

Patterns of suicide.

And now a new pattern is being established, high court judges wanting to reduce damages payments to families who's family members have been killed.

You are a vile network of crooks from the humble law student to the so called Lords. To the public, trust none of them.

Anonymous said...

If I was a juror and a judge tried telling me about damages I, and many other people would think, what financial interest does this judge have in this case.

If judges are going to get away with this then there is no point in having juries in the first place. Big business control the judiciary simply because they provide the financial sweeteners. They are fooling no one.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton's salary and pension, now we are talking excessive.

Anonymous said...

How much is a life worth Arthur Hamilton?

Your wife's.

My Wife's?

Are they the same or is it a matter of difference?

There is an interesting question. The lorry hits my wife or yours.

Are you impartial or are you a puppet on an insurance companies directors string?

Anonymous said...

This is about judges wanting to be the boss of their courts as usual and stuff whatever the jury thinks.This decision is akin to jury fiddling.

Anonymous said...

This is the same Lord Hamilton who was demanding higher salaries for judges not too long ago and now he thinks half of a judges salary for a life is too much?

We need more accountability and less neolithic relics in Scotland's courts!

Anonymous said...


As the facts regarding the miscarriage of justice carried out by Mr. MacAskill become more evident, increasing numbers of Scots are beginning to voice their opposition. Why did Mr. MacAskill show "compassion" to a convicted terrorist, and yet has consistently gone to great lengths to avoid displaying true compassion to his fellow Scots? Many have attempted to raise numerous cases of injustice before him, and have continued to be ignored by this so-called "Justice" Secretary.

The man is a scumbag, everything his does is aimed at protecting his own.

Anonymous said...

Do you know when situations get really dangerous for governments. It is when the people who are being oppressed stop caring what happens to them. This is why this financial crises is causing great dissent. We have a cabinet of millionaires and a leader telling us "we are in it together." How out of touch is this idiot, a man who understands political theory and the head of a government who may be causing suicides.

You cannot understand the issues David when you can heat your home in the dead of winter, when you can eat the fine foods, when you are privatising the job centre. We are not all free riders, a large proportion of us want to work.

Anonymous said...

Professional indemnity insurance
Last updated: 30 May 2012

The Law Society's professional indemnity insurance (PII) initiative aims to create a stable and competitive insurance market to ensure affordable and accessible insurance for the entire profession.

We have also created a series of advice products to help you address some of the issues surrounding PII and update members with information on market developments.
Why do they need this when no one can get a lawyer to sue a lawyer in the first place?

The Law Societies, bury clients complaints.

Anonymous said...

If ever further evidence was needed that truly independent and completely separate regulation of ther legal profession in Scotland is urgently required, this is it.

Another disgraceful display of partisanship from the Judiciary in Edinburgh.

Anonymous said...

Britians lawyers, doctors, employers, what do they have in common. They us the same insurance companies.

So if you want to sue your employer don't. The lawyers will start legal proceedings for you [they will make a lot of Legal Aid money] if your injuries are not visible but the medical reports will always state your employer is not responsible for your injuries. Think about it, they take on cases telling you you can claim damages and their insurers would be paying the damages. Lawyers, doctors and employers are all the same, you cannot win damages so deny them the Legal Aid money and avoid litigation lawyers at all costs.

They will dump you at the court, because the Sheriff and Judges uses the same insurers too, as I am sure Lord Hamilton will reluctantly agree.

Anonymous said...

Just say this was a criminal case instead of a civil damages claim,the jury returned a not guilty verdict and the judges said "
No we don't like that so we will void your verdict and have the trial heard again with a view to having a guilty verdict".. just how big would the uproar be?

If judges are setting aside verdicts of jurors in civil cases just because vested interests of insurers and companies who appear to be working for the Scottish Government are on the line,it wont be long before the Crown Office are insisting on the same treatment as the vested interests of prosecutors enter the fray.

Judges fiddling with juries verdicts should not be allowed and this case is an absolute disgrace for the justice system in Scotland.These claims should if anything be increased not decreased.

My sympathies to those who lost their loved ones.As for the greedy judges on hundreds of thousands of pounds every year and their pensions well.. words fail me.

Self Regulation an imbalance of Power said...

Unelected interests groups such as the Law Society of Scotland have too much power. Yes lawyers need their professional union but clients need to get together to form an online feedback system. Then we will be able to control these polished human rats.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton Lawyer Rapped After Being Found Guilty Of “Fundamental Misconduct”

Jun 14 2012 Hamilton Advertiser

A LAWYER sanctioned following disciplinary proceedings is now working at Hamilton Citizens’ Advice Bureau.
Paul McConville was carpeted by the Scottish Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal after failing to properly progress miners’ compensation claims.
Following a hearing in Edinburgh, the 45-year-old was told he was guilty of “fundamental misconduct”.
McConville will not be able to work as partner within a law firm for 10 years.

He will, however, be able to work as a solicitor... but only with Law Society approval and under the supervision of the firm for whom he works.
Yesterday (Wednesday), Hamilton Citizens’ Advice Bureau manager Maureen Chalmers confirmed that McConville had been working as a volunteer with them since February, 2011.
She said he had been “up front” about the disciplinary case and had undergone rigorous training before being allowed to work under supervision.
McConville found himself up before the solicitors’ disciplinary body after handling the cases of Scottish coal mine workers who had been injured or died as a result of their work.
He admitted allegations of misconduct after relatives of the miners failed to receive the compensation they had been awarded.
McConville was a partner of Glasgow-based firm McConville, O’Neill between 2001 and 2010, when they ceased trading.
During those years, there were a large number of cases of miners pursuing claims against the Government’s Coal Liabilities Unit.
Although some cases were taken up by miners’ union lawyers, others were pursued by McConville’s firm.
One client accused McConville of refusing to communicate with her over a £500 compensation claim, and a second woman said he had failed to progress a £9000 claim on behalf of a relative who died of lung disease related to mining.
McConville insisted it had been accepted by the tribunal that there was “no question of dishonesty” and that “every penny of clients’ funds had been accounted for”.
He added: “I regret that there were cases where for the reasons explained at the hearing, clients’ affairs were not progressed as well as they should have been and I apologise for that.
“However, over the time my firm operated we had many thousands of satisfied clients on whose behalf we had obtained justice, but that does not excuse even one lapse.
Ms Chalmers added: “Paul McConville has been a volunteer for 15 to 16 months.
“He went through all the training and gradually built up his skills and now he is a fully-trained advisor and an excellent volunteer.
“He has been up-front (about the disciplinary case) since he first came here.
“We get volunteers from all backgrounds and in some cases we are offering them a second chance.
“ I have every confidence in him.”

Anonymous said...

Fury over £1m bonus for chief exec of controversial Sickness benefit test company

Jun 17 2012 Sunday Mail
THE private firm behind controversial sickness benefit tests have been slammed for awarding their chief executive almost £1million in bonus payments.
International company Atos are contracted to reassess people claiming sickness and disability benefits.
Heart attack and lung-disease victims are among those the firm have assessed as being well enough to look for jobs.
According to Atos’ annual report, chairman and chief executive Thierry Breton received £1.95million in 2011.
Half the amount was his salary and the other half was a bonus. He received £1.83million the previous year.
Rutherglen and Hamilton West Labour MP Tom Greatrex said: “People will find it hard to believe that the boss of Atos sees fit to reward himself with millions in bonuses, while thousands of sick and disabled people in Scotland suffer.
“It will sicken those who have been through the Atos process to hear the company crow about their expertise in healthcare.
“Thousands of people have suffered because, time and again, incorrect decisions have been made on the back of Atos assessments.”
Atos declined to comment on Breton’s bonus.
No doubt Breton's doctors minds are made up before they examine the individual. Cameron will be pleased because people who have died he does not need to find a job for and they cannot claim any benefits. Yes David, legalised murder that is what is happening. Look out your Swasteka. National Socialism and Conservative Lib Dem policies have much in common.

Anonymous said...

I told a clerk at Hamilton Sheriff Court the legal establishment were corrupt. Horror covered his face, he thought I was a lunatic. I told him if a lawyer is drunk behind the wheel they may be prosecuted [a procurator fiscal did not while in charge of her BMW) but I said "have you never heard of A Diary of Injustice". This he did not want to talk about, enough said.

Anonymous said...

The Law Society of Scotland is the professional body for Scottish solicitors. We were established in 1949 and are financed by our members without any funding from government.

Not only do we regulate and represent all practising solicitors in Scotland but we have an important duty towards the public interest. All practising solicitors are members of the Society and are required to meet our high standards.
Right Law Society just like Douglas Mill who lied to the Justice Committee (itself not interested in human rights). The Law Society are bureaucratic criminals who protect their membership like a decent mother protects her children. The difference however is that the children are not criminals.

The Law Society, a hotbed of corruption.

Anonymous said...

Welcome to Scotland, a country where justice is the exception rather than the rule.

Good report, shows that Royal Sun Alliance sit of the benches in our courts. They are the legal profession, Lord Hamilton an agent for RSA and others.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton is treading on thin ice with this one.

Anonymous said...

And so once again we see what Scots Law is - nothing more than a tool for the powerful.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The lawyers firm Davidson Fraser knowingly employed a suspended lawyer (O'Donnell) and all of his clients would not be covered by the Master Policy block insurance. Therefore the victims are not not able to claim against this policy for this fraud?

They are completely unprotected?

Please note I do not know how long you have been reading A Diary of Injustice but no one is protected by the Master Policy Insurance. You need a lawyer to act for you against the Master Policies underwriters Royal Sun Alliance ans all lawyers are members of the Law Society so even if they did want to claim the Master Policy for you the Law Society would suspend their practising certificates.

The Master Policy is BULLETPROOF.

Compensation from it is impossible. They designed the system and it is always check mate for the client. They are criminals but they do not believe they are.

I promise you it is not only Mr O'Donnell's clients, no client is protected by the Master Policy. No lawyer will help a client in this situation, so a legal check mate ties the client up so the Master Policy and the Courts are closed shops.

Lawyers prove I am wrong.

Anonymous said...

David Cameron's ATOS and his cabinet, well they are sitting on millions and there's no reason why mass unemployment and economic stagnation should change that. But does Cameron blame the bankers for this disaster, no he targets the most vulnerable in society.

This man and his cabinet live on a different economic planet from us. I would like to see how they would do if they were at the bottom of the economic heap.

Anonymous said...

Check this out. It is horrific the power the legal and medical professions have, although the former are perhaps slightly less powerful?

Anonymous said...

There is a lesson to be learned here for the jury to go against the unlawful direction of the judge?

Do what the Scottish lawyers do when they charge you fees....double it, no triple it so that the amount these poor victims get bears some sort of comparison to the fat cat lawyers and judges salaries?