Monday, August 13, 2012

Taxpayer funded Court adviser who sent widow to crooked lawyer ‘off the hook’ as Hamilton Citizens Advice Chiefs close ranks with Law Society

Gilbert Anderson lawyer gets paid by us refers to O'Donnell Sunday Mail 20 May 2012Investigation of Hamilton Citizens Advice Bureau in-court adviser Gilbert Anderson branded a whitewash. AN INVESTIGATION into a taxpayer funded in-court adviser working at Hamilton Citizens Advice Bureau has been branded a whitewash after a trustee of Hamilton CAB claimed there was no evidence to link ex-Marine turned legal helper Gilbert S Anderson to complaints that he was sending people with desperate legal problems to a now notorious struck off solicitor John G O'Donnell, who was posing as a colleague at now defunct Glasgow law firm Davidson Fraser.

Even though documents proved Gilbert S Anderson, of Hamilton Citizens Advice Bureau had an association with the same law firm in which serial crooked lawyer John G O’Donnell was secretly working as a lawyer, and Anderson had handwritten messages bragging about cash fees which could be made from people he sent to O’Donnell at the Glasgow law firm, CAB chiefs told elderly widow Elizabeth Campbell nothing would be done about Anderson, even though his actions have ruined Mrs Campbell’s legal interests and now forced her to sell her home.

Diary of Injustice earlier reported how elderly widow Elizabeth Campbell, who went to Hamilton CAB for help and was sent to John O’Donnell by Gilbert Anderson, was ensnared by Gilbert Anderson, documented evidence showing the two were in cahoots to rip off vulnerable people needing the services of Scotland’s Citizens Advice centres.

Letterhead of crooked law firm showed Anderson’s name as an associate yet Hamilton CAB claim otherwise. Mrs Campbell wrote in her complaint how Anderson hoped John O’Donnell (posing as Colin Davidson) would be able to lift a large fee from the vulnerable widow : “On the Client Record Sheet produced by Mr Anderson (which I found in Davidson Fraser’s file) it clearly states on two separate occasions that he would endeavour to recommend a Legal Aid Solicitor to me. Also, on the back of this Client Record Sheet is a handwritten note “possibly in my mind a cash for Colin £3000”. I have enclosed a copy of this Record – the original is with Elaine Motion who is acting the the Law Society.”

After it became clear there were problems with O’Donnell’s dual identity, Mrs Campbell told Hamilton CAB their Mr Anderson refused to tell her what was going on.

Mrs Campbell told Hamilton CAB Chiefs : “I asked Gilbert Anderson about why people kept calling Colin Davidson “John” and voiced my other concerns about his identity and he said there was a reason for this which he was not prepared to divulge to me. I have now discovered that the Solicitor to whom Gilbert Anderson sent me, was not in fact Colin Davidson, but a struck-off solicitor, John O’Donnell, who between them conspired to deceive clients – John O’Donnell lost his licence because he had over 20 cases of negligence proved against him and the insurance had to pay out hundreds of thousands of pounds. The real Colin Davidson (whom I never met) has since died, and John O’Donnell has disappeared.”

The in-house investigation into Anderson’s activities was carried out by a trustee of Hamilton CAB, a Mr Neil Kennedy, who found against Mrs Campbell’s complaint on every point. Mr Kennedy even claimed that “Mr Anderson was in no way involved with Mr Davidson or Davidson Fraser” a fact already proved by letter heads and Anderson’s claim of £3,000 fees to go to Davidson Fraser for legal work to be provided to Mrs Campbell. Mr Kennedy also claimed the Law Society of Scotland said they had no record of an association between Anderson & the law firm Davidson Fraser.

Report into Gilbert Anderson branded ‘a whitewash’. Mr Kennedy said in his letter to Mrs Campbell, which can be viewed online HERE : Although our caseworker may have given you our standard list of local solicitors, regarding your case there was no reference to this as you point out in your letter, simply as a result of the fact that you did not expect to obtain Legal Aid for this, and that Davidson Fraser was, so far as we understand, not part of the Legal Aid scheme at that time. You will understand that Hamilton CAB as part of the CAB movement cannot and does not endorse or recommend one firm of solicitors in preference to another, however that does not prevent our professional staff assisting you with an intelligent choice as to a solicitor who has the experience to deal with the particular aspects of your case. This is what we believe that Mr Anderson was seeking to do in his dealings with you and the referral to Davidson Fraser was made on that basis, particularly as he had already referred another case to them and that was progressed and concluded successfully to the client's satisfaction.

From our interview you exhibited a very clear and able understanding of the process which Mr Anderson undertook to find a solicitor who would be able to deal with your problems. Whilst you have explained in detail your experience of dealing with Davidson Fraser after the referral took place, we have no responsibility for the conduct of independent professional solicitors and therefore cannot comment on these aspects, however the Law Society of Scotland may be able to assist further in this regard as this aspect of regulation falls within their remit.

We have therefore on grounds of remit not duplicated that investigation into your dealings with Davidson Fraser; however we have considered whether some of the statement which you have made in that regard were known by Mr Anderson or Hamilton CAB at the time that the referral was made. In this category are the aspects of mistaken identity, Mr Davidson's alleged alcoholism, etc, which may have been relevant in making the judgment to recommend Davidson Fraser to you. Our conclusion is that we had no knowledge of the alleged impersonation, and Mr Anderson was aware of a medical problem which Mr Davidson had experienced in the past which may be exacerbated by alcohol but which did not impair his abilities or judgment. We have no evidence to contradict that view.

Whilst not commenting on, and therefore not for those purposes doubting your narration of your interaction with Davidson Fraser, we have concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that the procedure leading to your referral to that firm was not properly conducted and concluded. We therefore are unable to uphold your complaint.

On a general note our review of referral procedures indicated that in some instances our documentation of the process was not as complete as we would expect, mainly due to the pressure of case load on our in-Court Advice personnel. We have therefore introduced a regular formal review of this by the Bureau manager to address this issue.

Gilbert Anderson conflict of interest re Davidson Fraser :

Our investigations regarding this point are seriously impaired by the untimely death of Mr Colin Davidson, and you will understand that Mr Anderson vigorously disputes any allegation of "involvement" in the widest sense and consequential conflict of interest in dealings with Davidson Fraser.

Mr Anderson and Mr Davidson had known each other for a number of years and we believe that an informal discussion had taken place regarding Mr Anderson working for Davidson Fraser at some point in the future, however this had led nowhere. On learning that his name was on the Davidson Fraser notepaper Mr Anderson had taken action to remove this, and this was rectified immediately.

We obtained evidence of other correspondence issued by Davidson Fraser within a few days of the letterhead which you provided showing Mr Anderson as an Associate. This correspondence contained no reference to Mr Anderson being connected with the firm.

The Law Society of Scotland has confirmed to us that they have no record of Mr Anderson being associated with Davidson Fraser or Mr Davidson.

Accordingly, in the absence of evidence, we can only conclude that Mr Anderson was in no way involved with Mr Davidson or Davidson Fraser, other than they had know each other professionally from time to time over a number of years. The allegation of conflict of interest is therefore not upheld.

Mr Kennedy ended his letter to Anderson’s victim, Mrs Campbell, by saying : “I know that this decision may disappoint you however we believe that our investigation has been thorough with regard to circumstance and procedure.”

Hamilton CAB was asked to issue a statement on the case. Manager Maureen Chalmers told Diary of Injustice : “Hamilton CAB has concluded its investigation into the complaint raised by Mrs Campbell, and have written to her informing her of the outcome. Hamilton CAB takes all complaints very seriously and has investigated this matter thoroughly in accordance with the procedures laid down by the national CAB movement. We regard it as imperative that local people have complete confidence in the quality and the impartiality of our advice. We have been in communication with Mrs Campbell throughout the process, and would like to thank her for the constructive way in which she co-operated with our investigation. “

However, after the statement was issued to Diary of Injustice, Mr Kennedy, the trustee who wrote the letter to Mrs Campbell detailing the results of the investigation into Mr Anderson sent a hurried email to Hamilton CAB’s Mrs Chalmers stating : “I do not think that it is appropriate to bring the confidential letter between HCAB and Mrs Campbell into the public domain.” Mrs Chalmers then contacted Diary of Injustice and advised us to “note the sensitivity of some of the content.” prior to publication.

A legal insider who read the Hamilton CAB letter on the investigation into Mr Anderson said “The report on Anderson reads more like a self serving Law Society of Scotland investigation into a dodgy lawyer, with an end result of a pat on the back for their colleague.”

Speaking last week to Diary of Injustice, Mrs Campbell says she may now appeal the findings of the Hamilton CAB investigation into Gilbert Anderson.

Clearly, the results of Hamilton CAB’s own investigation into one of its own merits a need for independent complaints procedures to be put in place where taxpayer funded positions such as the one occupied by Mr Anderson can be properly regulated.

Diary of Injustice stands by Mrs Campbell and the terms of her complaint, and will report further updates on the case.

Readers should also note Mrs Campbell gave full permission to Diary of Injustice to publish the letter from Mr Kennedy to Mrs Campbell regarding her complaint against Gilbert Anderson.

Meanwhile, if YOU have had dealings with Hamilton Citizens Advice Bureau, in particular Mr Gilbert Anderson or others and you have encountered difficulties, please contact us via scottishlawreporters@gmail.com

The Sunday Mail also covered the story as follows :

OAP'S ANGER OVER BUREAU 'WHITEWASH' Sunday Mail August 5 2012OAP'S ANGER OVER BUREAU 'WHITEWASH'.

By: Russell Findlay Aug 5, 2012

An elderly client sent to a rogue law firm by the Citizens Advice Bureau has hit out at a "whitewash" probe.

CAB employee Gilbert Anderson sent Elizabeth Campbell, 70, to now-defunct firm Davidson Fraser, where banned brief John O'Donnell advised clients.

But taxpayer-funded lawyer Anderson has been cleared by CAB bosses.

Elizabeth, from East Kilbride, said: "The CAB investigation has been an absolute whitewash.

"I would like to say they're not going to get away with this - but they are, because there's no point in wasting more time on an appeal."

Former Royal Marine Anderson's name appeared on the letter-headed paper of Davidson Fraser which was fronted by Colin Davidson, who has since died. Anderson said that was a mistake and denied any wrong-doing.

Elizabeth, who suffered from depression after her husband's death four years ago, has suffered a catalogue of problems with the legal profession.

She was stunned to discover that another controversial lawyer is an adviser for the CAB at Hamilton Sheriff Court.

Paul McConville, 45, failed to pass on tens of thousands of pounds in compensation to the families of dead miners.

In June, he was barred from working for a decade - except under supervision.

107 comments:

Anonymous said...

The outcome we expected. They know nothing else.

Anonymous said...

I expected this. You see there is nowhere you can go in Scotland for fair treatment against a lawyer.

The Citizens Advice Bureau another branch of the Law Society of Scotland.

Anonymous said...

Well this is just great.

Now we cannot trust Citizens Advice to look after our interests because they are too busy looking after their own dodgy lawyers.

Anonymous said...

However, after the statement was issued to Diary of Injustice, Mr Kennedy, the trustee who wrote the letter to Mrs Campbell detailing the results of the investigation into Mr Anderson sent a hurried email to Hamilton CAB’s Mrs Chalmers stating : “I do not think that it is appropriate to bring the confidential letter between HCAB and Mrs Campbell into the public domain.” Mrs Chalmers then contacted Diary of Injustice and advised us to “note the sensitivity of some of the content.” prior to publication.

Hamilton CAB too busy trying to censor news reporting of their screw ups?

Personally I think the Police should be called in on this one and criminal charges all round.

Anonymous said...

"I would like to say they're not going to get away with this - but they are, because there's no point in wasting more time on an appeal."
==============================
Yes Elizabeth they never want to know. Mentally these people are not reachable. I will tell all of my friends what has happened at Hamilton CAB, but this is the outcome I expected.

Anonymous said...

Ironic the kind of letter Hamilton Citizens Advice sent to Mrs Campbell is usually the same kind of thing that sends people to a CAB in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Interesting Mrs Campbell is being forced to sell her home because of all this behaviour by Anderson & O'Donnell - clearly this was the aim from the start added to the fact these guys had an elderly widow in front of them..

Little wonder lawyers are well known for being sharks.

Anonymous said...

Yet another exercise in 'passing the buck', and another good example of why self regulation must end.

Anonymous said...

A damning indictment of Citizens Advice and the letter you reprinted from Kennedy is priceless.How can CAB claim they help people out when sending out letters like this?

Anonymous said...

What a creepy letter out of the Citizens Advice!
Best wishes to Mrs Campbell you are not alone more strength to you!

Anonymous said...

Its official Scotland's Citizens Advice Bureaus are all branches of the Law Society of Scotland.

ONLY LEAFLETS EXPOSING LAWYERS WILL WORK.

Anonymous said...

Elizabeth, who suffered from depression after her husband's death four years ago, has suffered a catalogue of problems with the legal profession.

Yes the legal profession are the problem for us all.

Anonymous said...

“possibly in my mind a cash for Colin £3000” - so Mr Kennedy how does this tally with your claims there is no evidence of a relationship between Anderson and Davidson Fraser?

Pure lies all the way through and remember folks you saw it here on Diary of Injustice!

Anonymous said...

"I would like to say they're not going to get away with this - but they are, because there's no point in wasting more time on an appeal."
=================================
I firmly believe they can get away with anything.....even murder. You need advice about lawyers before going to lawyers. Clearly the CAB are not the people to go to.

There is nowhere to go for fair legal advice in Scotland. Every advice centre is infiltrated by lawyer lovers.

Anonymous said...

They do not want to remove crooked lawyers. Imagine a Law Society lawyer supervising any of these lawyers. The mind boggles, it is just a way to protect them.

Anonymous said...

The word "despicable" seems to sum this one up

Anonymous said...

Well I see Hamilton Citizens Advice have been taught well by the Law Society of Scotland on how to investigate their own and whitewash it.

Who in their right mind will trust any of these people now?Not me and I'll be doing my utmost to put all this news about.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for posting this.I'll know now never to call CAB the people's champion

Anonymous said...

Channel 4 News Documentary on Expert Witnesses in Family Courts – Media Request

12 Thursday Jan 2012

Posted by Natasha in Children, Family Law, Notes

Channel 4 News is working on a documentary that will be exploring the use of experts in the family courts, particularly focusing on psychologists but possibly also looking at psychiatrists and paediatricians.

The news channel are currently looking for people who have had concerns about the quality and/ or competency of such experts in their own cases. The following is an extract from the media request itself:

“We are keen to hear from people who have had concerns about the quality or competency of the expert witnesses used in their cases. We have, for example, heard about parents being diagnosed or evaluated by expert witness without ever having a formal assessment with them.

If you have any details on a case which fits the above, we would be very keen to hear more about your experiences. We will, of course, treat all information in the strictest confidence”.

You can get in touch via email at Phil.Carter@ITN.CO.UK

If you are not able to email for any reason, please let us know and we will help you to reach the news channel, if you would like us to.
-------------------------------
Sorry DOI Team, hope you can publish, thanks.

Anonymous said...

First time I've heard such a bogus explanation for someone's name appearing on a letterhead.

Just goes to show CAB are like the rest of them when protecting their own and I'm sure plenty journalists will get some ideas now from this info.

Anonymous said...

Scotland's CAB's don't trust us, we are all linked to the infamous Law Society of Scotland. Now this would exonerate CAB for being honest. But no the usual spin.

We never do anything wrong.

The CAB in the Law Society ring of steel.

What chance do citizens have now?

Anonymous said...

"Off the hook", of course, they are as slippery as Conger eels and as mendacious as politicians.

After having dealt with lawyer corruption myself I expected this outcome. Where we find lawyers and their friends we find chronic liars.

I hope the Hamilton Advertiser runs this story the way the DOI Team have, word for word.

Anonymous said...

20th JULY 2012

Remember this date well as, THE DEATH OF THE CAB in Scotland?

Anonymous said...

I wonder who it was at the Law Society of Scotland who wrote the letter for the CAB's Kennedy to sign?

Quite possibly Elaine Motion?

Anonymous said...

WEBSITES CRITICAL OF LAWYERS IN MASS SHUTDOWN

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

Anonymous said...

Why is it that the Law Society of Scotland's arms being the SSDT, the SLCC and now the CAB, feel as though they can arrive at 'Decisions' that are lies and expect the Public to believe them?

Are they certifiably mad or is it due to the fact they can tell lies with impunity knowing that the Police have been told to, 'Not Investigate' these criminal havens?

Anonymous said...

FAO Mrs Campbell,

I worry that your case is going to be snuffed out by Elaine Motion?

Especially that Elaine Motion seems to have inveigled the original documentation from you which is a prime facie case of organised criminality after all it seems clear that the Law Society of Scotland were using the firm Davidson Fraser as a place to 'house' their crooked lawyer friends to allow them to continue to charge fat fees erroneously and so that these individuals can continue to damage the Public with impunity?

Elaine Motion only requires a photocopy of the original?

You may by now realise that the original has somehow been misplaced (burnt) therefore there is no evidence against her colleagues?

Remember, that Elaine Motion is an Instructed Agent of the Law Society of Scotland and has 100% allegiance to the Law Society of Scotland including covering up for their many unlawful activities?

It should be NO surprise to you by now that contrary to what assurances she has given you she does not have even 1% interest in Justice for you and that you are considered already to be the enemy of the Law Society of Scotland because you have inadvertently discovered upon a Law Society of Scotland regular scam to keep their crooked lawyer members in work?

Before it is too late, get the original paperwork back if it still exists and report all of this case to the Police as the Law Society are up to their necks in it and as they are a party to this crime they should not be involved in coming to a remedy?

The Police are your only hope for Justice?

Remember, it was Elaine Motion who let this crooked lawyer O'Donnell of with a soft sanction through the SSDT in the first place and it was either she or the Law Society of Scotland who 'BROKERED' O'Donnell to get employed at Davidson Fraser?

Anonymous said...

Was this 'Kennedy' CAB letter written and prepared for him by Mary MacGowan?

Anonymous said...

This WHITEWASHING of the facts of this case is a breathtaking attempt to lie in order to avoid the consequences of their actions?

Why must Anderson be kept on and protected?

Because he was implicated in a scam whereby he was employed to 'find' vulnerable clients for the despicable O'Donnell who was parachuted into a job by the Law Society into the firm of Davidson Fraser?

It was not enough that a crooked Scottish Lawyer O'Donnell (who should have been struck-off by Elaine Motion at the SSDT, but she was minded to ensure that O'Donnell got a lighter sentence than he should have got) was parachuted into a job (in order that he could continue on 'as normal') but that there was a system set up to find O'Donnell a steady stream of vulnerable clients to allow him to continue his devious ways?

It can be seen in this set-up that O'Donnell was to be allowed to continue to act 'As Normal' against his client victims as there must have been ZERO supervision of his activities by his firm Davidson Fraser as O'Donnell was passing himself off as a bona fide lawyer (who was dead, and not as a lawyer who was under a supervisory sanction)?

Anonymous said...

Why have the Police not stepped into investigate this criminality?

Could it be that individuals employed or Instructed by the Law Society have been implicated in criminal activity?

Anonymous said...

Somebody should be properly advising Mrs Campbell instead of leaving her to the Law Society's wolves?

Anonymous said...

I am sure that Elaine Motion will be encouraging Mrs Campbell to report her complaint to the SLCC (to allow the Society to investigate)?

However, in two years time Mrs Campbell's case through the SLCC will be in limbo ( as the 'Society's' standard practise is to put as much distance between the time the crimes are committed and arriving at it's 'Decision', especially as in the intervening period there is less 'will' for the Press to run the story)?

A well practised rouse?

Or alternatively, Mrs Campbell could be told by the SLCC that her complaint to them, 'has no merit and therefore is rejected' at their 'Gateway Decision Making Stage' (which is of course what the Law Society of Scotland tell the SLCC to do when the case against a lawyer friend of theirs comes into the SLCC or where the Law Society could be implicated in criminality resulting in a large payout from their Guarantee Fund)

Anonymous said...

As long as a profession control the press, they can oppress and control the population by preventing their victims obtaining a public platform.

This is their aim in closing websites critical of lawyers.

Anonymous said...

“As long as a population can be induced to believe in a supernatural hereafter, it can be oppressed and controlled. People will put up with all sorts of tyranny, poverty, and painful treatment if they're convinced that they'll eventually escape to some resort in the sky where lifeguards are superfluous and the pool never closes. Moreover, the faithful are usually willing to risk their skins in whatever military adventure their government may currently be promoting.”

Tom Robbins, Skinny Legs and All


Anonymous said...

Lawyers do not want to become honest, that means less profits.

They want to silence all of us to exploit us more. Never trust them.

They ruin you because they know their pals at the Law Society will ruin you again. Why do they do this repeatedly? Because they think we are all thick as treacle, and they don't care if we die, providing we have paid their fees for ruining us beforehand. They are a brotherhood of professional criminals you must never trust. Don't be like us, don't learn the hard way.

Anonymous said...

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/the-law-society-is-worse-than-a-pit-full-of-vipers-1-655894

Anonymous said...

Deeply suspicious the letter from the Citizens Advice and also its an investigation into one of their own so not independent and cant be trusted!

Anonymous said...

Handing Scotland full control over its financial affairs will lead to deeper cuts in public expenditure or higher taxes, the former prime minister has warned.

Gordon Brown said people in the United Kingdom currently enjoyed a number of legal, social and economic rights that stemmed from their citizenship.
999999999999999999999999999999999
Wrong Gordon Brown, Legal rights are conditional and on that basis we are not citizens of the UK or Scotland. They legal profession create difference with full approval of all politicians.

I stopped voting a long time ago Gordon. A vote for any politician will not curb Law Society power which is totally out of control.

Many people have had their citizenship infringed by having their legal rights removed to save lawyers skins will agree with me. Shame on all of you lawyers and politicians. The pits of the human race.

Anonymous said...

The result of self regulation, lawyer always cleared. That is why there is no trust in the 10,400 of them. Trusting lawyers is utter madness.

Anonymous said...

They are shutting down web sites criticizing lawyers.

Better all go for the leaflets then.

Anonymous said...

Well I don't know about other groups but crime pays for lawyers, and they face no trial.

I am glad I am not a father, bringing kids into such a rotten world. I would hate them being victimized by these lawyers. But this is just my opinion I am not judging parents when I say this. It must be the most important responsibility in the world. Good on them.

Anonymous said...

A nastier profession there cannot be.

Anonymous said...

An earlier article by the DOI Team.


"Mr Cherbi.

As a solicitor I see the problems of complaints handling every day at the Law Society. I have even (once, never again) written a report on a complaint of a serious nature which ended up in the bin as Mr Yelland and his colleagues didn't seem to like my recommendations of a prosecution before the SSDT for the solicitor concerned.

Far from that being a one off, same happens on a regular basis and while complainers bash the system they should note that some of the case reporters actually did their work and recommended the solicitor be prosecuted before the SSDT (hopefully with a view to be struck off).

I don't see any willingness on the part of Mr MacAskill to improve the lot of solicitors & clients as you now so rightly draw attention to and I would go so far as to publicly support you if you continue your line of bringing the focus of the problem (the Law Society of Scotland itself) to the fore.

Good luck and I'm sure you are well able to handle it.
==================================
I thought this comment was worth highlighting again. I am not surprised what this lawyer wrote and I am deeply concerned if these people can take control of the internet.

As for those who support the Law Society those people disgust me. They are not on the sharp end of the Societies decisions.

Anonymous said...

How predictable!

Bye Bye to the Independence of the Scottish CAB and Hello to the new wing of the Law Society of Scotland?

You cannot trust the Law Society of Scotland?

You cannot trust the SSDT?

You cannot trust SLCC?

Now we cannot trust the Scottish CAB?

Where do we go to for help now?

The Big Man?

Anonymous said...

If the Law Society of Scotland is the farm owner and Mrs Campbell is the tenant farmer and all of her belongings are her chickens who have been risked by her unfortunate brush with the fox (O'Donnell), then how is it that the Law Society of Scotland get to send in their ferret?

Anonymous said...

I have been thinking.....

Since the Police are NOT ALLOWED to investigate any instances of the Law Society's criminality......why don't we just get rid of all of the Police in Scotland (saving around £2Billion a year) and instead just let the Law Society's sweep-up team to do all the investigations of criminality in Scotland?

Hey presto.......all of Scotland's crime statistics would go down to Zero % overnight.....?

Problem solved?

Simples?

Anonymous said...

Is it true that Mr Neil Kennedy has submitted this Decision on behalf of the Hamilton CAB as this years entry into the Scottish Comedy Letters Award 2012?

I so, it must have a great chance of winning?

Anonymous said...

This so-called CAB thorough investigation has more holes in it than a nervously mouse nibbled piece of Emmental cheese?

It is very smelly indeed!

Anonymous said...

What is going to replace the Scottish CAB?

Anonymous said...

I wonder if all the victims of Scottish crooked lawyers were to make an A4 sized poster of our crooked Scottish lawyers then we could stick them side-by-side onto the Law Society of Scotland building, the SSDT Building, the SLCC Building and every Scottish CAB office building and they would all disappear?

Sorted?

Anonymous said...

This is clearly an unlawful decision, made in order to dissuade Mrs Campbell from taking the CAB, the lawyers involved and the Law Society of Scotland to court and so that the Law Society can rsist a claim against their Guarantee Fund?

Anonymous said...

An earlier article by the DOI Team.


"Mr Cherbi.

As a solicitor I see the problems of complaints handling every day at the Law Society. I have even (once, never again) written a report on a complaint of a serious nature which ended up in the bin as Mr Yelland and his colleagues didn't seem to like my recommendations of a prosecution before the SSDT for the solicitor concerned.

Far from that being a one off, same happens on a regular basis and while complainers bash the system they should note that some of the case reporters actually did their work and recommended the solicitor be prosecuted before the SSDT (hopefully with a view to be struck off).

I don't see any willingness on the part of Mr MacAskill to improve the lot of solicitors & clients as you now so rightly draw attention to and I would go so far as to publicly support you if you continue your line of bringing the focus of the problem (the Law Society of Scotland itself) to the fore.

Good luck and I'm sure you are well able to handle it.
==================================
I thought this comment was worth highlighting again. I am not surprised what this lawyer wrote and I am deeply concerned if these people can take control of the internet.

As for those who support the Law Society those people disgust me. They are not on the sharp end of the Societies decisions.

14 August 2012 22:45
=====================================

There is at least one good Scottish lawyer left who clearly has a conscience?

However, there is NO POINT in the complaint going to the SSDT because it is controlled and operated by the Law Society of Scotland as the final filter in a long list of filters to make sure that any Scottish lawyer complained about gets as soft a sanction as possible?

If the Law Society Of Scotland's criminal behaviour is to be stopped then it requires people like this lawyer coming forward, naming names and cases where the unlawful practices have occurred and for this to be settled in a criminal court?

The sooner this reality comes to fruition the sooner the rebuilding of the legal landscape in Scotland can be rebuilt?

It is no longer a 'profession' and the status of Scottish lawyers is as low as possible with more and more people voting with their feet and refusing to use a Scottish solicitor because of their dirty reputation?

Anonymous said...

Is it true that due to the Law Society's criminal behaviour and the break down in law, where they and their lawyers are protected from the law that this has led to a gap in the market that is being filled by organised crime gangs (no, not the Law Society, other crime gangs) whereby good honest citizens are no longer going to Scottish lawyers as they cannot be trusted and instead they are going to the organised criminal gangs to resolve their disputes?

Apparently, the organised crime gangs are (a) more trustworthy than the Law Society and their Scottish lawyers; (b) they are quicker; (c) they are cheaper; (d) they are more effective; (e) and they are far more friendly and straightforward to deal with?

Another reason for the Public to turn their backs on the Law Society Criminal Gang and their member crooked lawyers?

Anonymous said...

Scotland is sliding down into the pits of depravity.

Anonymous said...

You cannot trust the Law Society of Scotland?

You cannot trust the SSDT?

You cannot trust SLCC?

Now we cannot trust the Scottish CAB?

Yes these horses are dead. You want to beat them. Don't spend years trying to whip them into life. When all roads to Rome close we wise clients make new ones.
==================================
eg....Leaflets, "Bloggs Solicitors Falkirk stealing mortgage money. Law Society protect them".

That will cause locals to avoid that law firm. Never complain to any office about a lawyer, use leaflets and I promise mighty forces will come to your aid.

Leaflets get results, complaining about lawyers is torture. Use the leaflets and cut lawyers and their supporters out of the complaints loop. Now where did I put my printer cartridges?

Anonymous said...

To Mr Lafferty and Mrs Jack of the Law Society of Scotland.

Because we know there is no point complaining to your union or any other bureaucracy in Scotland people should print leaflets with their lawyers name, firm address and date they contacted the Law Society of Scotland, and highlight the Societies response.

This will establish that lawyers complained about 2, 5, 10, 20 years ago are still working. It will prove beyond reasonable doubt your organization is totally corrupt.

Because the complaints channels are blocked by prejudice leaflets are a legitimate inexpensive way forward, but it will cost your membership millions in lost revenue if done en masse.

You were both in practice before your present positions.

Anonymous said...

http://www.ianfraser.org/emancipate-yourselves-from-financial-slavery-none-but-ourselves-can-free-our-minds/

Anonymous said...

Its interesting how Citizens Advice take people such as Gilbert Anderson on via a cheque from the public purse yet others who have done a heck of a lot more for people in need of legal advice or a fix for their problems are getting nothing and dont stand a chance with any of these organisations.

The whole thing is corrupt!

Anonymous said...

10,400 Scottish Lawyers, millions of clients and providing we stick to the truth, posters exposing their corrupt ways. The best way forward.

Cut the Law Society and its branches down to the Citizens Advice Bureau [now known as the lawyer protection bureau] out of the complaints loop.

GET YOUR PRINTERS GOING EN MASSE.

Print and use your own leaflets about your lawyer who ruined you and the true horror that is the Law Society of Scotland, infamous for coverups and client suicides will be exposed with their law firms.

How hard is this strategy compared to complaining to them? We have a duty to help ourselves and future generations from this scourge, by using all legal means to expose lawyers.

Anonymous said...

Somewhere in Scotland now, someone is being tortured by lawyers. Like Mr Gordon of Perth, disability benefits frozen, or Mr Cherbi, inheritance stolen.

If you know someone in this situation let them know about this blog.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

So if this Anderson has no involvement with the law firm,Colin Davidson or John O'Donnell,why is his name on the letterhead as an associate?

I think the Law Society are lying because they have used evidence like this before against people supposedly posing as solicitors or partners at law firms.

Anonymous said...

Letter checks out and they didnt want it published..

Clearly some dirt at work here and there will be some money at the root of it because in the end all this stuff is about money isn't it folks and how much sleazy lawyers can rip off for themselves.

Mrs Campbell's house must have been the attraction here probably the contents too these people are so predictable and crooked.

Anonymous said...

http://petercherbi.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/adversarial%20approach

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill admits Law Society complaints process is flawed. Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has made a startling admission on the negative policy of long enforced 'adversarial' complaints practices operated by the Law Society of Scotland, which are widely thought to have saved many solicitors with poor regulatory records from client complaints over many years.

The Justice Secretary's insight into the way complaints have been poorly handled against lawyers by the Law Society is crucial in that Mr MacAskill now recognises and agrees with his Ministerial colleague John Swinney's constituent, Mr Stewart MacKenzie, that the current 'adversarial' approach of self regulatory complaints handling by the legal profession is widely prejudicial against clients, and not in the public interest.
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
Well MacAskill we got the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and nothing changed. So you were blowing smoke, a spin doctor for lawyers. You should resign now.

Anonymous said...

Does this ridiculous decision by the CAB mean now that the whole of the CAB offices will shut or just the Hamilton Office?

Anonymous said...

It is a huge surprise that the CAB have gambled everything on this whitewash decision, especially when the CAB are facing a clear and evident allegation of serious criminaliy?

So, it is very surprising that the CAB would gamble their most important asset (their integrity) to defend the apparent indefensible?

Are the CAB in Scotland willing to crash against the rocks in a vain attempt to try to hide the Law Society of Scotland's rotten little scam of allowing their crooked Scottish lawyer members to fill their boots out of vulnerable victims assets?

Anonymous said...

Why no police involvement in this case?

Anonymous said...

How do the Law Society of Scotland treat crooked Scottish lawyers?

(1) They drop many of the legitimate complaints made against these crooked lawyers, knowing that there is nothing you can do about it. Even reading their own rules at them has no effect such is their determination to turn their nose up at the law and to invent their own laws?

(2) Then their Reporter carries out a Report based on the facts given to them by the Law Society of Scotland. If the Repoensures not fit with their desired outcome, they force the Reporter to amend the Report or they disregard the Report completely?

(3) By this time they have reduced the volume and seriousness of the valid complaints against their crooked member and at this stage they put a complaint to the SSDT?

(4) The SSDT's job is then to be deliberately obtuse and to disregard all of the evidence against the crooked Scottish lawyer and to ultimately to arrive at the Law Society of Scotland's desired outcome?

(5) Then the crooked Scottish lawyer has a soft sanction like, 'to act as a qualified assistant for X years' which means precisely NOTHING as they just continue as normal?

(6) Then they find this crooked lawyer a law firm to work from?

(7) Then they salary a Law Society of Scotland stooge, working out of a CAB office, to rustle up a steady stream of desperate vulnerable victims to ensure that their crooked lawyers are continually fed victims to take advantage of?

Honestly, you cannot make this stuff up?

It is criminal that this is happening in Scotland and even more criminal for those in power who know about it failing to protect the Public of these criminals?

Anonymous said...

'Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill admits Law Society complaints process is flawed'

Well MacAskill we got the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and nothing changed. So you were blowing smoke, a spin doctor for lawyers. You should resign now.

15 August 2012 21:30
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;.;;;;.;;;;;::;;;:;;;;:::;::;;;:;;;;:;;;:;

The Law Society's complaints system is not flawed, it is a cleverly designed and created criminal fraud who's job is to cause as much harm to client victims as possible?

Anonymous said...

This blog proves that democracy does not always mean freedom. One of the most important criterion in a democracy is legal equality.

Scotland has one law for lawyers and another law for laypersons.

Anonymous said...

I think I'll print those newspaper cuttings I have and the whitewash letter from CAB and start distro'ing them all over

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I think I'll print those newspaper cuttings I have and the whitewash letter from CAB and start distro'ing them all over.


We should all do it.

Anonymous said...


The Law Society's complaints system is pure evil.

Anonymous said...

The Law Society is the practicing lawyers exemption clause there to keep him out of trouble.

They are all exempt from punishment because they are their own police force.

Clients use your own legal methods of exposing lawyers said...

The Law Society's complaints system is not flawed, it is a cleverly designed and created criminal fraud who's job is to cause as much harm to client victims as possible?

Yes Mr Yelland has never denied the client suicides. So Mr Yelland with such a staunch anti client ideology clients must learn to cut you all out of the complaints loop. If the following case

http://scottishlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/borders-solicitor-who-wife-claimed-may.html

happened many times and the court found in the lawyers favour then the courts are as corrupt as the Law Society. In my opinion leaflet campaigns are the only short term solution to this problem. This was Mr Yelland and his cronies cannot control the public space, but complain to them and they have total control. It is up to individual clients? What do you all think?

Anonymous said...

Hamilton CAB I will never trust any of your advisers again.

Anonymous said...

The CAB's decision to try to WHITEWASH this case is wrong?

They clearly have received wrong legal advice from their new friends at the Law Society of Scotland that, they should just deny everything and force their victim (Mrs Campbell) to take them to court to prove the case against them and to defend herself (where the Law Society of Scotland will instruct their lawyers to continually frustrate the case through the courts so that the case remains unresolved for years, bankrupting Mrs Campbell in the process - remember they have their pal the AIB to aid their criminal plan)?

Once they bankrupt their victim Mrs Campbell, then they will sell her house and leave her £10 as the ultimate humiliation?

Someone earlier hit the nail on the head.....

Once these crooks identify a victim with funds (Mrs Campbell) then they will concentrate their efforts to take those funds (Mrs Campbell's Home) as their own?

The CAB have been caught out having sold their soul to the devil and the Scottish Public will not forget this?

All the time these crooks are filling their boots, the Scottish People are writing each case down and keeping a record which WILL be used against them when their house of cards come falling down around their ears....?

Fill your boots boys but remember if you are willing to engage in criminal behaviour then the truth will seek you out and you will burn for it?

Anonymous said...

When the Scottish Public force the Police to investigate this scandal, what will be the charges?

Fraud?

Deception with intent?

Defeating the ends of Justice?

Probably and a lot more besides?

Anonymous said...

You have to laugh at the arrogant look of Anderson in this photo.........?

It's as if he is saying something like, 'Go on then, try to prosecute me.......? The Law Society of Scotland have already promised me that they will ensure that I will not be prosecuted as this would implicate them, so I am off Scot-FreeeeeeeeYeeeeeeeehHaaaaaaHaaaaHaaaaHaaaaaHaaaaaaa. Losers....?'

A real smart guy?.......

Anonymous said...

"Off the hook", ah lawyers as slippy as Conger eels. The norm with this group of people.

Leaflets worked for Thomas Paine,no internet in his day. [if you are interested check]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine.

Oh I am not calling for a revolution, only a revolution in our thinking. A different strategy for exposing corrupt lawyers.

It will work for clients too, just like Thomas Paine, the pen is so mighty and so easy to use. No lawyer can control leaflet distribution, name and shame them yourself in your town. But tell the truth, we cannot lie like the Douglas Mill's of the world. He fell on his sword because of his mendacity, we clients are better than that.

Don't report your lawyer, to the Law Society of Scotland {the Master Policy never pays out anyway] or The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. What did they call us? Oh yes "frequent Flyers". We should take their advice. You will be gray headed without a resolution to your complaint if you go to them. Go public with leaflets, oh to use the Commissions jargon "frequent flyers". Yes be frequent with your flyers about the crooked liars, corrupt lawyers and stop the rot by bypassing the Society and Commission.

I promise you all it will work. If Mr MacAskill cannot end self regulation we can do it for him by naming and shaming his colleagues in our local towns. Remember be frequent with your flyers. Only clients can regulate law firms with leaflets. For example

"Bloggs Solicitors Glasgow stealing mortgage money"

but only do the leaflet if it is true. Over to you.

Anonymous said...

One adviser at Hamilton CAB did not like my criticizing lawyers but another adviser actually agreed my lawyer, doctor were against me. The pattern throughout the case proved that.

But they were both insured by the same company, the one I was claiming damages from.

So Hamilton CAB we cannot trust you any more.

Anonymous said...

Again we see how risky it is to trust a lawyer, and how closing ranks is the norm.

Anonymous said...

I think that the Police should be looking into this case asa matter of urgency.

This unlawful behaviour cannot be allowed to go unpunished in a civilised society.

Anonymous said...

We only know of this case.

How many other cases are there where this duplicity and deceit is going on?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
http://petercherbi.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/adversarial%20approach

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill admits Law Society complaints process is flawed. Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has made a startling admission on the negative policy of long enforced 'adversarial' complaints practices operated by the Law Society of Scotland, which are widely thought to have saved many solicitors with poor regulatory records from client complaints over many years.

The Justice Secretary's insight into the way complaints have been poorly handled against lawyers by the Law Society is crucial in that Mr MacAskill now recognises and agrees with his Ministerial colleague John Swinney's constituent, Mr Stewart MacKenzie, that the current 'adversarial' approach of self regulatory complaints handling by the legal profession is widely prejudicial against clients, and not in the public interest.
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
Well MacAskill we got the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and nothing changed. So you were blowing smoke, a spin doctor for lawyers. You should resign now.

15 August 2012 21:30
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

We've been lied to by the Scottish polititions.....the LPLA Act 2007 legislation is operating just exactly as they planned, to trick and deceive the Scottish People that the Law Society of Scotland's rotten system of self regulation was going to be changed when in reality they planned for it to continue to be a monopolistic closed secret system, where Scottish lawyers were to continue to be let off Scot-Free, to continue to FILL THEIR BOOTS and to continue to damage and humiliate their Client victims and to deplete them of their cash and assets at every opportunity for having the temerity to challenge the authority of the Law Society of Scotland?

Scotland has become a very SICK SOCIETY?

Anonymous said...

Dissent is exposing their criminal activities, and they want to crush that dissent. So if the MSP's by their passivity have no intention of protecting anyone who voted for them is this country a democracy?

I think not, voting will never diminish Law Society omnipotence so long as lawyer supporters are elected to the Scottish Parliament.


I stated on this blog I would never approach my MSP about lawyers. She must know I left this statement. Has any female MSP contacted Diary of Injustice to ask them to contact me?

MSP's approve of lawyers ruining clients, the only reasonable conclusion we can draw from this.

Anonymous said...


Correct me if I am wrong but was O'Donnell not given an SSDT sanction for 5 years to act as a qualified assistant in 2009, followed up in 2010 when O'Donnell was AGAIN given an SSDT Sanction to only be allowed to continue to operate at the level of a qualified assistant for 5 years.....?

This does not make sense?

How can this be possible?

A 5 year sanction restriction in 2009 and then one year later appears before the SSDT having already incurred their sanction, how is it that this man was LET OFF from being STRUCK - OFF?

It is simply not a credible reality?

Then, when you dial-in that the Law Society of Scotland's Fiscal, Elaine Motion (who they Instruct) who is supposed to be prosecuting O'Donnell at the SSDT, that she is agreeable to a soft sanction 'deal', which is brokered over drinks at the Law Society Christmas party?

Elaine Motion had a duty under law to do her job without fear or favour to protect the Public from her criminal colleague?

Has Elaine Motion done her job OR has she willfully conspired to defeat the ends of justice by proposing and then assisting in a softer sanction than fits the crime, thereby affecting the legitimacy of the finding and the Process?

It is not her job to represent the best interests of O'Donnell as the named Prosecuting Fiscal?

The SSDT ?

Have they maintained their self proclaimed independence from the Law Society of Scotland and their Fiscal, given that they too have a statutory duty of care to apply appropriate sanctions that fit the crime and to protect the Scottish Public from these criminals and to take notice of the lawyer's past regulatory history before reaching their decision?

OR have they taken Instruction from the Law Society of Scotland to NOT STRIKE-OFF O'Donnell?

What about the fitness of Elaine Motion to continue to be able to Prosecute O'Donnell in her compromised position?

Remember, Elaine Motion was party to a discussion with O'Donnell's lawyer to agree to give O'Donnell a softer sanction, which she agreed to take to the Law Society of Scotland as a resolution?

If the Law Society were fulfilling their duty under law (Solicitor Scotland Act 1980) should Elaine Motions behaviour not have excluded her from acting as Prosecuting Fiscal of O'Donnell before the SSDT because she had involved herself in exploring a softer sanction for O'Donnell rather than concentrating on her job of prosecuting him?

What happened to the idea of Justice, rather than trying to artificially arrive at a solution which suits the guilty parties, reached through secret behind closed doors meetings?

What we have here is very clear, an organised conspiracy to defeat the ends of justice, with the intention of allowing their member O'Donnell to continue to work and charge Fees, whilst ignoring the victims of O'Donnell in contravention of the law in Scotland?

Further, this unlawful action to defeat the ends of justice has had the collateral damage (which was obviously going to happen) of causing a further victim in Mrs Campbell to her detriment, damage and loss and possibly others?


So, a solution?


Their solution has been to NOT REPORT THIS TO THE POLICE (which in itself may be a further crime) and instead to disingenuously tell Mrs Campbell that Elaine Motion will sort this all out, when Elaine Motion was partly directly responsible for creating this problem in the first place and when the ONLY RESOLUTION for this considering the seriousness of the case is by the Police's investigation?

The very facts of the case would exclude Elaine Motion from being further involved, unless the intention was to try to further deceive Mrs Campbell and the Scottish Pulic by trying to suffocate this case and to keep the facts from being known out of fear of criminal prosecution and the corresponding massive claim against the Law Society of Scotland's Guarantee Fund?

This is not ZIMBABWE or SYRIA.........This is still Scotland?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
So if this Anderson has no involvement with the law firm,Colin Davidson or John O'Donnell,why is his name on the letterhead as an associate?

I think the Law Society are lying because they have used evidence like this before against people supposedly posing as solicitors or partners at law firms.


15 August 2012 20:19
~~~>~~><~><~~<>~>~<~><~><~<~>~>~<~><~>~<>~<

Unfortunately, the Law Society of Scotland or more accurately Office Bearers at the Law Society have for some time sought to let their members off with the lightest sanction possible so that they can continue to cause havoc and the O'Donnell / Campbell Case is only one in a series of incidents where this has happened?

What is alarming is that up until now the Police have been held back from doing their job and wrongly the Law Society have been entrusted to prosecute their own, which has been an unmitigated disaster?

In fact, Scottish MSP's may have committed treason against the Scottish People and the Queen by the anti-Public LPLA Act and the SLCC?

Anonymous said...

The Law Society is the command centre for lawyers. They control who keeps their practicing certificate. They are 100% there for lawyers.

It is also the complaints handling centre for us, and they think we are unimportant things to be exploited as lawyers see fit. Right now there are people complaining to the Law Society about their lawyers. Word of mouth is a wonderful thing because you tell others and eventually someone dealing with them will read Peter's blog.

The Law Society and its branches have deliberately failed the people of Scotland. Self regulation has been shown to result in inheritances stolen, disability benefits seized, occupational injury covered up, Legal Aid stolen by lawyers who are not prosecuted, crooked lawyers you are not warned about dealing with your finances. If they will do this this else are they capable of.

Law Society their is horror in being battered to a pulp by you. But there is also a fire within me, a little flame of defiance that will never be extinguished, except by death. I am fifty years old. Until my dying day I will warn others what you are. I will tell everyone you are the baddest of the bad, the evilest of the evil. A wicked group. You are not a profession but you are slowly reaping what you have sown and no matter what you do we will expose you.

People of Scotland, the Law Society is a black hole into which your complaints will vanish forever. When the so called regulator protects your lawyer you are caught in this trap. A place without legal rights. But you need rights don't you. So print leaflets about your lawyer where his offices are and you will free yourself from their trap.

If they try and seize you disability benefits print 1000 leaflets and scatter them near their offices. The Law Society will not shut them down but you can and you must. It is the only protection you have in Scotland against a lawyer.

We clients have to do this, because nobody else will. Their self regulation is doomed, use leaflets to take their power away from them. Providing your methods are legal use any means to expose them.

Anonymous said...

"Bloggs Solicitors Perth attempt to take their clients disability benefits for fees, after covering up his injuries.

Lawyers Union Protect Law Firm".

That would be a cool leaflet.
1000 leaflets later blogg's solicitors Perth exposed as crooks because no one should ever complain to the Law Society SLCC. Only leaflets will destroy these crooked law firms.

Trust no lawyer folks.

Anonymous said...

Bit of a shock here as I have been dealing with this man Anderson for awhile and now I know why nothing has happened in my case I'll get in touch with the Sunday Mail and yourself thanks for the war ning wish I had it before I walked in their door at Hamilton

Anonymous said...

I am disgusted that the CAB have tried to keep what has happened to Mrs Campbell a secret and seem to be saying that she is either a liar or mentally deranged when it is crystal clear what has been allowed to happen on THEIR WATCH !

What is happening to Scotland?

It's like Scotland has been taken over by an evil sect?

Anonymous said...

What has O'Donnell GOT ON the Office Bearers at the Law Society of Scotland for them to be going out of their way to save O'Donnell from being sent to JAIL?

1) In 2009 he gets a 5 year punishment instead of being struck off?

2) During O'Donnell's 2010 complaint, his lawyer engages with the Law Society of Scotland's Prosecuting Fiscal, Elaine Motion to try to get him off the hook?

3) Elaine Motion must know that it is unlawful to try to interfere with the statutory complaints procedure, yet she agrees with O'Donnell's lawyer and tries to get O'Donnell off Scot-Free?

4) In 2010, Instead of this 'Deal', it is decided that O'Donnell should get another 5 year punishment by the SSDT (who follow the Law Society of Scotland's Instructions) Were the SSDT informed of the attempted deal beforehand between the Law Society of Scotland's Prosecuting Fiscal and O'Donnell? (Remember, according to Law Society rules that O'Donnell's lawyer cannot act without O'Donnell's Instruction)

5) Now, that is two 5 year SSDT punishments handed out within 1 year to the same person?

6) This second punishment however is absurd because it runs concurrently with the 2009 punishment which means that it's actual affect on O'Donnell is only a 1 year punishment, which the SSDT would have been aware of when reaching their decision.

7) Did the SSDT take into account O'Donnell's previous regulatory record? YES, they did but they applied it in the wrong way (perverse) as their 5 year punishment was effectively only 1 year.

8) Why was O'Donnell not struck off, as he was appearing before the SSDT within 1 year and being found guilty of a 5 year's punishment worth of crimes? had this something to do with the Prosecuting Fiscal (Elaine Motion) already having demonstrated that she was on O'Donnell's SIDE?

9) The SSDT punishment was for O'Donnell to only be able to continue to work as a qualified assistant for 5 years ( In other words he was not a competent lawyer). However, what controls are in place to ensure that the Scottish Public are protected from this crook?

Answer - ABSOLUTELY NONE (as evidenced in this case) as these crooks are just allowed to continue their crooked ways as if nothing has changed?

10) Who placed O'Donnell with the firm Davidson Fraser? The Law Society must have required the partners of Davidson Fraser to confirm that they would (a) take O'Donnell as an employee with a blackened disciplinary record, with all of the potential risks that would entail for their firm and (b) they would have to give the Law Society an undertaking that they would properly supervise O'Donnell, especially as he carried a high risk of re-offending? Were the Master Insurance Policy Insurers notified? Was O'Donnell even insured? What steps did the Law Society of Scotland take to prevent this crook from reoffending, particularly when it would seem obvious that NO SUCH SAFEGUARDS WERE PUT IN PLACE AT ALL?

11) How the hell can Elaine Motion (who is under Instruction from the Law Society of Scotland) be allowed to play any further part in this SCOTTISH SCANDAL, when she and the Law Society of Scotland's position is nothing other than criminal?

The sooner the police go in and put the arm up the back of the real crooks the better?

Anonymous said...

Neil Kennedy's condescending letter to Mrs Campbell has the definite ring of the Law Society of Scotland about it?

Mrs Campbell, do you realise who you are dealing with........?

We will totally rebutt your complaint, despite the fact you have prime facie evidence against us, as we can make the rules up as we see fit and can act unlawfully whenever we desire and there is nothing you can do about it?

So, everything you say albeit true has ZERO CHANCE of receiving Justice. We are all powerful and not even the police can touch us?

WE shall decide who gets off Scot-Free and if we take your home from you in the process, consider yourself lucky, we are just stealing your home from you and not your life?

Anonymous said...

Did the SLAB know what the guy they were funding was involved in?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Somewhere in Scotland now, someone is being tortured by lawyers. Like Mr Gordon of Perth, disability benefits frozen, or Mr Cherbi, inheritance stolen.

If you know someone in this situation let them know about this blog.

Thank you.

15 August 2012 17:11
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Please, if you have a civic spirit, go onto your Facebook / Twitter / etc account and let every one of your friends and family know about the DOI website?

The sooner we rid Scotland of these crooked organisations that DOI is exposing the better?

WE WANT OUR SCOTLAND BACK !!!!!!!

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...
"Off the hook", ah lawyers as slippy as Conger eels. The norm with this group of people.

Leaflets worked for Thomas Paine,no internet in his day. [if you are interested check]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine.

Oh I am not calling for a revolution, only a revolution in our thinking. A different strategy for exposing corrupt lawyers.

It will work for clients too, just like Thomas Paine, the pen is so mighty and so easy to use. No lawyer can control leaflet distribution, name and shame them yourself in your town. But tell the truth, we cannot lie like the Douglas Mill's of the world. He fell on his sword because of his mendacity, we clients are better than that.

Don't report your lawyer, to the Law Society of Scotland {the Master Policy never pays out anyway] or The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. What did they call us? Oh yes "frequent Flyers". We should take their advice. You will be gray headed without a resolution to your complaint if you go to them. Go public with leaflets, oh to use the Commissions jargon "frequent flyers". Yes be frequent with your flyers about the crooked liars, corrupt lawyers and stop the rot by bypassing the Society and Commission.

I promise you all it will work. If Mr MacAskill cannot end self regulation we can do it for him by naming and shaming his colleagues in our local towns. Remember be frequent with your flyers. Only clients can regulate law firms with leaflets. For example

"Bloggs Solicitors Glasgow stealing mortgage money"

but only do the leaflet if it is true. Over to you.

17 August 2012 21:27
.+€|>~?.]+{€~,]+|€~> wjefh biwjehfbkjfbdfvjgwf la

VERY WISE WORDS!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Bit of a shock here as I have been dealing with this man Anderson for awhile and now I know why nothing has happened in my case I'll get in touch with the Sunday Mail and yourself thanks for the war ning wish I had it before I walked in their door at Hamilton

18 August 2012 19:39
ccccccrrrrrrrrrrooooooooooooookkkkkkkkkkssssssssss

Not surprised by this?

There is going to be a lot more desperate victims out there who have had their lives ruined by this scam?

Anonymous said...

This lot are pure evil......





Davie Jones

Anonymous said...

Why have MacAskill and Salmond not been asked for their explanations as to how this corruption is allowed to flourish in Scotland?

Anonymous said...

The fabric of Scottish Society is in rapid decline because of these crooks?

Until Scotland's Institutions governed by legislation are freed from corruption then Scotland's People will continue to be repressed and will never be FREE?



W. Wallace

Anonymous said...

Mrs Campbell, do you realise who you are dealing with........?

We will totally rebutt your complaint, despite the fact you have prime facie evidence against us, as we can make the rules up as we see fit and can act unlawfully whenever we desire and there is nothing you can do about it?
------------------------------
Oh Yes spot on, in Nazi Germany a member of the public could be picked off the street at any time because people did not know when they were breaking the law. The law changed at the whim of Hitler.

This is the same but is bureaucratic extremism, perfectly designed to exonerate lawyers no matter how serious their crimes against the public.

Self regulation means lawlessness because those subject to it are always cleared. The only treatment for this pernicious system is public exposure by any legal means. They have designed a system for concealing their criminal activity behind a veil of bureaucracy, where lawyers are never accountable for what they do. People need to realize only they can expose crooked lawyer. No office in Scotland will do it other than dissidents.

Anonymous said...

Kennedy Corporate Development
29 Brandon Street
Hamilton
Lanarkshire ML3 6DA

Mr Kennedy's company?

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/neil-kennedy/4/638/373

listed as a member of ICAS official group ... you've linked the Law Society with ICAS before haven't you,Peter?

Clearly Mrs Campbell never stood a chance with her complaint so hope she appeals and the press continue to report it.

Good work Sunday Mail and you.

Anonymous said...

Thank Goodness for the DOI Team and the Sunday Mail?

If it wasn't for their diligence and strong sense of Justice and journalistic integrity then where would Scotland be?

The Scottish National Party (SNP) should be renamed the Scottish Nazi Party for sitting on their hands and allowing bold corruption in our Institutions governing the Rule Of Law in Scotland?

Anonymous said...

This Scottish Scandal and it's attempted fraudulent COVER-UP is smellier than a piece of Stilton wrapped in anchovies that's been found in the jock-strap of a triathlon competitor after the completion of his race?

Really STINKS?

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the Law Society of Scotland would capitulate if interviewed about this by the Police?

Anonymous said...

have the police made any arrests yet since the DOI Team ran this story?

If not, why not?

Anonymous said...

With friends like the CAB, who needs enemies?