Thursday, December 13, 2012

From Bad to Worse : Complaints against lawyers up 16%, few cases upheld, Board members on £20K expenses, reports anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in 2012 annual report

Jane Irvine SLCC ChairIt’s goodbye from her – Jane Irvine’s final term as SLCC Chair since 2008 did little for Scots clients caught in rogue lawyer trap. COMPLAINTS AGAINST SOLICITORS have shot up 16% in 2012, according to the latest 2012 ANNUAL REPORT issued by the ‘independent’ lawyer controlled Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) which spent £2.7 million pounds up to 30 June on ‘investigating’ crooked lawyers. The fourth & final report under the Chair of Jane Irvine, whose term expires on 31st December 2012 also reveals the SLCC, which has not yet claimed one single solicitor being struck off as a result of its work over the past four years, was conveniently able to throw out a third of the complaints made to it by members of the public whose lives have invariably been ruined by the actions of rogue lawyers still working in the legal profession.

The report states that of the 1,264 complaints received by the SLCC during 2012 and 566 in hand at the start of the year, a suspiciously high number of complaints (486) were thrown out by the SLCC as being ineligible for investigation, while the report lists that 128 more complaints were withdrawn or resolved before an eligibility decision was made.

Included in the totals were 144 conduct complaints against members of the legal profession, which were then referred to the appropriate professional body (such as the Law Society of Scotland), and 289 eligible complaints were dealt with and closed by the SLCC, leaving 783 still in hand at the end of the year. The most common reasons for the SLCC branding complaints under the heading of “ineligibility” were "totally without merit" (200 cases), time bar (174) and prematurity (115).

Complaint Statistics SLCC annual Report 2012Complaints trends show House sales, Litigation, Wills & Executries remain big factors in clients ripped off by lawyers. The SLCC revealed that cases going all the way to a full determination totalled 146, of which 44 were upheld in whole or in part and 92 not upheld. A total of £37,042 was awarded in compensation across 33 cases, averaging out £1,122 per case yet clients face further hurdles in receiving compensation after the SLCC revealed solicitors had not complied with its rulings, forcing the SLCC to engage Sheriff Officers on particular occasions. The report stated : "We have seen an increase in cases of non-compliance where practitioners fail to pay awards which have been made against them by the SLCC. We take a firm line on this and use sheriff’s officers and the small claims court processes to enforce the outstanding sums."

The SLCC said it was in talks with the Law Society of Scotland about its solicitors refusing to comply with compensation orders, stating : ”We are in discussion with the relevant professional organisations to ensure their support in tackling non-compliance. In addition, we have found that complainers sometimes have to wait a considerable length of time to receive compensation or fee rebates where a judicial factor or trustees have been appointed. Since this does little to build public confidence, we have started to work with the relevant professional organisations to assess options to address this issue.”

Worryingly, the annual report also reveals the SLCC refused to use its powers to abate or zero fees charged by lawyers who had given poor service to their clients, where only in 17 cases, fees were abated and fees totalling a paltry £3,851 were abated, an average award of only £227 per client.

The 2012 audited accounts of the SLCC also reveals that despite throwing out a third of complaints made to it, and the poor use of powers over fees, the SLCC’s board members continued to be paid what can only be described as lavish remuneration, listed as up to £20,000 each during 2011-2012, quite a contrast to the financial losses suffered by Scots clients of rogue solicitors.

A number of case examples are, for the first time, included in the SLCC’s latest annual report, although no identities of solicitors or law firms who have failed their clients have been revealed, marking the SLCC’s continued policy of refusing to name & shame rogue Scottish solicitors & law firms who consumers would be better to avoid.

The SLCC’s 2012 Annual report can be viewed online HERE or downloaded from the SLCC’s website HERE while the 2012 Annual accounts revealing the SLCC’s financial position, expenditure & remuneration of its staff, board members etc can be viewed online HERE or downloaded from the SLCC HERE.

The SLCC issued a Press Release on its 2012 Annual Report HERE

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission ("SLCC") laid its fourth Annual Report before the Scottish Parliament on 7 December 2012. The report covers the period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012 and highlights the number and types of complaint coming to the SLCC; the SLCC's achievements both as a gateway for legal complaints and a supporter to high standards in the legal profession.

Commenting on the SLCC's challenges and achievements, Chair Jane Irvine said: "It stands as a huge tribute to the skills and hard-work of all our Staff and Board Members that we have achieved all we have this year. Our commitment remains unfailing despite the increasing demands placed on us and our resources, growing case loads and increasing financial pressures, along with the added complications deriving from transitional arrangements and backlog of earlier cases."

Commenting on the work of the organisation during the year, Chief Executive, Matthew Vickers said: "My colleagues and our Board Members are committed to making the SLCC even more effective and efficient in handling complaints and more influential and impactful in improving legal services.

Mr Vickers, the fifth Chief Executive of the SLCC also went onto claim, laughably that “The SLCC exists to strengthen public trust and confidence in our legal services."

In reality however, the SLCC, commonly regarded by most in the know as a joke, has demonstrated itself to be as anti-client as the Law Society of Scotland.

The Law Society of Scotland issued its own Press Release praising the SLCC for its work in protecting solicitors from client complaints.

Commenting on the publication of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission annual report, Lorna Jack, chief executive of the Law Society of Scotland, said: "We will look at the report in detail to see where we can assist the commission on working with the profession to improve complaints handling. The new use of case studies in this year's annual report are a great way of showing solicitors examples of good practice in complaint handling at an early stage, and further down the line.”

Ms Jack was also grateful for the SLCC’s whitewash of the Law Society’s “Guarantee Fund”, long known as a corrupt compensation scheme which fails to pay out to ruined clients of crooked lawyers.

Ms Jack went onto congratulate the SLCC over their ‘review’ of the Guarantee Fund, saying : "Following a thorough audit of the Guarantee Fund by the Commission as part of its oversight role, we are pleased to see recognition that claims on the fund are being handled properly and impartially by the Society. We have always made it clear that all claims on the fund are considered on a case by case basis and on their own merit, regardless of the funds held and the audit has confirmed this.”

Ms Jack ended by saying : "It is reassuring that the commission is driving efficiencies as our members are tightening their belts during these straightened times.The Society will continue to work with the Commission to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."

A CLIENTS LOT IS NOT A HAPPY ONE :

In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.

Little compensation on offer for solicitors stealing from clients, or negligent service, regulators poor use of powers to completely negate fees, hardly any complaints being fully upheld, few solicitors struck off, a claims system via the Master Policy that is just as corrupt as it was twenty years ago, a Guarantee Fund compensation scheme which puts tax dodging in the Cayman Islands to shame, regulators who are so anti-client, anti-public & anti consumer they cant see past their expenses claims , and amidst it all, lazy politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance … the same old story from 1990 to 2012 repeats itself once again …

Previous coverage of the SLCC’s annual reports, which tell a similar story can be found HERE

85 comments:

Anonymous said...

Spot on as usual of course and you are correct - little has changed in 20 years.The SLCC are as bad if perhaps even worse than the Law Society.

Anonymous said...

Bye Jane and thanks for NOTHING

Anonymous said...

Worryingly, the annual report also reveals the SLCC refused to use its powers to abate or zero fees charged by lawyers who had given poor service to their clients, where only in 17 cases, fees were abated and fees totalling a paltry £3,851 were abated, an average award of only £227 per client.

£227 per client when legal fees are minimum thousands of pounds??

Clearly the SLCC are more worried about the wallets of lawyers than compensating clients whose lives are ruined by crooked lawyers!

Anonymous said...

Who will be Lorna fiddle's new paid piper?

Anonymous said...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20709393

Anti-social behaviour victims 'to pick punishments'

Victims of anti-social behaviour will be able to choose the punishment for offenders under government plans.

They will be given the right to choose from a list of out-of-court penalties handed down to tackle low-level crime.

HOW ABOUT THE SAME OFFER FOR CLIENTS WHO ARE RUINED BY THEIR LAWYERS?

Anonymous said...

mmMmm yes the lawyers will be rubbing their hands at all those wills and estates to rip off as per the usual habits

wonder how much they stole from clients v how much the SLCC dished out in compensation?

Anonymous said...

Only clients can regulate lawyers. And someone said they were fed up with the leaflet idea. I don't mind that but if anyone believes this lot will change their ways they are wrong.

Anonymous said...

In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.
================================
IT WILL NEVER CHANGE, ALTHOUGH I ADMIRE ALL YOUR EFFORTS.

Anonymous said...

In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.
---------------------------------
She can join the other two for the opening scenes of Shakespeare's Macbeth. They only cause clients toil and trouble.

Anonymous said...

"It is reassuring that the commission is driving efficiencies as our members are tightening their belts during these straightened times.The Society will continue to work with the Commission to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."
==================================
MENDACIOUS BULLSHIT

Anonymous said...

And people wonder why lawyers are crooked. Glad I have no kids in this rat race world.

Anonymous said...

Ms Jack went onto congratulate the SLCC over their ‘review’ of the Guarantee Fund, saying : "Following a thorough audit of the Guarantee Fund by the Commission as part of its oversight role, we are pleased to see recognition that claims on the fund are being handled properly and impartially by the Society.
=============================
Is this idiot for real, oversight my arse Lorna. Claim payouts = £0.00.

Anonymous said...

So we can be assured none of the SLCC board members will be starving over this Christmas with a 20K bung from the legal profession for covering up their yearly sins against clients

Anonymous said...

and amidst it all, lazy politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance … the same old story from 1990 to 2012 repeats itself once again …

Yes too true Peter - these msps are 100% corrupt and value more their friends in the legal world than us poor peasants who vote for them.

I can think of a lot ot say about this and imagine there are plenty out there who have been let down by their msp when it comes to dealing with issues about lawyers..

Anonymous said...

A repeat of the Law Society under the SNP who would have thought!

Anonymous said...

You forgot to mention the SLCC dont like to deal with complaints about lawyers stealing Legal Aid money and pretending they are claiming for lots of work for their clients at the same time

Anonymous said...

Who is MacArsekill going to stick in the job?He may as well give it to Lorna so she can squeal about how great she is in more self congratulatory press releases!

Anonymous said...

Shows how easy it is to find people to say lawyers are great for £20K a year!

Anonymous said...

The lazy corrupt undemocratic politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies YES, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance, EXACTLY. MSP's prefer client suicides too.

This is why The Law Society are the Scottish Government. Lawyers control policy and expulsions dressed up as resignations as Mr Park knows. A bunch of lawyer protecting filthy scumbags. Well MSP's gave us the SLCC. Don't hear them condemning it.

Anonymous said...

£2.7million and its all paid for by laywers double charging their clients to make sure they get it back and then some!

The "independent regulator" is as big a rip off as the rotten lawyers themselves!

Anonymous said...

In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.
=================================
And distributing leaflets near their offices is pointless? Well the complain through the official channels is never going to work either because all channels are infested by lawyers or their supporters. Yes this is great reporting [you guys are doing a wonderful job] but it ain't the only way. Report your lawyer and it will stay the same as the last twenty years. Leaflets stating blogs Solicitors Falkirk stealing mortgage money.

Anonymous said...

Ms Jack ended by saying : "It is reassuring that the commission is driving efficiencies as our members are tightening their belts during these straightened times. The Society will continue to work with the Commission to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."
---------------------------------
The Commission and Society are infested with client hating maggots.

Anonymous said...

Regulators, anti-client, anti-public & anti consumer. Self regulation in action. Plato wrote about it millenia ago.

Anonymous said...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20720203

MacAskill targets airguns but does nothing about lawyers who store guns for their gangster clients

Anonymous said...

Yes it speaks volumes of how anti consumer a regulator is when the scum they are supposed to be regulating gives it full marks and praise!

Anonymous said...

Chief Executive, Matthew Vickers said: My colleagues and our Board Members are committed to making the SLCC even more effective [AT PROTECTING OUR LAWYERS DICKHEADS] and efficient in handling [HE MEANS BURNING] complaints and more influential and impactful in improving legal services [FOR LAWYERS].
==================================
This guy is talking utter bullshit. My edited version is what he and his commission are for. TRUST NO LAWYER.

Anonymous said...

Look at the figures - £2.7m to run the SLCC and investigate/throw out complaints against lawyers.

This shows us how much a business this all is,with the lawyers paying for it by fleecing clients for exorbitant legal fees.

Anonymous said...

Chair Jane Irvine said: "It stands as a huge tribute to the skills and hard-work of all our Staff and Board Members that we have achieved all we have this year".
=================================
Yes Irvine you can engineer any coverup you want in an office. You don't need much skill to protect lawyers. And you are good at it. When you fly away on your broom another lawyer protector will take your place. You will not protect clients but spare us the mendacious statements. Its boring.


Anonymous said...

In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.
=============================
As long as clients play into their complaints system it will never change in 100 years. Like it or not when people complain about their lawyers they actually participate in the inevitable coverup. That is what happened in the Penman case. I am not criticising you Peter, [I expected fair treatment, more fool me] they did the same to me. The system has been designed to give lawyers total control. That and their support from our beloved MSP's. Their controlling it all for their benefit.

Anonymous said...

Next headline ; New Stooge for Law Society takes reigns of independent SLCC (independent my foot!)

Anonymous said...

Little compensation on offer for solicitors stealing from clients, or negligent service, regulators poor use of powers to completely negate fees, hardly any complaints being fully upheld, few solicitors struck off, a claims system via the Master Policy that is just as corrupt as it was twenty years ago, a Guarantee Fund compensation scheme which puts tax dodging in the Cayman Islands to shame, regulators who are so anti-client, anti-public & anti consumer they cant see past their expenses claims , and amidst it all, lazy politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance … the same old story from 1990 to 2012 repeats itself once again …
================================
I had all this shit from a professional. The NHS did the same as the SLCC. Try leaflets. What do you have to lose? Blogs solicitors stealing peoples mortgage money, but only if it is true.

Stop playing into their hands because if you do we will see this report again, not having a go at you DOI team. Just assessing the reality of the situation.

Anonymous said...

From Bad to Worse : Complaints against lawyers up 16%, [OK THE NUMBERS GET WORSE] few cases upheld [WHY REPORT LAWYERS THEN? THEY ARE SCREWING US ALL], Board members on £20K expenses, reports anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in 2012 annual report.

Clients send in your complaints IN THE THOUSANDS. You might as well use them for toilet paper. IT WILL NEVER WORK, LAWYERS OFFICES WERE DESIGNED FOR COVERUPS. 50 YEARS FROM NOW LAWYERS WILL BE ROBBING YOUR GROWN UP KIDS. NO DISRESPECT TO THE DOI TEAM, GOD BLESS YOUR STERLING EFFORTS. BUT REPORTING LAWYERS IS MADNESS. OH YES YOU DOI CAN REPORT ON THE OUTCOME, BUT NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

LPLA ACT DEAD.

CIVIL COURTS REVIEW, DEAD.

SOME RUINED CLIENTS DEAD.

OTHER RUINED CLIENTS STRUGGLING.

CITIZENS ADVICE PROTECTING THE PUBLIC, DEAD.

MSP HELP, DEAD.

THE PUBLIC ARE NOT IN THE SLCC, LAW SOCIETY. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE STREETS, TOWNS.

Leaflets worked for me. Try it.

Anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in 2012 annual report. Toilet paper or leaflets? You choose.

Anonymous said...

The Law Society and SLCC are in charge of a team of legalised thieves. As long as they are dealing with complaints you will never break this cycle. Even their ideas are perverse SSDT 'borrowing without consent' is not theft to them. Lets apply the same ideology elsewhere.

If I stole Lord Gill's car and was charged and in court they said how do you plea Mr X, oh I borrowed the car without consent.

The Sheriff would say that's fine Mr X. Our SSDT protect lawyers this way. You are free to go, no conviction, no fine. Crime would Soar if the Courts treated the public the way the SSDT treat lawyers. Imagine treating women like this, a rapists defence, I borrowed her without consent. It would be an outrage against women and rightly so.





Anonymous said...

Reporting lawyers will never warn the public. Play into the SLCC and Law Societies hands and expect more of the same coverups. The public are on the streets, the SLCC and Law Societies weapon is keeping it all secret. They are secret societies. DOI are breaking the secrecy, that's why they hate you. They don't hate Penman, I bet the fucker is still working as a lawyer.



Anonymous said...

The worst cases omitted from their list of examples
I had a complaint in where my solicitor was claiming over £10K in fees he stands no chance of being paid I'd rather burn my own belongings than give it to the rat who went onto destroy my entire family You know who you are if you are reading this comment

Anonymous said...

So many web sites criticizing lawyers have vanished from the web. Another indicator of their fanatical desire for secrecy. It also indicates what we already know, they have to silence ruined clients before their Law Society is ruined.

A totally secretive mendacious mafia.

Anonymous said...

Another one here had my complaint kicked out by the SLCC on time bar yet the lawyer had altered all the dates in his records anyway so they are as big a bunch of liars as he is.What can be done about this if anything?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Spot on as usual of course and you are correct - little has changed in 20 years.The SLCC are as bad if perhaps even worse than the Law Society.

13 December 2012 15:25
-————————————

C'mon, know your facts?

The SLCC is the Law Society of Scotland?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
In reality, clients of Scottish solicitors who are put in a position of having to make a complaint to the SLCC about their solicitor’s conduct or service, are in a no better position in 2012 than they were in two decades ago.
---------------------------------
She can join the other two for the opening scenes of Shakespeare's Macbeth. They only cause clients toil and trouble.

13 December 2012 19:11
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Surely no one believes this corrupt propaganda?

Jane Irvine works for the Law Society?

The SLCC is the Law Society?

Reporting to the SLCC is like taking a fork and poking yourself in the eye?

Who in their right mind would do it....?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Ms Jack went onto congratulate the SLCC over their ‘review’ of the Guarantee Fund, saying : "Following a thorough audit of the Guarantee Fund by the Commission as part of its oversight role, we are pleased to see recognition that claims on the fund are being handled properly and impartially by the Society.
=============================
Is this idiot for real, oversight my arse Lorna. Claim payouts = £0.00.

13 December 2012 19:44
================================

Are these crooks involved in a contest to see which one can tell the most lies?

If the Law Society's Guarantee Fund was being administered properly then they would step in and pay all of these wronged clients their compensation money and fees erroneously taken?

The purpose of the SLCC is an unlawful RUSE, designed to trick the clients into believing that the SLCC is acting in their favour, when the truth is that the SLCC are only interested in humiliating the client victims and to keep as much cash as possible in crooked Scottish lawyers pockets and the statistics prove it?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
and amidst it all, lazy politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance … the same old story from 1990 to 2012 repeats itself once again …

Yes too true Peter - these msps are 100% corrupt and value more their friends in the legal world than us poor peasants who vote for them.

I can think of a lot ot say about this and imagine there are plenty out there who have been let down by their msp when it comes to dealing with issues about lawyers..

13 December 2012 20:22
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

I reported my crooked Scottish lawyer to my MSP over a prime facie documented case where my dodgy lawyer was openly caught breaking the law?

My MSP's answer...........?

'I don't want to take sides'?

How can he not take sides when my crooked Scottish lawyer was caught red-handed being a criminal?

This is what happens when the Law Society of Scotland infiltrate the heart and souls of MSP's?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The Society will continue to work with the Commission to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."
---------------------------------
The Commission and Society are infested with client hating maggots.

14 December 2012 00:03
::::::;:;:;:;:;:::::;;:;::;;:;::::::;:;:;::;::::::::

'The Society (Law Society of Scotland) will continue to work with the Commission (Ourselves) to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."?

What a total lie?

They hate client victims with an astonishing bitterness?

They even call them 'Complainers' instead of 'Complainants'?




Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Yes it speaks volumes of how anti consumer a regulator is when the scum they are supposed to be regulating gives it full marks and praise!

14 December 2012 12:10
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

HUMILIATION is the primary goal?

Anonymous said...

I thought that the SLCC had been shut down due to it's corruption?

C'mon, the cat is not only out of the bag, it has also left the building and f**ked off on its holidays?

Anonymous said...

The SLCC is a SHAM organisation and is a FRONT for the Law Society so that they can continue to let their members off Scot-free and to cause harm to their clients?

Anonymous said...

S cumbag
L awyers
C ant be
C aught

If you report to the SLCC, you are inviting them to stab you in the back?

It is designed to be a remedy for crooked Scottish lawyers and couldn't give a runny shit about client victims?

Anonymous said...

Yes it speaks volumes of how anti consumer a regulator is when the scum they are supposed to be regulating gives it full marks and praise!
==================================
A perfect analysis of the situation.

Anonymous said...

So in reality Mr Vickers has made no improvement whatsoever.What a surprise (not).

Anonymous said...

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/job-creation-agency-uses-unpaid-1492476

WORKING LINKS recruitment agency are paid about £120million a year to help jobless folk find employment but are using unemployed youngsters to do the job for free.
John Mason MSP said it was important to make sure no one was exploited

A RECRUITMENT agency being paid millions by the Government to get people back to work have got unemployed youngsters doing the job for free.
Working Links are paid about £120million a year to help jobless folk find employment.
The company, based in London’s Covent Garden, have welfare to work contracts worth more than £300million.
But their offices in Glasgow, Paisley and Rutherglen have drafted in jobseekers on unpaid work experience – to help other unemployed people find jobs. According to a Department of Work and Pensions letter seen by the Sunday Mail, their duties include compiling CVs for jobseekers, helping them with job applications and looking for jobs.
The firm have had 12 unpaid volunteers. So far only two have been given paid full-time jobs.
SNP MSP John Mason said: “Work experience should never be a replacement for paid employment. We need to know that no one is being exploited.”
Working Links yesterday insisted the job description by DWP was wrong.
They said: “The individuals are not working on customer CVs or application forms and have no access to sensitive data.
“If any role description says otherwise, we will be working with Jobcentre Plus to correct this.
“The individuals on the scheme are fully supported in their work experience placement.”
The DWP said: “Work experience is voluntary but gives young people the skills and experience they need to help them find a job.”
Last week, we revealed how big firms are using the jobless as free labour for the Christmas rush.
Under Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith’s back-to-work programme, young people do up to 30 hours’ unpaid work a week.
Placements can last up to eight weeks and they only receive travel expenses in addition to their £53-a-week jobseekers’ allowance.
Our story was raised with David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Questions by SNP MP Mike Weir.
=============================
Lawyers clients are exploited too Mr Mason and MSP's don't talk about that. Shame on all of you.

Anonymous said...

Time for this 'partnership against the public' to be ended ... we don't need the same corrupt financial & insurance companies insuring the professions and Government, do we ? No wonder no one can progress their claims to court .. everyone from the lawyers we use, to the Court staff, to the Judge, to the Government, seems to be insured by the same cartels of insurance companies.

It's time for an investigation into why this has gone on for so long ... and time for those in Government to admit their guilt in standing by for so long, while the public have begged for help and received none against the likes of crooked lawyers & other crooked professionals ..

How about also asking why the Government has been paying public money to a knowingly corrupt insurance company for so long ? .. and not bothered to investigate it's insurance practices in the UK .. when so many reports of corruption have been made by members of the public in dealings with these companies and claims against their insured clients ...
==============================
Well Salmond what do you and your rats have to say?

Anonymous said...

Here's an example, although the same applies if you go up against many other professionals - who are insured by the same insurers, Marsh, RSA & the remainder of the group who comprise the Master Insurance Policy.

If you try and sue a lawyer, you will find your lawyers are insured by Marsh & RSA, your crooked lawyer and their lawyers will be insured both by Marsh & RSA, the Sheriff or Judge in your case is a subscribing member of the Law Society of Scotland and this is also be insured by Marsh & RSA, and several of the Scottish Courts Service staff, as well as the Auditor of the Court, have similar insurance arrangements.

I think anyone would agree there is a problem in that - a client is fighting a system where everyone excempt the client, pays into the same insurance arrangement the client is trying to claim against.. There is certainly a conflict of interest, which time & again, prevents negligence claims against crooked lawyers from ever getting a fair hearing. How can a member of the client go into court when everyone except themselves is insured by the same insurers and all except themselves will benefit if their claim & case are dismissed ... Most peoplw would call that a fit-up.

As for the rest of it, well, the investigations in the US uncovered political funding by the Insurers to ensure their 'business ideals' (profits) were met & protected by those who got elected (so what can & has been done in the USA, can & will be done here) the Scottish Executive have already admitted they hold insurance with Marsh & RSA in key areas which overlap with the legal system .. and if David McLetchie had answered my complaint in January 2005 on his failure to declare certain interests, including the financial benefits which come from being in the Master Policy, he might still have been Tory leader - but he didn't, Jim Dyer closed the investigation, the Parliament covered it up,.. so it all went to the media and that was that.
==============================
MSP's sh++++ng the public up the a***s. There is a cartel of criminals running Scotland.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps she may confound her critics and write memoirs about what a waste of time the SLCC has been under the SNP and how MacAskill and ministers have mangled what was to be the new approach to regulating complaints against the legal profession!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Look at the figures - £2.7m to run the SLCC and investigate/throw out complaints against lawyers.
=================================
Public money wasted and they are doing what the Law Society have always done. The World Trade 0rganisation is controlled by rich countries, and it is meant to help developing countries in economic terms. I see parallels with this lot. Independent regulation is a myth. No matter the bureaucracy, the powerful will always dominate. These two words independent regulation are and always will be an utter lie.
Keep playing into their hands. It will provide good journalism but will not change how these actors operate in a hundred years because of secrecy.

Too often in this world the scum are protected.




Anonymous said...

Hello Lord Gill

LPLA ACT DEAD. MSP traitors.

CIVIL COURTS REVIEW, DEAD. Your baby.

SOME RUINED CLIENTS DEAD. Horrific treatment causing suicides.

OTHER RUINED CLIENTS STRUGGLING.

CITIZENS ADVICE PROTECTING THE PUBLIC, DEAD.

MSP HELP, DEAD.

THE PUBLIC ARE NOT IN THE SLCC, LAW SOCIETY. THE PUBLIC ARE IN THE STREETS, TOWNS. This breaks bureaucracies secrecy.

Leaflets worked for me. Try it.

Well Lord Gill, domination. The office or system of offices where it is impossible to obtain justice for the injustice being done and it is impossible to identify culprits.

Lawyer power can only be curtailed by campaigners targeting the public. Reporting lawyers gives the offices total control of the complaints system.

Anonymous said...

I learned that to obtain some form of justice it was necessary to complain and then use their response to my complaint against them. NHS Local complaints resolution like these lawyers complaint system, an utter joke.

I knew the doctor in question could not be sued because no lawyer would represent me. So he was named and shamed in public because the lies on document he prepared about me he could not repute. I was blocked from the courts so I used the same system against the doctor. He could get a lawyer but he knew I was telling the truth about him.

Scotland does not have any complaints systems. Once the complaints handler realises the doctor, lawyer etc is up to his or her neck, the handler repudiates you. The evidence for this is all over the DOI Teams blog and peoples personal experiences.

Bureaucracy means injustice. Self regulation means self protection. You have to ask yourselves one question. Can I accept what they have done to me?

Anonymous said...

I reported my crooked Scottish lawyer to my MSP over a prime facie documented case where my dodgy lawyer was openly caught breaking the law?

My MSP's answer...........?

'I don't want to take sides'?
==================================
They are all the same. They want you to report lawyers because that is the way they keep your lawyers reputation intact.

Your MSP, like the others, they are latent members of the Law Society. Scotland has an Iron Curtain to protect professions, insurers, and anyone else in their criminal gang. Clients are abused because the Law Society Iron Curtain takes away your legal rights with full MSP approval. They demonstrate that because there is a EEC declaration of human rights, it means nothing if no lawyer will enforce rights for you. This is the reason lawyers ruin people, again and again. That Iron Curtain of domination separates us into,

those they give rights to.

those they wont.

Anonymous said...

Similar story here I tried making a complaint and it was thrown out.Strangely I also called the Law Society and they said the complaint was valid but could do nothing about it because the SLCC must decide first.
I wrote to my msp asking for a meeting and got no reply.Wrote again and his nasty secretary wrote back saying msps do not handle problems with solicitors and that if I made another attempt at contact it will be ignored!
My msp happens to be a minister in the so called Scottish cabinet!

Anonymous said...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

An inquiry into Newsnight's shelving of a report into sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile criticises BBC management but finds no evidence of a cover-up.
===============================
No matter the bureaucracy, the powerful will always dominate. The 'no evidence of a cover-up' will be another cover-up. The office is silent domination to protect the corrupt and rob victims of justice.

Anonymous said...

The actors in the SLCC drama change but the play never will. Changing bums on seats is how they attempt to convince us we are protect from crooked lawyers. Unfortunately for them clients are not the idiots they think we are. Vickers is the same as his predecessors. They are fooling themselves not us.

Anonymous said...

It would be good to get all these people together who the SLCC threw out the door and hear what they have to say about it..

Anonymous said...

While I agree with you the SLCC has done little for those clients who end up as victims of their own solicitors,the annual report does show more insight into the types of complaints being made than we ever found out from the Law Society of Scotland.
However,it remains obvious from your coverage of the SLCC over these four years that the regulator has not lived up to public expectation and is still too biased towards the legal profession.Consumers have lost out once again and sadly our supposed consumer guardians are not speaking out enough about this.

Anonymous said...

The statistics indicate 174 cases looked at by SLCC were time barred , It has to be assumed that there was no criminal activity in volved in these 174 cases, This would be extremely unlikely in my view , anyone agree with this view. There is no time bar if there was even the faintest hint of criminal activity this would include any form of "cover-up" or attempt to cover-up.

Anonymous said...

LPLA ACT DEAD. MSP's killed this.

CIVIL COURTS REVIEW, DEAD.

SOME RUINED CLIENTS DEAD.

OTHER RUINED CLIENTS STRUGGLING. Lawyers want us blown up.

CITIZENS ADVICE PROTECTING THE PUBLIC, DEAD.

MSP HELP, DEAD.
-------------------------------
Your see the Master deceivers The Law Society control everything. All this applied to the public would result in

Bank robbery, police protect the robbers and victimise the Bank.

Violence police protect the perpetrator and victimize the victim.

Rape, police protect the perpetrator and victimize the victims. Fortunately the police are not like the Law Society. In my opinion The Law Society and self regulation have been devised to make sure these gangsters avoid jail by keeping the public out of the loop.

To the victims of the Law Society & SLCC,

Use your letter from them. Redact your name, address, and any reference numbers. Print what your lawyer did to you on the back of the photocopies and distribute them. When this is the result of reporting your lawyer

"From Bad to Worse : Complaints against lawyers up 16%, few cases upheld, Board members on £20K expenses, reports anti-client Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in 2012 annual report"

What other option's do you have? The DOI Team are doing a brilliant job. The Law Society & SLCC, cannot stop you redacting your details from letters they send. We are only following their example.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I reported my crooked Scottish lawyer to my MSP over a prime facie documented case where my dodgy lawyer was openly caught breaking the law?

My MSP's answer...........?

'I don't want to take sides'?
================================
If you have that in writing send it to the DOI Team for publication. Another LIAR MSP. Perhaps he or she voted to kill off the LPLA Act, perhaps he or she shares your lawyers insurers. Please note lawyers do not break the law, because they are the investigations of their own corruption. In the Law Society world there are no laws, only exoneration for lawyers. People get ruined and stay that way because you and I are just money to them. And all MSP's support them. So the Law Society of Scotland is the Scottish Government.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I reported my crooked Scottish lawyer to my MSP over a prime facie documented case where my dodgy lawyer was openly caught breaking the law?

My MSP's answer...........?

'I don't want to take sides'? So your politician wants to leave you fighting the twelve thousand lawyer Scottish sledgehammer yourself. Scummy MSP bastards, may as well move into the Law Society of Scotland.

Anonymous said...

Law Society SLCC cannot protect the public. They simply hate us. A rabid pernicious intense hatred. It is utter madness to expect these people to change their ways. The public, yes their clientele they regard as scum. They believe they are better them the public.

Their attitudes are simple, look after the lawyers, exploit the public using any vile methods for money, and client suicides, well that gets rid of some of the 'thorns in our flesh'. To them clients are like light bulbs, once they have served the legal mafia's purpose throw them away. Lawyers are among the most dishonest simply because the so called independent regulators are more corrupt then their lawyers. In truth people need legal advice before they trust a lawyer, a dilemma indeed.



Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

It would be good to get all these people together who the SLCC threw out the door and hear what they have to say about it..
###############################
Yes I agree 100%. Lawyers dominate because they are thoroughly organized. This prevents client's getting to contact each other. The legal profession's weapon is secrecy. Break that and the foundation of self regulation crumbles. Say forty victims of the Law Society in one town organizing against local law firms. It will work. What do they have to lose?

Anonymous said...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/20/food-bank-chris-mould-george-osborne_n_2337330.html
=============================
Another group of hypocrites just like lawyers.

Anonymous said...

Similar story here I tried making a complaint and it was thrown out.Strangely I also called the Law Society and they said the complaint was valid but could do nothing about it because the SLCC must decide first.
I wrote to my msp asking for a meeting and got no reply.Wrote again and his nasty secretary wrote back saying msps do not handle problems with solicitors and that if I made another attempt at contact it will be ignored!
My msp happens to be a minister in the so called Scottish cabinet!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It wasn't Roseanna Cunningham was it? Now thats one hopeless ignorant bastard she couldn't run Scotland's lollypop men.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous18 December 2012 14:48
Similar story here I tried making a complaint and it was thrown out.Strangely I also called the Law Society and they said the complaint was valid but could do nothing about it because the SLCC must decide first.
I wrote to my msp asking for a meeting and got no reply.Wrote again and his nasty secretary wrote back saying msps do not handle problems with solicitors and that if I made another attempt at contact it will be ignored!
My msp happens to be a minister in the so called Scottish cabinet!
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

When asked to intervene in an overt, prime facie documented case of criminal behaviour by a Scottish Lawyer aided and assisted by the Law Society of Scotland, the Cabinet Member MSP said, 'I do not want to take sides'........

How can you NOT take sides, when there is prime facie, documented evidence of criminal activity???

Probably the same person?

Or are multiple MSP's morally bereft?

Anonymous said...

I thought at the SLCC had been shut down!

Anonymous said...

Recently, there was a Radio 5 Live report that the suicide incidence rate in Scotland is 80% higher than in England?

The scientist who conducted the study into suicide was at a loss to explain the massive difference between suicides in Scotland and England where culturally they are so similar?

Well, it is so obvious when you look at what the only significant material difference there is between the two countries which is their respective judicial system, lawyers and lawyer regulation?

Maybe Jane Irvine should reflect upon her role in these statistics and ask herself if she has the blood of scores of victims on her hands?

Anonymous said...

Justice must be for everyone.. or for nobody

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/justice-must-be-for-everyone-or-for-nobody-1503186

Anonymous said...

Maybe Jane Irvine should reflect upon her role in these statistics and ask herself if she has the blood of scores of victims on her hands?
===================================
She does not care.

Anonymous said...

Murderers.

Anonymous said...

The Commission and Society are infested with client hating maggots.
----------------------------------
Why go through the complaints process then?

Anonymous said...

Food Banks At Christmas Will Feed Double The Amount In 2012, Trussell Trust Reports.
=================================
How many lawyers and politicians have to go to food banks? How many of them suffer?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous22 December 2012 12:47
Recently, there was a Radio 5 Live report that the suicide incidence rate in Scotland is 80% higher than in England?

The scientist who conducted the study into suicide was at a loss to explain the massive difference between suicides in Scotland and England where culturally they are so similar?

Well, it is so obvious when you look at what the only significant material difference there is between the two countries which is their respective judicial system, lawyers and lawyer regulation?

Maybe Jane Irvine should reflect upon her role in these statistics and ask herself if she has the blood of scores of victims on her hands?
--------------------------------------------------------------

When the Law Society of Scotland owns and runs the SSDT & the SLCC, there is a deliberate built-in unfairness where Scottish lawyers are repeatedly allowed to act above the law?

This leads to such unfairness where the lawyer's victims have no where else to turn to, no wonder theare driven to suicide?

This is exactly what those in power at the Law Society of Scotland want, such is their hatred of the Scottish People?

Anonymous said...

Has Jane Irvine's alarming conduct against the Scottish people meant that she is to be added into the Scottish Hall of Shame, which is reserved for people who have gone out of their way to harm their fellow Scots?

Anonymous said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2252733/Judges-security-family-court-rooms-spate-attacks-angry-parents.html

Anonymous said...

Anonymous14 December 2012 00:03
Ms Jack ended by saying : "It is reassuring that the commission is driving efficiencies as our members are tightening their belts during these straightened times. The Society will continue to work with the Commission to seek to reform the legislation to make complaints a better experience for all involved."
---------------------------------
The Commission and Society are infested with client hating maggots.
--------------------------------

Jack (boot on the kneck) / Irvine should be arrested for deliberately misleading the public by spreading their lying propaganda?

They are hoping that the neutered press and non contravertial BBC Scotland & STV (read wings clipped) will keep the wool firmly pulled over the public's eyes?

HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOW!

The public DO NOT listen to a single word you are saying because they know that you are criminals hiding behind the veneer of respectability by you referring to yourselves as 'professionals' when you are nothing other than a self protecting gang similar to AL CAPONE and his untouchables.......?
Reply

Anonymous said...

Anonymous16 December 2012 03:46
Anonymous said...
and amidst it all, lazy politicians at the Scottish Parliament & Scottish Government who value legal freebies, and paid-for social occasions with lawyers & regulators too much to help constituents in dire need of assistance … the same old story from 1990 to 2012 repeats itself once again …

Yes too true Peter - these msps are 100% corrupt and value more their friends in the legal world than us poor peasants who vote for them.

I can think of a lot ot say about this and imagine there are plenty out there who have been let down by their msp when it comes to dealing with issues about lawyers..

13 December 2012 20:22
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

I reported my crooked Scottish lawyer to my MSP over a prime facie documented case where my dodgy lawyer was openly caught breaking the law?

My MSP's answer...........?

'I don't want to take sides'?

How can he not take sides when my crooked Scottish lawyer was caught red-handed being a criminal?

This is what happens when the Law Society of Scotland infiltrate the heart and souls of MSP's?
---------------------------------

In other words, I couldn't give a shit about you as my constituent........I'm only worried about the possible damage the Law Society will inflict on my Scottish political career even though they are COMMITTING CRIMINAL OFFENCES, I will back them and let you rot?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous17 December 2012 11:49

Perhaps she may confound her critics and write memoirs about what a waste of time the SLCC has been under the SNP and how MacAskill and ministers have mangled what was to be the new approach to regulating complaints against the legal profession!
---------------------------------

Nice post Jane but we know that you have zero conscience?

The public now know that the LALP act was a treasonous attempt to deceive them into believing that the law was to be changed, as a result of the Law Society's appalling treatment of victims at the hands of their members?

As the then deputy finance minister said to the Justice 2 Committee, the reason was not to enact any of these rules......rather that its purpose was to change the perception of the Scottish public so that they would believe that actual change was being undertaken but instead it was business as usual and the status quo was to be maintained where by the Law Society of Scotland would continue to abuse their power?

Anonymous said...

The Law Society of Scotland IS the SLCC?

Any client victim reporting to the SLCC will have seen by now that the SLCC is an anti-Justice organisation, backed-up by their own sorry statistics?

IT IS A SCAM?

The statistics are evidence that the SLCC is an unlawful institution and as such it's controller (The Law Society of Scotland) or rather its Office Bearers should be arrested and jailed for treason and fraud?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Worryingly, the annual report also reveals the SLCC refused to use its powers to abate or zero fees charged by lawyers who had given poor service to their clients, where only in 17 cases, fees were abated and fees totalling a paltry £3,851 were abated, an average award of only £227 per client.

£227 per client when legal fees are minimum thousands of pounds??

Clearly the SLCC are more worried about the wallets of lawyers than compensating clients whose lives are ruined by crooked lawyers!

13 December 2012 15:41
--------------------------------------

There is zero disincentive to Scottish crooked lawyers to stop committing criminal offences against their clients?

Actually, it could be argued that the SLCC is in fact encouraging crooked Scottish lawyers to FILL THEIR BOOTS?

Go on guys........keep on pruning the £50 pound notes off your CASH TREES?