Free Civil Legal Advice??

Author
Discussion

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
is there anywhere to get free legal advice on a civil matter? It's seems to be very hard to get these days, have solicitors done away with this free hour/half hour thing or is only for compassionate matters like family law. Is civil law just seen as petty unimportant stuff now. Shame as it's something a trained solicitor could probably answer in about 60 seconds.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Advice is as good as what you pay for.

If you want 60 seconds of a solicitor's time, and you want him to indemnify his advice, you are not just paying for 60 seconds you are paying for the years he spent studying, his student loan, his practice/chambers and other costs.

Alternatively, there's some sensibly switched on people here, some solicitors and at least one barrister who post frequently.

You'd probably get the right answer by the end of the day. smile

Soov535

35,829 posts

270 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Post it here - one of us will probably know the answer.


ORD

18,086 posts

126 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
rolleyes I often wonder why there are also no free estate agents, accountants, plumbers, gardeners, etc, too

rlw

3,321 posts

236 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Citizens Advice might help but if you can afford it why not do the decent thing......

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
I KNOW that qualified people have to train, and that many things are not free. However, solicitors used to offer an hour's free consultation, across the board. It was, IIRC, a government dictate. However it isn't that common nowadays. My question was, is it possible to still get free advice or not? I don't want to be given st about whether it's fair or not, it used to exist.

Soov535

35,829 posts

270 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Blown2CV said:
I KNOW that qualified people have to train, and that many things are not free. However, solicitors used to offer an hour's free consultation, across the board. It was, IIRC, a government dictate. However it isn't that common nowadays. My question was, is it possible to still get free advice or not? I don't want to be given st about whether it's fair or not, it used to exist.
Some firms used to do it as a loss leader.

Look, just post the bl00dy problem and either I or one of the other bazzas/solicitahz on here will have a gander.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Blown2CV said:
My question was, is it possible to still get free advice or not?
Recap:

You are posting on the Speed, Plod & the Law forum to ask if you can get free advice.

Two posters have responded that you can get advice for free, on here, from solicitors and barristers.

One of those posters is barrister and has asked you what your 60 second query is.

If your query is "Can you get 60 seconds of legal advice for free?" Then you have it answered in the most positive way imaginable.

Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 23 October 12:20

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all

soprano

1,586 posts

199 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
You can charge the beneficial interest of the individual against whom you have a judgment.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
I think I remember your situation now.

It's difficult either way round. The final sanction is the threat of bankruptcy.

Then, he won't be safe in the knowledge that he can hide behind claims of assets in his wife's name. The Official Receiver will look to sell one or more of the properties.

If they are on a buy to let mortgage, the minimum equity is 20% now. There will be some money there.

He may not be scared of going bankrupt, but most likely he will be, or certainly his wife will also be affected due to the joint properties. That's the best leverage you've got.

IIRC the cost is £600 in fees. If the gamble pays off, and he wants to avoid bankruptcy, putting charges on the properties and agreeing for the sale of one to pay you back before a certain date would be something that he and the wife would be forced into doing without court orders.

ETA: I was in court a couple of weeks ago and in the waiting room I overheard a heated conversation between solicitors for both sides on a bankruptcy petition which was going to be heard in 30 minutes. The potential bankrupt was making all sorts of offers of immediate payment once the inevitable happened.

In your case, your debtor risks that his and his wife properties are taken from him, his bank accounts frozen, the rent then goes to the receiver, and the properties are sold. Even if the chap is hard nosed he must realise that he will get a much better return by selling the properties himself.

Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 23 October 13:27

soprano

1,586 posts

199 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
JustinP1 said:
I think I remember your situation now.

It's difficult either way round. The final sanction is the threat of bankruptcy.

Then, he won't be safe in the knowledge that he can hide behind claims of assets in his wife's name. The Official Receiver will look to sell one or more of the properties.

If they are on a buy to let mortgage, the minimum equity is 20% now. There will be some money there.

He may not be scared of going bankrupt, but most likely he will be, or certainly his wife will also be affected due to the joint properties. That's the best leverage you've got.

IIRC the cost is £600 in fees. If the gamble pays off, and he wants to avoid bankruptcy, putting charges on the properties and agreeing for the sale of one to pay you back before a certain date would be something that he and the wife would be forced into doing without court orders.
It's been a while since I've dealt with one of these, but you can't petition for bankruptcy on a secure debt I don't think.

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
soprano said:
You can charge the beneficial interest of the individual against whom you have a judgment.
OK, does that mean i have just made the wrong application to the land registry, or i need to have the charging orders re-drawn?

As the orders currently show only his name, the land reg have told me all i can do is apply for restrictions to be put on his properties, citing the charging orders. The restriction apparently requires that he has to ask my permission to sell, however it doesn't require him to pay me anything so that would need to be some kind of agreement between him and I before I gave permission. Not sure I like that as he could just fail to honour his side and that would be that.

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
JustinP1 said:
I think I remember your situation now.

It's difficult either way round. The final sanction is the threat of bankruptcy.

Then, he won't be safe in the knowledge that he can hide behind claims of assets in his wife's name. The Official Receiver will look to sell one or more of the properties.

If they are on a buy to let mortgage, the minimum equity is 20% now. There will be some money there.

He may not be scared of going bankrupt, but most likely he will be, or certainly his wife will also be affected due to the joint properties. That's the best leverage you've got.

IIRC the cost is £600 in fees. If the gamble pays off, and he wants to avoid bankruptcy, putting charges on the properties and agreeing for the sale of one to pay you back before a certain date would be something that he and the wife would be forced into doing without court orders.

ETA: I was in court a couple of weeks ago and in the waiting room I overheard a heated conversation between solicitors for both sides on a bankruptcy petition which was going to be heard in 30 minutes. The potential bankrupt was making all sorts of offers of immediate payment once the inevitable happened.

In your case, your debtor risks that his and his wife properties are taken from him, his bank accounts frozen, the rent then goes to the receiver, and the properties are sold. Even if the chap is hard nosed he must realise that he will get a much better return by selling the properties himself.
Sure, I think i remember you mentioning this previously. It would indeed be the last resort. I had hoped that he had money to pay all his debts and it was just tied up in his properties, which he appears to be starting to sell. If he was doing that already and I could latch on a charging order to get a piece of that when it's being dished out to all his creditors then great. It seemed the best course of action as it was starting to happen anyway, and i didn't feel i needed to force it by threatening bankruptcy. I guess that's the root of the question, can i do something with these charging orders now they've been made, or are they useless?

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
rlw said:
Citizens Advice might help but if you can afford it why not do the decent thing......
CAB said it was outside of their remit. I am not saying i can't afford solicitors' fees.

soprano

1,586 posts

199 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Blown2CV said:
OK, does that mean i have just made the wrong application to the land registry, or i need to have the charging orders re-drawn?

As the orders currently show only his name, the land reg have told me all i can do is apply for restrictions to be put on his properties, citing the charging orders. The restriction apparently requires that he has to ask my permission to sell, however it doesn't require him to pay me anything so that would need to be some kind of agreement between him and I before I gave permission. Not sure I like that as he could just fail to honour his side and that would be that.
What did you put in the original N379 form, in part 4 of the application? Did you obtain office copy entries for the properties to check the ownership position before you made the application?

Lurking Lawyer

4,534 posts

224 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Blown2CV said:
OK, does that mean i have just made the wrong application to the land registry, or i need to have the charging orders re-drawn?

As the orders currently show only his name, the land reg have told me all i can do is apply for restrictions to be put on his properties, citing the charging orders. The restriction apparently requires that he has to ask my permission to sell, however it doesn't require him to pay me anything so that would need to be some kind of agreement between him and I before I gave permission. Not sure I like that as he could just fail to honour his side and that would be that.
Where property is jointly owned, I'm afraid that's all your entitled to.

The Land Reg is correct - you can't register the charging order against the legal title if it's jointly owned and the debt is owed by only one of the co-owners. All you can do is register a Restriction against his beneficial interest in the equity.

Which gives rise to an interesting question as to whether that amounts to "security", which if soprano is right would prevent you petitioning for his bankruptcy. I don't immediately known the answer to that.

Lurking Lawyer

4,534 posts

224 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Blown2CV said:
CAB said it was outside of their remit. I am not saying i can't afford solicitors' fees.
But you'd prefer not to pay them....?

FWIW, I'm not sure there has ever been an obligation to provide a "free hour" or "free half-hour" in all the 20 years-ish I've been in practice. You used to be able to get legal aid for certain types of civil claim (usually means tested though, IIRC) and the solicitor may have been able to give you some initial advice and claim the cost back under the Green Form (?) scheme. But not all solicitors did legal aid work anyway, so there wasn't a general obligation.

I used to take cold calls to our Reception but I'd frequently spend 20-30 minutes on the phone and then never hear from the client again. A few years ago, we swapped to a system by which we charged a fixed fee (£75 plus VAT) for an initial meeting or an hour or so to give some preliminary advice and to allow the client to understand whether it was worth taking further. That's a substantial discount on my usual hourly rate.

Blown2CV

Original Poster:

28,697 posts

202 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
soprano said:
Blown2CV said:
OK, does that mean i have just made the wrong application to the land registry, or i need to have the charging orders re-drawn?

As the orders currently show only his name, the land reg have told me all i can do is apply for restrictions to be put on his properties, citing the charging orders. The restriction apparently requires that he has to ask my permission to sell, however it doesn't require him to pay me anything so that would need to be some kind of agreement between him and I before I gave permission. Not sure I like that as he could just fail to honour his side and that would be that.
What did you put in the original N379 form, in part 4 of the application? Did you obtain office copy entries for the properties to check the ownership position before you made the application?
Joint owner, and yes official copies were obtained.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
Lurking Lawyer said:
Which gives rise to an interesting question as to whether that amounts to "security", which if soprano is right would prevent you petitioning for his bankruptcy. I don't immediately known the answer to that.
This is the quandary the OP has.

On the one hand he can register the beneficial interest on some or all of the properties. When one is sold, he does have some rights and he might get paid, some or all.

However, let's turn that around. The real question here is what will motivate the debtor to pay his debt?

If you consider a rental property, at the moment the debtor is getting rental income. On the other hand he can sell the property to get funds to pay some debts or spend. However, if it were the case that to sell that property he wouldn't get anything or much at all after the OP's debt is settled whenever that is, maybe years in the future when the debt has increased due to interest, then why would he voluntarily sell?

The charging order(s) in that scenario would have limited use. The debtor may be quite happy to sit on the houses accruing equity for him, and proving rental income.


It's difficult, and I say that from someone who is owed money by someone who has recently made themselves bankrupt after they had the chance to liquidate and hide their assets over a year. If I had my time again, I'd rush things through and make them bankrupt myself. I'm pretty sure that if the bankruptcy papers hit them out of the blue then I'd have my money in full, or at least a chunk.