Discussion
Dear all, thanks for your help in advance, I am in a situation where i need your help.
I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
asimwarraich said:
Dear all, thanks for your help in advance, I am in a situation where i need your help.
I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
IANAL but something tells me this is a selective version of events.I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
Why would your barrister not know about the case.
Why would you have a barrister for what appears to be a very low level offence.
Why didn't your solicitor explain the case to the barrister, instead leaving you to do this?
Why would the court reopen a case? You were convicted so it's an appeal.
Why didn't you have all the relevant info before the hearing?
IANAL but something tells me this is a selective version of events.
Why would your barrister not know about the case.
Why would you have a barrister for what appears to be a very low level offence.
Why didn't your solicitor explain the case to the barrister, instead leaving you to do this?
Why would the court reopen a case? You were convicted so it's an appeal.
Why didn't you have all the relevant info before the hearing?
Because she came in hoping that case will be dismissed as we didn't receive any correspondence from police or cps.
Because this was first time i was going to court, its not like i know everything about court procedures or what not.
Because my solicitor seems to be sham now, she should have informed that barrister before hand.
Because i have a lot more evidence to prove that due care was taken to receive posts and as long it is question of my character judgement, i am willing to get some character certificates from uni professors and my employer.
Because i was misinformed by my solicitor that she can not take my statement because she hasn't received any paperwork.
And finally, barrister told me that at last minute that case can be adjourned as well if i want to but then i ll have to pay more money to my solicitor. I had already paid her £1000 and i am not made of money.
Why would your barrister not know about the case.
Why would you have a barrister for what appears to be a very low level offence.
Why didn't your solicitor explain the case to the barrister, instead leaving you to do this?
Why would the court reopen a case? You were convicted so it's an appeal.
Why didn't you have all the relevant info before the hearing?
Because she came in hoping that case will be dismissed as we didn't receive any correspondence from police or cps.
Because this was first time i was going to court, its not like i know everything about court procedures or what not.
Because my solicitor seems to be sham now, she should have informed that barrister before hand.
Because i have a lot more evidence to prove that due care was taken to receive posts and as long it is question of my character judgement, i am willing to get some character certificates from uni professors and my employer.
Because i was misinformed by my solicitor that she can not take my statement because she hasn't received any paperwork.
And finally, barrister told me that at last minute that case can be adjourned as well if i want to but then i ll have to pay more money to my solicitor. I had already paid her £1000 and i am not made of money.
I'm trying to understand your situation as it isn't clear.
I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
I'm trying to understand your situation as it isn't clear.
I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
It was my car and was registered in my name, i don't know what is legal or not, company dedicated money straight from my salary stating magistrate earning order.
Why is this an odd thing if i wanted a barrister to be present during my hearing. Its not that i go to court everyday and know everything about the law.
I did not receive any letter in the first place, probably it got lost in the post for whatever reason. How am i suppose to know if i didn't receive anything.
I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
It was my car and was registered in my name, i don't know what is legal or not, company dedicated money straight from my salary stating magistrate earning order.
Why is this an odd thing if i wanted a barrister to be present during my hearing. Its not that i go to court everyday and know everything about the law.
I did not receive any letter in the first place, probably it got lost in the post for whatever reason. How am i suppose to know if i didn't receive anything.
asimwarraich said:
Because she came in hoping that case will be dismissed as we didn't receive any correspondence from police or cps.
Because this was first time i was going to court, its not like i know everything about court procedures or what not.
Because my solicitor seems to be sham now, she should have informed that barrister before hand.
Because i have a lot more evidence to prove that due care was taken to receive posts and as long it is question of my character judgement, i am willing to get some character certificates from uni professors and my employer.
Because i was misinformed by my solicitor that she can not take my statement because she hasn't received any paperwork.
And finally, barrister told me that at last minute that case can be adjourned as well if i want to but then i ll have to pay more money to my solicitor. I had already paid her £1000 and i am not made of money.
But why would your solicitor advise a barrister, or why would you hire one without consulting them? With regard to the evidence I still don't see why you wouldn't have that in front of your solicitor well in advance of court. Because this was first time i was going to court, its not like i know everything about court procedures or what not.
Because my solicitor seems to be sham now, she should have informed that barrister before hand.
Because i have a lot more evidence to prove that due care was taken to receive posts and as long it is question of my character judgement, i am willing to get some character certificates from uni professors and my employer.
Because i was misinformed by my solicitor that she can not take my statement because she hasn't received any paperwork.
And finally, barrister told me that at last minute that case can be adjourned as well if i want to but then i ll have to pay more money to my solicitor. I had already paid her £1000 and i am not made of money.
What statement was your solicitor going to take and what impact does that have on the process of the court? If you don't like the result you can appeal it, you cant ask them to reopen a hearing AFAIK
papa3 said:
But why would your solicitor advise a barrister, or why would you hire one without consulting them? With regard to the evidence I still don't see why you wouldn't have that in front of your solicitor well in advance of court.
What statement was your solicitor going to take and what impact does that have on the process of the court? If you don't like the result you can appeal it, you cant ask them to reopen a hearing AFAIK
I didn't hire a barrister but barrister was sent by same solicitor firm i was using. Barrister came in hoping that because no paper work was served on us so case will be dismissed. That clearly wasn't the case. My solicitor seems to be a very unorganised person now, she should have informed barrister about all the situation. What statement was your solicitor going to take and what impact does that have on the process of the court? If you don't like the result you can appeal it, you cant ask them to reopen a hearing AFAIK
I don't know what statement she had to take but that what she told me. She couldn't take my statement because she hadn't seen any paper work or evidence. I am genuinely not guilty in this matter and i want to prove it.
asimwarraich said:
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
AFAIK, any penalty will be applied as at date of offence.I found this out as I was stopped speeding the day before my 3 points expired. I was not offered an FPN due to the speed and so had to go to court but the court hearing was several months after the event so the 3 points were expired.
I was given 6 points for the offence and was then warned by the Magistrate that as I was on 9 points I should 'be careful'.
I didn't question this at the time (no point in potentially making things worse) and I was relieved at escaping a ban, my Solicitor later explained that it was as at time of offence even if only for a day and that had I received an extra 3 points I would have been banned due to totting up.
asimwarraich said:
I'm trying to understand your situation as it isn't clear.
I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
It was my car and was registered in my name, i don't know what is legal or not, company dedicated money straight from my salary stating magistrate earning order.
Why is this an odd thing if i wanted a barrister to be present during my hearing. Its not that i go to court everyday and know everything about the law.
I did not receive any letter in the first place, probably it got lost in the post for whatever reason. How am i suppose to know if i didn't receive anything.
What on earth has who the owner/keeper of the car got to do with the company deducting money from his wages, it will be as a result of an attachment of earnings from the court so they are legally bound to comply, Can be used in plenty of different circumstances from oustanding fines to child maintenance. Don't give advice when you obviously don't have a clue about the legal process involved.I assume the (alleged) offence happened in a company vehicle and not your own?
When did your companies Payroll deduct money from you wages, recently I assume?
Letters for offences are sent to where the vehicle is registered, for example I've had lots of company cars in the past and all correspondence goes to either the company they lease the vehicles from or the company I've worked for if they've purchased the vehicles themselves. Either way it should all be traceable back. Lease company tells your employer, employer looks up reg of car, traces it back to you, they inform you.
So if it was your own car, then your Payroll have no right to deduct money from you obviously. If it is a company provided vehicle they should have informed you the moment they knew about the alleged offence. (This happened to me once when I drove into a bus lane, my company got the fine through and phoned me asking if they wanted me to pay it or if they can pay it and deduct from my wages)
The whole solicitor/barrister/magistrate court thing sounds odd as well.
I mean there are so many suspicious flaws in this whole story, firstly why you didn't get notified of an alleged offence, if it is your companies fault for not informing you, then I'd be looking to get legal action taken upon them but I doubt that is the case.
It was my car and was registered in my name, i don't know what is legal or not, company dedicated money straight from my salary stating magistrate earning order.
Why is this an odd thing if i wanted a barrister to be present during my hearing. Its not that i go to court everyday and know everything about the law.
I did not receive any letter in the first place, probably it got lost in the post for whatever reason. How am i suppose to know if i didn't receive anything.
OP you need to give us a concise time line for the events, what happened in what order and to whom because a lot of your post does not ake sense as you have written it.
asimwarraich said:
Dear all, thanks for your help in advance, I am in a situation where i need your help.
You've got a solicitor & a barrister speak to them about it, not a bunch of randoms on the internet.They are far better placed to advise you as they know the law & also your individual circumstances.
asimwarraich said:
Dear all, thanks for your help in advance, I am in a situation where i need your help.
I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
You didn’t get the paperwork. How could you be expected to undertake due diligence? Odd.I had my court hearing yesterday where i was found guilty of failing to provide driver information. Back story is, Some amount was deducted from my salary so i called my payroll department to ask about it and was informed that they were ordered by magistrate court to take that amount. So i called magistrate court and found out that back in February 2016, my vehicle was caught exceeding temporary speed limit of 50 on motorway. Letters were sent to me asking for identification of driver which i never received, so case went on trial and i was convicted in my absence. Once i had found out about all this, i had to do a statute declaration stating that i had no knowledge of this prior to September 2017 so case started from new. I hired a solicitor to deal with my case. My solicitor wrote/called police and cps numerous time asking for evidence but they could not find my file. So i went for trail with a barrister and 15 minutes prior to trial a file was handed to barrister containing all the paperwork. My barrister knew nothing about my case so i had to explain her everything in 15 minutes. We went to trial and were asked for supporting documents for due diligence defence, i could provide few documents from my email but not all the documents. So judges found me guilty for this offence. I came back home and thoroughly checked my emails and found a lot more stuff which i could have provided as evidence and felt very stupid for not having a copy of everything at that time. I partly blame this on my solicitor as well, she was way too positive that my case will be dismissed prior to trial but that didn't not turn out to be the case.
Now, my first question is, should i apply to magistrate court for reopening the case or should i go ahead to crown court?
Secondly, i had my license for 1 year and 9 months at the time of offence but now it is 3 and half years old. So after six points on my license, will DVLA revoke my license or because hearing was only yesterday so i should be fine?
Your help will be much appreciated.
Sounds like a badly prepared case, possibly some bad advice from the solicitor. Good advice from your counsel to get the case adjourned. You ignored that advice as a cost saving measure. Bad idea.
It sounds like you used a one office “national” solicitor. If so, then that’s perhaps a lesson to others. These “national” solicitors typically charge top money for doing minimal work. Ok, you get a few calls and emails, but you never meet and you certainy don’t get to meet your counsel in advance. You’re told that your case is much stronger than it actually is. The solicitor (paralegal in reality) sends a local barrister (the cheapest they can find) to court. Your invoice doesn’t show the disbursement, only the solicitor’s fee. Solicitor gets 80% of the fee for doing 20% of the work on your case. Nice.
With hindsight, you should have used a direct access barrister. But I would say that wouldn’t I?
vonhosen said:
You've got a solicitor & a barrister speak to them about it, not a bunch of randoms on the internet.
They are far better placed to advise you as they know the law & also your individual circumstances.
Well i used them so that's why here i am. I guess, random people will give the honest answer whereas law firms will try to scare the sThey are far better placed to advise you as they know the law & also your individual circumstances.
t out in order to get more money from me. agtlaw said:
You didn’t get the paperwork. How could you be expected to undertake due diligence? Odd.
Sounds like a badly prepared case, possibly some bad advice from the solicitor. Good advice from your counsel to get the case adjourned. You ignored that advice as a cost saving measure. Bad idea.
It sounds like you used a one office “national” solicitor. If so, then that’s perhaps a lesson to others. These “national” solicitors typically charge top money for doing minimal work. Ok, you get a few calls and emails, but you never meet and you certainy don’t get to meet your counsel in advance. You’re told that your case is much stronger than it actually is. The solicitor (paralegal in reality) sends a local barrister (the cheapest they can find) to court. Your invoice doesn’t show the disbursement, only the solicitor’s fee. Solicitor gets 80% of the fee for doing 20% of the work on your case. Nice.
With hindsight, you should have used a direct access barrister. But I would say that wouldn’t I?
You are the first person who i think did understand the situation. This is exactly what happened. Sounds like a badly prepared case, possibly some bad advice from the solicitor. Good advice from your counsel to get the case adjourned. You ignored that advice as a cost saving measure. Bad idea.
It sounds like you used a one office “national” solicitor. If so, then that’s perhaps a lesson to others. These “national” solicitors typically charge top money for doing minimal work. Ok, you get a few calls and emails, but you never meet and you certainy don’t get to meet your counsel in advance. You’re told that your case is much stronger than it actually is. The solicitor (paralegal in reality) sends a local barrister (the cheapest they can find) to court. Your invoice doesn’t show the disbursement, only the solicitor’s fee. Solicitor gets 80% of the fee for doing 20% of the work on your case. Nice.
With hindsight, you should have used a direct access barrister. But I would say that wouldn’t I?
As a general info point, at the lower end of the legal market there are lots of rubbish solicitors and some rubbish barristers too, and it is not uncommon for very junior barristers to be sent to court by inept solicitors with very little in the way of instructions or preparation. I add that barristers doing minor cases is common, as junior counsel are often cheaper than solicitors and barristers may be better at advocacy.
It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. If he can't, he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. If he can't, he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 4th November 22:36
What I do not understand and it may be just me is:
You had a attachment to earnings order applied but you had no idea of the s172 so how did they know who you were employed by and your details for the attachment order?
At some point you must have provided this, or the police and DVLA have just become the judge / jury / executioner.
To get to the attachment order you must have been informed.
You had a attachment to earnings order applied but you had no idea of the s172 so how did they know who you were employed by and your details for the attachment order?
At some point you must have provided this, or the police and DVLA have just become the judge / jury / executioner.
To get to the attachment order you must have been informed.
Breadvan72 said:
As a general info point, at the lower end of the legal market there are lots of rubbish solicitors and some rubbish barristers too, and it is not uncommon for very junior barristers to be sent to court by inept solicitors with very little in the way of instructions or preparation. I add that barristers doing minor cases is common, as junior counsel are often cheaper than solicitors and they may be better at advocacy.
It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. I he can't , he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
I can't find any agtlaw firm in google. what is their website?It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. I he can't , he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
asimwarraich said:
Breadvan72 said:
As a general info point, at the lower end of the legal market there are lots of rubbish solicitors and some rubbish barristers too, and it is not uncommon for very junior barristers to be sent to court by inept solicitors with very little in the way of instructions or preparation. I add that barristers doing minor cases is common, as junior counsel are often cheaper than solicitors and they may be better at advocacy.
It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. I he can't , he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
I can't find any agtlaw firm in google. what is their website?It also sounds like the OP may have done some head in sand stuff, or be such a deeply disorganised person that he did not notice letters and so on. Going to Court without having prepared and passed to the solicitor documents which were obviously relevant was daft.
OP, spend some money on a consultation with agtlaw. If anyone can get you out of your tangle, he can. I he can't , he'll tell you that straight.
You might have a beef against the solicitor for inadequate service, but sort out the crim position first.
asimwarraich said:
I can't find any agtlaw firm in google. what is their website?
I could post a link but I am going to give you some tough love as you seem to be somewhat adrift on the sea of life and maybe need to get a grip. Have a read of your own thread and note who one of the contributors is. Please stop bleating about everyone being to blame except you. It's not attractive!Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 5th November 07:28
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff