Showing posts with label solicitors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label solicitors. Show all posts

Friday, 30 December 2011

Some Nightmares Just Won't Go Away...



Hot off the press, this one. Rick Kordowski, creator of Solicitors from Hell website, is appealing the judgment against him.

So far the Law Society's actions have failed to close the website, which has resurfaced as Solicitorsfromhell.net (see below), and now Kordowski is back to challenge Mr Justice Tugendhat's decision.

Kordowski said, "[he] was tempted to leave it alone and let it go down in  history as one of the most ‘archaic’ judgments of all time."

However, Kordowski further said, "the individuals who accompanied the Law Society on the claim against him failed to follow the Pre-Action protocol code. [He] is also perplexed to why these individuals had not (and still haven’t)  contacted [him] to ask who the authors of the words complained about were."

One other interesting aspect of this is that the Law Society complained to the Information Commissioner (IC) about Solicitors from Hell, but received a less than helpful reply. The IC said although he found some of the comments offensive, other accounts of clients' experiences were credible.

Moreover, the IC can't be expected, nor is it his role, to police websites. And, he says quite definitely, that it isn't his role to "rule on what is acceptable for one individual to say about another, be that a solicitor or other individual. That is not what my Office is established to do." That's where libel comes in if you want to take action.

But accepting that we now live in a socially networked world, the Information Commissioner suggests that the best route is for solicitors to approach Solicitors from Hell directly to negotiate changes where there are factual inaccuracies.


In a final recognition of the new world order that professionals and others have to live within, the IC effectively tells the Law Society "live with it". There are plenty of websites that rate people and products and if you kill one, then it will pop up elsewhere....just as Solicitors from Hell has done.

It is an unwinnable battle.


Given that Hugh Tomlinson QC of Matrix Chambers who is acting for the Law Society can't be cheap, I hope the Law Society has the support of its members for the costs of this litigation. They clearly aren't going to get any money from Kordowski.

I still have my doubts about shooting the messenger. It can make the Law Society look like a bully if it's not careful, no matter how justified it may think it is.



Share/Bookmark

Friday, 3 September 2010

Diversity in the Legal Profession?

(Thanks to Karishma Daswani)

Neil Rose at Legal Futures reports that the Legal Services Board (LSB) is to compel law firms and barristers' chambers to disclose information on diversity, which would encompass:
  • age
  • disability
  • gender
  • race
  • religion or belief
  • sexual orientation
  • working patterns
  • social mobility
This should come into effect in February 2011. And not before time.

My colleagues Lisa Webley and Liz Duff have been doing research on this, in conjunction with scholars from Leeds, for the LSB. Their report is due shortly and at Westminster we will be holding a seminar on this on 13 October. My guess is that their findings will not make happy reading for the profession.


This is an aspect of the legal profession which has remained under-researched and misunderstood for a long time. Both solicitors and the Bar have been reluctant to provide figures, except in aggregate, on gender and ethnicity. We do know that there are severe distortions in numbers between entry to law school and those in practice.

Lawyers and the legal profession have been good at portraying themselves as meritocratic and having removed the last traces of noblesse oblige. Yet without the statistics how do we know?

Discussion groups on Linked In have been grumbling about "heavy-handed" regulation from the LSB over having to collect and disclose this information. But they have only themselves to blame for not taking the lead and actively seeking to resolve the problems endemic in the profession.

Unfortunately when it comes to change the legal profession is snail-like. And this is one of the reasons the Legal Services Board exists--to overcome the inertia of the profession. Maybe it will begin to get the message, if it's prepared to listen. But....
Share/Bookmark

Friday, 5 February 2010

Tesco Law in a Wig and Gown



Are solicitors endangered? James Dunning has an insightful post on this at his blog, An Inside Take from the Outside.

He advances his argument on the basis of the changes made in the regulation of barristers. Dunning says:
Last week though, in my humble opinion, the earth moved as the Bar Standards Board voted to allow barristers
  • to work in partnership with other barristers
  • to work in partnership with lawyers
  • to invest in law firms
  • to practice in more than one capacity
  • to investigate and collect evidence, take witness statements in civil and criminal case, advise suspects at the police station and conduct correspondence
The Law Society is busy considering the relative merits and demerits of referral fees.  Meanwhile the Bar Council has just voted to allow barristers to steal a sizeable proportion of law firms’ daily sustenance.
I agree with Dunning the earth is moving and solicitors should be checking their earthquake insurance.

565NPCXDCPAW
Share/Bookmark