I'm dealing with mine just now and to be honest he's been great, but of course there another firm as well. What i want to know is does anything ever happen smoothly between 2 sets of solicitors and why do we pay them so much money for (as far as i can see) being fairly useless. Is there any other market that continually lets down its consumers that isn't forced to change?
2006-07-17 00:43:49 · 9 answers · asked by Waltzing Wallace 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
With a bit of hard work and the rescources for good research, we could all probably do as good a job. But we're not qualified and lack the courage half the time.
That's why they thrive.
2006-07-17 00:55:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
(NOTE) slightly off topic, this is concerning criminal law, not conveyancing) solicitors are busy folks, and they charge accordingly. so, i have, on occasion represented people in the magistrates courts under teh mackenzie friends application. (so far, one drug bust, and two motoring offences.) the bust was for 2kilo of weed. the guy did 3 months. (he walked into a bust carrying the weed!) one guy wrote off a 735d BMW when he ran his mercedes sprinter into the back of it at 60mph on the M6 at Warrnigton, result 3 points and a fifty quid fine. and the third, i wrote a brand new (an hour old) 525i BMW off. that didnt ever get to court... oh, and i got a guys medical benefit reinstated from the DSS...(that was a nightmare) and i have no legal training whatsoever. why was i successful? because i pay attention to the detail. they are complacent, and solicitors havent go the time to tell a good story, they all follow the same litany... and it sucks. how many times have the magistrates heard the same lines over and over again? we all forget that solicitors are merely letter writers in the pay of the aggrieved party. they can only act upon instructions.
and on the other side of the coin is the CPS... unless they have a very good (70%) chance of conviction they wont go to court. one can present their "evidence" to teh CPS directly. i have had three cases dropped at the last minute when i have presented my evidence in this way.
so, one doesnt need a degree. (I have one but its in sociology) the law is open. we can all read, draw conclusions and articulate our arguments... and i can do just as good a job in the magistrates court as the next guy. (as proved) so, as an alternative to paying exhorbitant fees, try advocacy. most big cities have this service, or ask at the citizens advice, or your free law centre. solicitors are only responding to market forces, they have a monopoly on representation...the law society is a nice little club, and were not members, merely end users, and they treat everyone as the cash cows they are.
i suppose, the legal profession is looking after its own interests, as we do, but in a magistrates court, for non custodial offences, you could do just as good a job as the shiny suit. but you have to do the research, know the law, and present your case, communicating coherently, concisely, and accurately with the bench. (the clerk of the court is great, they will help out quite a bit) and when put like that, solicitors do good work, but you have to instruct them...dont let them make descisions on which you base your liberty. ( D, got done for D&D, his brief decided not guilty... against all the evidence. so D goes along. it went to crown, and was bumped to dangerous driving etc... he got 12 months in jail, a 2 yr ban, and he has to retake all his licences. if D had pleaded guilty on day one, hed have got a 12month ban and a fine, and probably an alcohol awareness programme. all teh solicitor wanted was a day or two in court. the end user D, was just a means to an end.
how did i learn all of this? i watched my solicitor, Ian Gold as he represented me through 15 years of hell raising. he was a great teacher, and I, the convicted pupil, paid attention. so, if poachers become the best gamekeepers... jail house lawyers know more about criminal law than their legal representatives. we know where the loopholes are, and we exploit them. Ian Gold once said to me, Stuart, im here to accept your instructions, not cook up the best possible story... so, i gave him instruction, and we walked. poor representation comes from poor instruction.
2006-07-17 02:37:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ther not all useless, some I have to admit are very very slow n stupid but its 50/50 when it comes to it....and as for paying them money u would pay them double if you knew the **** they have to go through to get you a house etc when you just sit back and sign stuff and all you do is wait while the solicitor ends up getting all the stick trying to arrange closings on time n chase up banks for money for YOU.....and 99.9% of the time there stressing out just to get YOU a house when they could easily tell you to piss off. (",)
2006-07-17 00:54:21 · answer #3 · answered by rainbow 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem with useless solicitors is that it is too expensive to take them to court for a job poorly done. Insidious circle.
2006-07-17 00:50:07 · answer #4 · answered by Gallivanting Galactic Gadfly 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we have bought a house in 8 weeks, from the offer being accepted to moving in next Friday! It helped that both parties used different branches of the same firm but i am happy with the service we got!
2006-07-17 00:46:34 · answer #5 · answered by elmleaquack 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, all solicitors are completely useless, without exception.
2006-07-17 00:47:19 · answer #6 · answered by Roxy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
solicitors only want to make money out of you. therefore, since they are doing so, they are not completely useless. trust me, i have a law degree.
2006-07-17 00:46:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No - its just that the good ones are very very expensive
2006-07-17 03:12:48 · answer #8 · answered by mnaagar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Woe be unto them.
2006-07-17 00:46:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋