The legal profession should have a health warning stuck on top of their heads. My advice to anyone in trouble - first avoid getting into trouble and secondly don't hire a lawyer and pay for them. I once wrote contribution on the Times Law Blog regarding my experiences with lawyers. Of course, I am not the only one with this experience. When comparing notes, numerous of my friends and colleagues have had similar experiences. Anyhow, this was my experience as listed in the comments section of the Times Blog.
Those who have represented me are Paul Garlick QC in 2009 and Robert Jay QC in 2004. Believe me even if you are dead, don't hire Paul Garlick QC. Solicitors representing were Paul Pickering of Birchall Blackburn and Richard Price in 2004. Lawyers aren't nice people. You start to discover this the more you dissect their conceited personalities. More on these people in the up and coming book The Discreet Inquiry.
Those who have represented me are Paul Garlick QC in 2009 and Robert Jay QC in 2004. Believe me even if you are dead, don't hire Paul Garlick QC. Solicitors representing were Paul Pickering of Birchall Blackburn and Richard Price in 2004. Lawyers aren't nice people. You start to discover this the more you dissect their conceited personalities. More on these people in the up and coming book The Discreet Inquiry.
Dear Sirs,
I was interested in the above piece regarding lawyers. As an NHS Whistleblower, I have been represented by a number of lawyers. I have found that I have been forced to do a lot of background work for the case[s].
In 2004, I created my own legal bundles while I paid my lawyers in excess of £30,000. Despite being paid such high rates neither bought us lunch.
My barrister at the time did some minimal work and went away early Friday afternoon. Luckily we won in court so the minimal reading must have worked. We did though spend large quantities of time correcting his errors in the skeleton arguments before we faxed the document. Two of us sat in front of our computers puzzled as to how we were going to tell a QC that he had got it wrong. Nevertheless, the rapport with the judge worked and we won.
In a memorable case in the past, my lawyers went on holiday before the hearing. No one had read or prepared the documents. Again, the QC's Skeleton was full of errors which we then corrected. We listed the spelling errors by email to him. They were still not corrected days later. At the time, he had got his client's name wrong and called me Dr Patel. There were factual errors as well which we had to nit pick as well. This QC did not take well to corrections but neither did he familiarise himself with any of the legal material. In his view, overnight work would do the trick. It didn't of course.
Neither could find the papers in court so I had to do it for them. In court, when I warned them of what the opposition was going to do - they both gaffawed at me. When the opposition did do what I predicted they failed to apologise and continued to say how right they were. My barrister was instructed to argue a issue one way and his arrogance decided he would argue it his way. We lost the point. It was a simple point.
A loss in court did not matter to them because to them I was simply another client. I walked out of court that day mid hearing because I could not tolerate the arrogance of my legal team, the fact they were not listening and worst still, the fact they were losing. As I walked out of the door, I was hooked onto the coat hanger statue of Lord Woolf. I looked at the wired Lord Woolf and decided that the statue could have done better than my lawyers. I could have just taken him into court.
Following the above, even the judge made no less than 25 mistakes as he had not read the documents. Letter dates were wrong etc. Even the date on the order was wrong.
All parties gaffawed about the internet when they understood nothing about it at all. I was bemused that so many highly intelligent lawyers could get so many things wrong. I wondered what innocent men stuck in prisons do with this lax attitude to the law. I had never seen anything like it. I wasn't in prison of course but what a spectacular disaster. If only the public could see what happens in court rooms.
Apparently I discover that judicial mistakes cannot be corrected. Amazing! Now I have to live with the spelling mistakes, the fact that she is called a he and wrong letter dates etc.
I believe I am a reasonable person. I simply expect my legal team to defend me, I expect a judge to have read the documents and I don't expect a series of mistakes. I was shocked and it took me a while to recover.
As a doctor, if I had made as many errors, I would be struck off.
I of course know that there is no accountability in the legal profession and it is essentially pointless making a complaint about anyone.
I must say that I am disappointed by the legal profession. I should not be unfair and say all lawyers are terrible - they aren't. Most are of the view that they are better than us mortals. I can read a law book, try and understand case law etc. Can they read a medical book? Three lawyers failed to define what a speciality doctor was called.
There doesn't appear to be any pride in ones work.
My advice - never get involved with the legal profession. It should have a health warning stuck on it. If there is a good lawyer, it is often like searching for a needle in the haystack. On a plus point, the RCJ does have rather dapper and dashing barristers. At £450 plus VAT, there has to be some talent.
Copyright and ownership of this post Dr Rita Pal not Doctors4Justice.net
0 comments:
Post a Comment