Legal "opinion" needed

Wile E. Coyote · 22-04-2011 2:08pm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You can't seek advice on this forum.

Good god. If you can't ask for opinion on the 'LEGAL DISCUSSION' forum where can you ask for it? There are plenty of people here who will happily share their knowledge with anyone who asks. It's then up to the OP whether he takes on that advice or not. 90% of the threads in here are from people asking advice, if your not allowed give it then the forum should be removed.

Het-Field · 22-04-2011 2:10pm

bassist needed wrote: »

I wasn't being a smartarse... at least not intentionally, I was basically winking at the fact that a lot of people are giving me "advice" and calling it opinion.

I really did appreciate your opinion, but it's hard to say, without looking a little silly, "go to FLAC" is an opinion. That's straight up advice... So I was winking at the little semantic quirk this forum has.

Sorry if it came across as being a smart arse. Genuinely.

And that's a fact.

I dont think a suggestion of "go see a solicitor" could be construed as a "legal advice". It is almost a natural action taken by somebody who wishes to assert legal rights, and in the light of you monetary circumstances, it is part of that action to direct you towards FLAC.

At no point have Kayroo, JS, or myself commented on the details of your case, requested details of same, evaluated the case, or informed you of any legal rights that you may, or may not have.

Het-Field · 22-04-2011 2:10pm

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

Good god. If you can't ask for opinion on the 'LEGAL DISCUSSION' forum where can you ask for it? There are plenty of people here who will happily share their knowledge with anyone who asks. It's then up to the OP whether he takes on that advice or not. 90% of the threads in here are from people asking advice, if your not allowed give it then the forum should be removed.

A solicitor ?

There are other non-contentious matters which require dicussion. These include law-reform, the provision of case-law to those requesting it, questions regarding the academic study of law, and possible progression after undergraduate level and examination discussion.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Legal advice is almost always opinion. It's not a semantic quirk at all.

This is MY point. Making us say the word "opinion" and not the word "advice" is purely semantic. In the legal sense they're essentially identical.

From the stickied thing:

***W-A-R-N-I-N-G***: Do Not Seek Legal Advice **Posts will be snipped/deleted (Read!)
Less than a week has gone by since the inception of this forum, and I've had to snip a number of posts and PM some users. Now, it's early days yet so I don't mind at all, but I thought it might be handy to give a few examples of what sort of posts will be deleted and what sort won't. Basically, hypotheticals are ok, real-life cases are not. REMEMBER, OPINION IS ALL THAT CAN BE SOUGHT/OFFERED!!!

In brief, do NOT seek ADVICE, Seek OPINION.

Now to quote you:

Legal advice is almost always opinion.

To put it all together:

The two words in your (and my) opinion are essentially interchangeable. Making me use one, essentially arbitrarily, is a quirky thing that's not based on the true meaning of he words in question.

I found that a bit funny, so I winked at it, playfully.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:24pm

Het-Field wrote: »

I dont think a suggestion of "go see a solicitor" could be construed as a "legal advice". It is almost a natural action taken by somebody who wishes to assert legal rights, and in the light of you monetary circumstances, it is part of that action to direct you towards FLAC.

At no point have Kayroo, JS, or myself commented on the details of your case, requested details of same, evaluated the case, or informed you of any legal rights that you may, or may not have.

I would actually say that IS legal advice.

I wouldn't actually know if seeing a solicitor is a good or necessary step. And I was advised to represent myself.

Two separate opinions, but both advice about something legal.

NOW, if we're gonna be anal, I believe "formal legal advice" is actually the issue.. I would not ask for "formal legal advice" on a public forum, and I think it should be obvious to everyone on this forum why... but casual advice from people with knowledge, to help me inform myself, that shouldn't be an issue...

People advise each other on every other forum, informally... and no one seems to think that's an issue... I think this forum could be the same.. simply say in the sticky, NO ADVICE GIVEN ON THIS FORUM SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS FORMAL LEGAL ADVISE. ANY POSTER ASKING FOR FORMAL LEGAL ADVICE WILL BE WARNED. FURTHER ATTEMPTS BY THAT SAME MEMBER TO OBTAIN FORMAL LEGAL ADVICE WILL RESULT IN THE POSTER BEING PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM THIS FORUM.

Or something like that.

22-04-2011 2:24pm

bassist needed wrote: »

To put it all together:

The two words in your (and my) opinion are essentially interchangeable. Making me use one, essentially arbitrary, is a quirky thing that's not based on the true meaning of he words in question.

I found that a bit funny, so I winked at it, playfully.

OK, let me put you straight because you are woefully incorrect.

The forum charter allows opinions on hypotheticals. These can only ever be opinions in the plain meaning of the word as one cannot advise in that situation as there is no party to advise.

In real life when one seeks advices those advices come in the form of an opinion. This is a specific form of advice where, based on the facts and the law the legal professional gives first his opinion on the merits of the case and then his recommended course of action under those circumstances, otherwise known as advice.

As legal professionals can be legally liable for their advices it would be ridiculous to expect them to be given freely over the internet, just as one would think the same of a doctor giving medical advice over the internet. The only piece of genuine advice you will ever get is "go to see a solicitor".

However, when people comment on the basic legal principles or underlying legal arguments within any situation those are opinions and should never be relied upon as statements of the law or of fact.

In short:

1. Opinion is based on an interpretation of law and fact.
2. Advice is a recommended course of action based on the opinion.

While this forum can offer the former it should never offer the latter. Do you get me now?

Wile E. Coyote · 22-04-2011 2:28pm

Het-Field wrote: »

A solicitor ?

And is that your answer to everyone in here looking for an opinion? If it is and you have nothing else to add to the OP then why not stay out of the thread and let the mods (which you and the others who are telling the OP that he can't post here, are not) decide whether to allow the thread continue? The OP has already stated he is asking for 'opinions' which are allowed in this forum.

*Sorry for hijacking the thread OP. Just hate back seat modding*

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

OK, let me put you straight because you are woefully incorrect.

The forum charter allows opinions on hypotheticals. These can only ever be opinions in the plain meaning of the word as one cannot advise in that situation as there is no party to advise.

In real life when one seeks advices those advices come in the form of an opinion. This is a specific form of advice where, based on the facts and the law the legal professional gives first his opinion on the merits of the case and then his recommended course of action under those circumstances, otherwise known as advice.

As legal professionals can be legally liable for their advices it would be ridiculous to expect them to be given freely over the internet, just as one would think the same of a doctor giving medical advice over the internet. The only piece of genuine advice you will ever get is "go to see a solicitor".

However, when people comment on the basic legal principles or underlying legal arguments within any situation those are opinions and should never be relied upon as statements of the law or of fact.

In short:

1. Opinion is based on an interpretation of law and fact.
2. Advice is a recommended course of action based on the opinion.

While this forum can offer the former it should never offer the latter. Do you get me now?

I understand you, yes, and I can see why you'd say that.

What I would say though is this: in this thread alone three people have not understood this delineation, between the two definitions. Mos people would simply see any opinion given on what actions to pursue as "advice". Telling me to see a solicitor is advising me that I may have reason to see a solicitor...

If I came on here with something wildly trivial and you advised me to see a solicitor, what's to stop me from saying, based on your definitions, "that you advised me to see a solicitor, unnecessarily"?

In other words, even that default advice leaves you open to complaint.

I don't want to argue this, but as I've been told many times, "if I don't understand your position it's because you didn't explain it clearly".

This thread demonstrates that even people that enter into this in good faith do not clearly understand the rules.

So either, be less aggressive about the implementation of the rules, or explain them more clearly in the sticky.

22-04-2011 2:36pm

bassist needed wrote: »

I would actually say that IS legal advice.

It's not.
If somebody tells you to see a solicitor they have given no legal advice. They have not told you of any possible legal rights that you might have or how to assert them. They have not told you what course of action to take in pursuance of any legal right. Telling somebody to see a solicitor is telling them to go get legal advice, not giving it.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:41pm

234 wrote: »

It's not.
If somebody tells you to see a solicitor they have given no legal advice. They have not told you of any possible legal rights that you might have or how to assert them. They have not told you what course of action to take in pursuance of any legal right. Telling somebody to see a solicitor is telling them to go get legal advice, not giving it.

That sounds like a legal opinion to me.

So if I went to my family solicitor and told him I'd murdered someone, and he said, "as your solicitor I'd advise you to seek good defence council," that wouldn't be legal advice?

22-04-2011 2:42pm

bassist needed wrote: »

I don't want to argue this, but as I've been told many times, "if I don't understand your position it's because you didn't explain it clearly".

There is a serious logical fallacy at play here.

Your inability to understand is not always predicated on my inability to explain.

In all seriousness though the only piece of advice that anyone could give in this thread is see a solicitor because there are so many facts at issue. Anything else would be very bad advice.

Opinions are restricted to discussions of the law and there really is no law to discuss here without an excruciating amount of detail. If you'd started a thread about disputing contractual obligations where the contracting party admit to their agent acting improperly then you would have had a legal discussion which is, shock horror, the point of this forum. It's not legal advice, it's legal discussion.

22-04-2011 2:44pm

bassist needed wrote: »

That sounds like a legal opinion to me.

Luckily you are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion it's just a fact. What 231 refers to is not a legal opinion, it's a piece of friendly guidance. Legal opinion has a specific meaning.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:49pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Luckily you are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion it's just a fact. What 231 refers to is not a legal opinion, it's a piece of friendly guidance. Legal opinion has a specific meaning.

"legal opinion" as defined here:

1. Opinion is based on an interpretation of law and fact.

--

At any rate... it's a silly discussion... like I said, three people on the same thread didn't understand the sticky; you can either assume we're all illiterate idiots or you can see if there's a way to make it clear to more people.

I don't care.

Just stating my non-legal opinion.

22-04-2011 2:53pm

That's not my job. I was just trying to explain it to you. I wasn't implying you were incapable of understanding what I meant. Perhaps there is an issue with explaining the vagaries and subtle distinctions in these matters and you could well have highlighted an issue but, regardless, you cannot just state that something is X when people who, quite clearly, know better say it is Y.

Regardless, and far more on the fundamental point, I hope you do heed the one genuine piece of advice here (non-legal obv) and speak to a solicitor. If the tapes you have say what you suggest then it's worth speaking to them depending on the amounts of money that are involved. FLAC is a good place to start. I hope it all works out.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 2:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not my job. I was just trying to explain it to you. I wasn't implying you were incapable of understanding what I meant. Perhaps there is an issue with explaining the vagaries and subtle distinctions in these matters and you could well have highlighted an issue but, regardless, you cannot just state that something is X when people who, quite clearly, know better say it is Y.

Regardless, and far more on the fundamental point, I hope you do heed the one genuine piece of advice here (non-legal obv) and speak to a solicitor. If the tapes you have say what you suggest then it's worth speaking to them depending on the amounts of money that are involved. FLAC is a good place to start. I hope it all works out.

Thanks for the non-legal advice.

22-04-2011 3:22pm

bassist needed wrote: »

Thanks for the non-legal advice.

If somebody is giving you a helpful pointer in the direction of FLAC then it might just pay not to wind them up. If you treated a solicitor like this it wouldn't be tolerated.

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 3:29pm

234 wrote: »

If somebody is giving you a helpful pointer in the direction of FLAC then it might just pay not to wind them up. If you treated a solicitor like this it wouldn't be tolerated.

[rolls eyes]

22-04-2011 3:40pm

bassist needed wrote: »

[rolls eyes]

[kicks out of office]

bassist needed · 22-04-2011 3:42pm

234 wrote: »

[kicks out of office]

[reminds you that you're not in an office, you're on the internet]

22-04-2011 3:54pm

Maybe we should nip this in the bud now before it's locked?

Het-Field · 22-04-2011 4:33pm

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

And is that your answer to everyone in here looking for an opinion? If it is and you have nothing else to add to the OP then why not stay out of the thread and let the mods (which you and the others who are telling the OP that he can't post here, are not) decide whether to allow the thread continue? The OP has already stated he is asking for 'opinions' which are allowed in this forum.

*Sorry for hijacking the thread OP. Just hate back seat modding*

Hate back seat modding all you like. There are ethical implications at play. I suggest you consult the codes of both elements of the legal profession. Those on the "legal discussion" forum, who are best placed to provide the necessary information to the OP are bound by the same codes.

We have never said that he is not entitled to post here. We have stated that he is not entitled to "opinion" or "advice" on what appears to be a contentious legal matter. "Opinions" are fine, but the OP clearly has a matter which is contentious. It is not a hypothetical scenario, on which an opinion can be given.

It is also better for the OP to consult a legal profession, be it through FLAC, or in a private capacity. Legal matters are not capable of being fully articulated on a website, and this can cause a host of problems.

Legal "opinion" needed

Comments