traffic offense solicitor

cantdecide

I'll start by saying I'm blissfully ignorant of the law and what is considered 'normal' practise.

I ran into some license/ insurance problems while driving my motorbike earlier in the year. Bike licenses are complicated and realistically, a majority of bikers have abused the <incomplete> licensing laws, historically. I was no exception. I got my summons in recent months. Stuck my head in the sand until today but the court date is for about a months time.

On the day, I was with a friend, another biker, whose situation is similar to mine, if not worse. He went to a well known local solicitor that was recommended. I tried to follow suit.

I rang the solicitors office and explained that I needed to see a solicitor and a particular solicitor had been recommended. The secretary put me through to a colleague of the recommended solicitor. It was immediately clear that the solicitor I spoke to had just a very rudimentary knowledge of bike license specifics.

I have arranged to meet him but after a couple of minutes of brief background, I came away more worried than before. My friend, however, who theoretically should have been worse off, came away having been very much reassured by his colleague that their is no end of procedure the garda hasn't followed and that in all probability, the case will be thrown out.

The question, having played a bit of solicitor Russian Roulette, how can I be sure I have someone who will do their best for me? Is it too late to ring and ask specifically for his colleague too?

Maybe someone can recommend a solicitor that specializes in traffic offenses?

detective

cantdecide wrote: »

came away having been very much reassured by his colleague that their is no end of procedure the garda hasn't followed and that in all probability, the case will be thrown out.

Can you explain what you mean here I'm confused? End of procedure?

Solicitors are like every other profession. If you got tired of a mechanic, butcher or milkman what would you do? You'd change him right? You have all the right in the world to do this here too. You will probably have to pay for the initial consultation though.

Just because your friends solicitor pleased your friend this doesn't mean he's a better solicitor. If you wait until the court day this solicitor might turn out to be useless. Maybe he's feeding your friend BS? Whereas your solicitor might review the legislation and turn out to be a dinger.

Generally though with licence and insurance charges its very difficult for your solicitor to get you off, they're very much slam dunk cases for Guards with the burden of proof on the defendant to show he was licensed and insured.

McCrack

Exactly it would be hard for anybody here to say you got dodgy advice. We would need to know the detail to give any opinion and obviously you can't spill all that here.

I suppose you just need to trust your solicitor, they are the person that is legally trained. If your gut is telling you it's not right well then go speak to another solicitor in a different firm for a second opinion. Most firms don't deal with traffic law but the firms around Smithfield/Four Courts/Mary's Abbey are your best bet,I'm not going to name firms here but you can PM me if you wish.

nuac

Contact a solicitor who practises in the court for which you are summonsed.

Most solicitors would not go around claiming to be experts on the licenses required for motor-bikes.

A solicitor would check out the Acts and Regulations referred to in the summons, and have or prepare a check list of what the state has to prove.

johnnyskeleton

It seems strange to me that two solicitors from the same firm would appear in different cases in the same court on the same day without there being a conflict of interest.

Ring the firm back and ask for the solicitor that you want. Odds are that he will be in court for your friend anyway.

McCrack

I can't see how there possibly could be. They are two seperate clients and are not against each other.

Amazotheamazing

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It seems strange to me that two solicitors from the same firm would appear in different cases in the same court on the same day without there being a conflict of interest.

Ring the firm back and ask for the solicitor that you want. Odds are that he will be in court for your friend anyway.

Why would there be a conflict of interest? Completely separate matters from what I can see?

johnnyskeleton

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Why would there be a conflict of interest? Completely separate matters from what I can see?

A conflict of interest is the only reason I can see for why such an occurence would happen.

cantdecide

detective wrote: »

Generally though with licence and insurance charges its very difficult for your solicitor to get you off, they're very much slam dunk cases for Guards with the burden of proof on the defendant to show he was licensed and insured.

detective wrote: »

Can you explain what you mean here I'm confused? End of procedure?

I mean my mate was told that the Garda hadn't followed half the procedure he was meant to and that the guard's case will be so shabby, there's a good chance it will be thrown out for lack of evidence.

Specifically, that the bike wasn't tested to confirm it was too powerful for our licenses and that that they hadn't been mechanically restricted to make them conform to our license rules. The law, AFAIK, doesn't require a "certificate of restriction" that the bike had been restricted, it just required that they be restricted to 33bhp if you're on a provisional or recently passed the bike driving test.

In a nutshell, I was driving a bike that might have been too powerful for my license.

The guard is assuming we were uninsured because of the license issue but I'm not 100% sure.

The insurance premium is the same whether the bike was full power or whether it was "restricted". At one stage, an insurance company told me that there is no discount for having your bike "restricted" to 33bhp. He said that because the kit is so easy to tamper with/ remove, the bike is insured as if it was full power (hence no discount) and that "how you make yourself legal is between you and the law".

This is where the battle will be won and lost for both myself and my mate, IMO.

In my case, my insurance documents show that I passed my test recently enough that I had license restrictions and that the bike was not modified from the manufacturers specs, ie full power.

McCrack wrote: »

Exactly it would be hard for anybody here to say you got dodgy advice. We would need to know the detail to give any opinion and obviously you can't spill all that here.

The solicitor seemed happy after the phone call that I was uninsured and that it was a bunch of points/ fine for it. End of.

I thought there was a more appropriate charge along the lines "driving without the correct license for the vehicle". How can I find out??

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

A conflict of interest is the only reason I can see for why such an occurence would happen.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It seems strange to me that two solicitors from the same firm would appear in different cases in the same court on the same day without there being a conflict of interest.

Different days, about three weeks apart. Similar cases/ charges but different circumstances.

FreudianSlippers

It's your choice to see another solicitor if you are not happy with the one you already have. We cannot tell you whether or not the advice will be the same or different, that's just a risk you're going to have to take.
If we were to say to you "yeah this solicitor is wrong" (which we're not) and you go get a new one who says the exact same thing then we're opening ourselves to problems.

Plus it'd be in breach of the charter

Jo King

There are a number of threads regarding the issue of breaches of conditions invalidating policies of insurance and thus resulting in an offence being committed. It requires an up to speed solicitor to advise properly on it. Cases are being and have been successfully defended but each turns on its own facts.