Solicitors

who what when

Harleigh Substantial License wrote: »

Bile, I'd hate to have a belly full of it like you appear to have.

There are plenty of solicitors using this forum, why can't you just have a little cop-on and respect and not tar them all with the same brush.

Luckily enough I've had little dealings with solicitors, but of the times I have had only one has let me down.

Very recently I got completely free advice from someone here on boards for a friend of mine. Saved my friend a wad of money and helped him keep a completely clean career personal file.. And this was from someone I've never met, probably will never meet - thank you.

Annon people posting hatred from the comfort and safety of a username which mean's feck all to anyone really are pretty pathetic, you belittle yourself when you do it.

Boards is a disussion forum where people are enouraged to discuss their opinions and life experiences in an anonymous manner. Do you expect me to give my name and phone number whenever i say something negative?

Unlike you i deal with solicitors on an almost daily basis and they are exactly as i described. If you dont like it too bad!

FreudianSlippers

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

Barristers eat babies

With caviar on top they're amazing.

duracell_bunny

There's good and bad in both professions. I've worked for both Solicitors and Barristers.

Two of the three barristers I've worked for (one of whom would be up there with the best in the country) are as straight as they come. I'd trust them both completely. The other is just sh*t at his job. If they are any good, they can make a really good case for both sides of any argument. They study previous case law to convince the court that their side of the argument is more valid than the other sides.

Solicitors have far more opportunity to be dodgy. Out of the seven solicitors I've worked for, two were outstanding and if I ever needed the services of a solicitor I'd call them without hesitation. Of the others, most were just incompetent or sloppy/lazy or (in the case of junior ones) just so ridiculously overworked so that a good few mistakes happened due to the sheer volume of work they were pushing through. Only one was crooked and he is about as crooked as they come - forging wills, forging client's signatures on mortgages/deeds of transfer etc, pocketing stamp duty and then paying it when rates for that category had dropped etc.

FreudianSlippers

prinz wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I was being tongue in cheek with my first comment. Neither is more deserving of abuse, but as the barrister is often the more public face, especially in high profile cases, (not to mention the releasing of earnings by barristers at the tribunals etc.) it's not suprising that they would come in for a lot more stick than solicitors.

You can't really compare barristers that do tribunal work with regular barristers.

ScumLord

bonerm wrote: »

This isn't solicitors fault. People are instinctively hardwired to be like this from the day they're born to the day they die. Even the ones who say they aren't are just lying to themselves (almost without exception). Solicitors , developers and bankers etc are just taking advantage of personal greed and self-obsession.

I don't think it's fair to assume every one would step over their mothers to make a quick buck, it's just simply not the case in most dealings, my parents have been in the process of separating for over 15 years! And both sides would have agreed it's because of the solicitors dragging it out and being unable to come to a conclusion instead wanting complete victory over he opponent.
Both my parents had moved on in their life, had met other people and where living better life's but the solicitors saw to it that they could never speak to each other again.

I'm not as such calling out the individuals that are in the law profession as scum. I'm saying the system they operate gives them no option but to act in the wrong matter and their goals are not in the best interest of the client.

My parents example is what's wrong with the profession their goal wasn't to solve the argument, it was to win as much money as they could or defend as much money as they could. On paper that seems logical but in real life it's no good to anyone.

Once they become involved it's a battle where someone wins and someone loses, it's not about resolution or fairness is crude survival of the fittest, it's not at all civilised no matter how much gloss they rap it up in.

drkpower

ScumLord wrote: »

Both my parents had moved on in their life, had met other people and where living better life's but the solicitors saw to it that they could never speak to each other again.

What a load of tosh:D.

If your parents wanted it ended, they could simply tell their solicitors to end it, or sack their solicitors and deal with each other like adults. They chose to instruct solicitors; they chose to allow the thing to go on for 15 years.

It sounds like your darling parents are blaming someone else for the continuation of their squabbling. Sounds like they are people who dont like taking responsibility for their own actions.

Wolfe Tone

OisinT: The evil Barrister. :pac:


Ah they are not that bad. Sure I want to become one myself. There are good and bad in every profession.

FreudianSlippers

I am evil

ScumLord

drkpower wrote: »

What a load of tosh:D.

If your parents wanted it ended, they could simply tell their solicitors to end it, or sack their solicitors and deal with each other like adults. They chose to instruct solicitors; they chose to allow the thing to go on for 15 years.

It sounds like your darling parents are blaming someone else for the continuation of their squabbling. Sounds like they are people who dont like taking responsibility for their own actions.

Can you get separated in this country without a solicitor? This also happened 15 years ago when separations weren't tolerated by local community's which added another dimension to it. They had deals done out but solicitors made advice, it's hard for a person to want one thing but be told they'd be a fool not to do something else.

My parents obviously split for a reason so weren't on the best of terms at all. But they lived in different countries after they separated. The only thing dragging it out in the end was solicitors actions and demands.

kowloon

The thing that really annoys me, more than it should, is the stupid dress code, what exactly is the point of it all?

Lumen

Barristers are hot.

I think it's the horsehair that does it.

ejmaztec

ScumLord wrote: »

Can you get separated in this country without a solicitor? This also happened 15 years ago when separations weren't tolerated by local community's which added another dimension to it. They had deals done out but solicitors made advice, it's hard for a person to want one thing but be told they'd be a fool not to do something else.

My parents obviously split for a reason so weren't on the best of terms at all. But they lived in different countries after they separated. The only thing dragging it out in the end was solicitors actions and demands.

It's always in the best interests of a solicitor that a case is dragged out for as long as possible. What can start of quite civilised, turns into mayhem, mainly due to each solicitor inciting their clients to go for the throat. After about 50 items of correspondence down the line, people start fighting for custody of a biscuit tin that someone gave as a wedding gift years before.

drkpower

ScumLord wrote:

Can you get separated in this country without a solicitor? .

Yes. But more importantly, 2 adults can agree to anything they want to and then tell their solicitors to piss off. Its not the solicitors fault that, when told by their solicitors what they could 'get' (thats called 'legal advice'), your parents decided to fight to try and get more than other rather than sitting down like adults and resolving the problem.

ScumLord wrote:

My parents obviously split for a reason so weren't on the best of terms at all. But they lived in different countries after they separated. The only thing dragging it out in the end was solicitors actions and demands. .

If your parents demanded it end, it would have ended. But its a lot easier to blame someone else for your problems.

ejmaztec wrote: »

It's always in the best interests of a solicitor that a case is dragged out for as long as possible.

Only if hourly rates are being charged. If a fixed fee is agreed in advance (which is more and more the norm, and rightly so), a solicitor loses money the more a case drags.

latenia

I saw some of my best friends enter Blackhall Place and emerge as the most venal, smarmy, self-righteous, dishonest shower of cúnts you could imagine.

Dubh Geannain

An engineer died and reported to the pearly gates. An newly annointed angel, filling in for St. Peter, checked his dossier and grimly said, "Ah, you're an engineer; you're in the wrong place."

So the engineer was cast down to the gates of hell and was let in. Pretty soon, the engineer became gravely dissatisfied with the level of comfort in hell, and began designing and building improvements. After a while, the underworld had air conditioning, flush toilets, and escalators, and the engineer was becoming a pretty popular guy among the demons.

One day, God called Satan up on the telephone and asked with a sneer, "So, how's it going down there in hell?"

Satan laughed and replied, "Hey, things are going great. We've got air conditioning and flush toilets and escalators, and there's no telling what this engineer is going to come up with next."

God's face clouded over and he exploded, "What? You've got an engineer? That's a mistake; he should never have gotten down there; send him up here."

Satan shook his head, "No way. I like having an engineer on the staff, and I'm keeping him."

God was as mad as he had ever been, "This is not the way things are supposed to work and you know it. Send him back up here or I'll sue."

Satan laughed uproariously, "Yeah, right. And just where are YOU going to get a lawyer?"

:cool:

prinz

latenia wrote: »

I saw some of my best friends enter Blackhall Place and emerge as the most venal, smarmy, self-righteous, dishonest shower of cúnts you could imagine.

Really? I thought they were entry requirements... :pac:

ejmaztec

drkpower wrote: »

Only if hourly rates are being charged. If a fixed fee is agreed in advance (which is more and more the norm, and rightly so), a solicitor loses money the more a case drags.

Until they come up with the "extras" that were mentioned in the small print as being excluded from the quote.

latenia

prinz wrote: »

Really? I thought they were entry requirements... :pac:

Well, maybe the rot set in at TCD Law School...

drkpower

ejmaztec wrote: »

Until they come up with the "extras" that were mentioned in the small print as being excluded from the quote.

Then read the fcukin small print and tell them you are not accepting it. FFS, why cant people grow a pair and speak up for yourself rather than play the victim constantly. No wonder the country is in a shambles when its made up of such a bunch of pussies.

thebaz

agree 100 % , the legal profession is populated mainly by a small group of blackrock/gonzaga educated elitists , where no one can question there authority - just look at the fiasco of the tribunals - they have been going on for over 10 years , and what they have given us i dont know, they can't even confirm that certain politicians , who every dog in the street know is corrupt is actually so ... the one thing they do know how to do, is charge excessively for their so called expertise ... not forgetting that arrogant manner t

p.s. not all legal types are so, but a trip to the law library is quite revealing, if you can get in , that is

Kalimah

Heard this one a while back

What do you call 100 solicitors at the bottom of the sea?

A start!

Lumen

thebaz wrote: »

agree 100 % , the legal profession is populated mainly by a small group of blackrock/gonzaga educated elitists , where no one can question there authority - just look at the fiasco of the tribunals - they have been going on for over 10 years , and what they have given us i dont know, they can't even confirm that certain politicians , who every dog in the street know is corrupt is actually so ... the one thing they do know how to do, is charge excessively for their so called expertise ... not forgetting that arrogant manner t

p.s. not all legal types are so, but a trip to the law library is quite revealing, if you can get in , that is

"Mainly"? Using the example of the tribunals? That's hardly representative of the entire legal profession.

There is a degree to which the trade attracts rich kids. Much of this is down to it being incredibly expensive to get into - training to become a barrister is just about the worst possible investment decision you could make. Fast track to poverty more like.

prinz

Lumen wrote: »

There is a degree to which the trade attracts rich kids. Much of this is down to it being incredibly expensive to get into - training to become a barrister is just about the worst possible investment decision you could make. Fast track to poverty more like.

It's badly in need of an overhaul. Along with some of the other professions.

thebaz

Lumen wrote: »

"Mainly"? Using the example of the tribunals? That's hardly representative of the entire legal profession.

sorry , probably not clear , i was using the tribunals as an example of ineffectivness and greed - the "mainly" referred to the privilleged education

ejmaztec

drkpower wrote: »

Then read the fcukin small print and tell them you are not accepting it. FFS, why cant people grow a pair and speak up for yourself rather than play the victim constantly. No wonder the country is in a shambles when its made up of such a bunch of pussies.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who believe that a lawyer is as honest as the day is long, and wouldn't possibly stitch them up. It will probably mean that you have to hire one lawyer to handle your particular case, and another lawyer in a separate jurisdiction to examine the first lawyer's small print.:P

Wolfe Tone

OisinT wrote: »

I am evil

All that deviling.... mastering... midnight masses, sacrificing goats, all those strange "dinners" where everyone has to wear robes....

EVIL!!

ballsymchugh

Harleigh Substantial License wrote: »

Bile, I'd hate to have a belly full of it like you appear to have.

There are plenty of solicitors using this forum, why can't you just have a little cop-on and respect and not tar them all with the same brush.

Luckily enough I've had little dealings with solicitors, but of the times I have had only one has let me down.

Very recently I got completely free advice from someone here on boards for a friend of mine. Saved my friend a wad of money and helped him keep a completely clean career personal file.. And this was from someone I've never met, probably will never meet - thank you.

Annon people posting hatred from the comfort and safety of a username which mean's feck all to anyone really are pretty pathetic, you belittle yourself when you do it.

oh ffs, nearly every profession gets a pasting on boards. the thread 'Gardai - do you respect them' being case and point. just because you've had a good history with solicitors, doesn't make them universally appealing. there's nothing belittling about talking about a bad experience with certain members of a certain profession, be it in the pub or on an internet forum, as long as it doesn't get libelous though, we don't want boards to be getting solicitors letter

johnnyskeleton

prinz wrote: »

How are you doing my learned friend in the silk? :pac:. No offence but I dislike people arguing black is white one day, white is black the next depending on who is stumping up the cash. Too much room for spin in my opinion. Added to that an almost homogenous arrogance when putting questions to witnesses.

Should note that I'm approaching this tongue in cheek. Both solicitors and barristers can do a tip top job.

So to summarise:
1. I hate them because they will argue one thing one day and the opposite the next.

2. (in the same post). I'm only joking, I actually quite like them.

Nice. Are you a solicitor or a barrister?

johnnyskeleton

k_mac wrote: »

Just so we're clear, I am agreeing with the statement that the system needs restructuring. As it stands, imo barristers are too far seperated from their clients and the people they represent. I was at a serious trial recently where this really struck me. The defence tore strips off the victim in the stand and the prosecuting barrister did nothing, even in his redirect. If he had had any knowledge of the case or the victim he would have easily been able to spin it back. I could have done it myself. But he could barely even remember the victims name. It is not the only time I've seen this kind of thing either.

As to the independent monitoring, I have had a few personal experiences with solicitors where the law society showed little to no interest in getting involved. I would look at it in the same way as the Garda complaints office was looked at. There is just too much potential for corruption on cronyism.

Well tell the DPP to give more work to the Defence counsel then.