Legal "opinion" needed

bassist needed

Ok, thanks in advance for any advice... I'm asking these questions out of ignorance, so please forgive anything grossly stupid.

Also, like many folks desperate enough to publicly ask for legal advice on a public forum, I'm a bit upset... I'll try and reign that in though.. just the facts, etc.

--

Here's the issue:

I was scammed by a utility in December. The utility admits this. Including the use of the word, scam.

I discovered the scam, they claimed "rogue employee" (though they also said multiple employees were running the same scam and it affected many customers), and they agreed to put my account back the way it was before the scam. To undo what their rogue employee did, essentially.

Unbeknownst to me at this point, the company also "accidentally" stopped my direct debit.

I was alerted to all of this by a threatening letter (credit ruined, go to court) stating I owed them 1200 euro (aprox).

To resolve all of this mess, I had to switch my account around and this took about a month, due to something out of my control (a whole other story).

I was told that I could (again I have this recorded)get back on my old plan and simply roll the accidentally unpaid amount into my bill, which seemed... vaguely ok... my bill was going up due to their mistake, but I did owe them the money...

In the to-ing and fro-ing involved in that, I was repeatedly threatened with legal action. I was also told to only talk to one person in the company. That person absolutely refused to return calls. I left aprox 12-15 messages for him without a single returned call.

Eventually, I went back up the chain of command and demanded another employee to deal with, to resolve the case. I was harassed for this, even after explaining why... that I couldn't resolve a case if the POC was refusing to discuss matter with me.

(In fact this is a common issue - I have been promised at least two dozen times that I will receive phone calls and have received maybe 3-4.)

On top of this, I call ed the regulator, who told me they'd received MANY complaints about the business related to this AND that the plan the company was promising to RETURN me to was legal unavailable. In other words, my original plan was ALSO a scam, according to the regulator, and they could NOT legally offer it to me, something I have recording of them doing dozens of time.

Finally, at the end of all of this, I got both my gas and electric away from the company, after probably 45 phone calls, dozens of lies from the company, at least a dozen threatening letters etc.

In the last conversation I had with them, re: switching back, I called them on the legality of their offer... and they claimed, SUDDENLY, that they had NEVER offered to switch me back. Again, I have the recordings to prove otherwise. They said in fact that they couldn't offer me their original plan (the whole reason I spent a month trying to sort out switching my accounts around, at their direction), but could offer me a similarly named plan, with different term and a different rate.

I said no.

So then came the final bill.

They claimed to be able to reverse charge me on the original (now illegal) plan for the months they didn't take money from my account. And they claimed to be able to provide me a bill with no mention of the new rate, the scam rate.

I said to them, and again I have recording of this, "I agree that I owe you money, but before I pay ANY bill I will need to take advice on the bill, from my family, who know a thing or two about this kind of thing, because I do NOT trust you to give me an accurate bill."

Their response?

"Take your time; if it's ok, call me back and we can arrange a payment plan."

Grand thought I.

The bill was promised within 24 hours... it took four days.

When I got it it incuded charges for the second "scam" rate, clearly labelled as charges for the plan they said they wouldn't charge me on.

At this point my head exploded and I decided to tlk to my father in law and my brother in law.

I gave them both copies of the bill and waited to find a good time to discuss it with them.

It took about a month.

Before that month was over though I got a bill through my door. A bill I was promised they would not issue.

I called them and logged a formal complaint. They claimed all attempts to get the money off me would stop until the complaint was resolved.

Today I got a letter from a solicitor threatening to take me to court for not paying my bill, "on time" (no date was agreed) and a 70e late fee. I called them, btw., they promised someone would call me back... after asking a bunch of uncomfortable questions, which were usually answered with, "you didn't pay your bill on time" or "that letter was automatic, don't worry about it..." (tell that to the solicitors who sent it)... I said basically look, this is why I need a supervisor to call me (was promised two weeks ago.. no call received...still)... she said, "look I'm trying to help you".. I said, "you're obviously not trying to help me". She hung up on me. I've been hung up on MULTIPLE times by their staff.

Oh and.. AND... they cancelled one of my formal complaints because my mobile was broken.. It was not and I can also prove that (I have bills showing outgoing calls and can get my carrier to say that voicemail was active).

I have watch my wife cry about this bill multiple times (we're not rich, we're still paying our monthly bill and now we have to pay extra to this utility because they stopped debiting us, because they changed our account, because their employee scammed us).

I have spent MANY hours trying to resolve this, many stressful aggravating hours. In fact they have ruined several of may days due to the lost time and stress.

I genuinely have NO idea how much money I owe them, I think I may end up in court, I'm poor with no resources for a solicitor and I feel like I'm basically screwed.



Anyone have any advice??

As you can see I'm desperate.

Thanks in advance!

BTW: This is sooo long and convoluted I may have left something out or confused something, if anyone has any questions, just ask and I'll try and fill in gaps or clarify.

johnnyskeleton

bassist needed wrote: »

I genuinely have NO idea how much money I owe them, I think I may end up in court, I'm poor with no resources for a solicitor and I feel like I'm basically screwed.

Anyone have any advice??

You can't seek advice on this forum. If you are unemployed or on a very low wage you can contact your local Free Legal Advice Centre. You could also try the Legal Aid Board but they are unlikely to help you.

If you are working then you should be able to pay a solicitor. If you win your case you may be able to get the fees you pay to the solicitor back from the other side.

bassist needed

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You can't seek advice on this forum. If you are unemployed or on a very low wage you can contact your local Free Legal Advice Centre. You could also try the Legal Aid Board but they are unlikely to help you.

If you are working then you should be able to pay a solicitor. If you win your case you may be able to get the fees you pay to the solicitor back from the other side.

Sorry, do you have an opinions on my situation?

I checked FLAC, but they, specialise in "family, immigration and employment law".

And I am unemployed (well, I'm a professional musician), but my wife works full-time.

mari2222

go to court. represent yourself if you dont have free legal aid. tell the judge the full facts. explain the distress etc. explain the costs you incurred trying to resolve it. the judge will see both sides and solve it sensibly.
write down each fact one by one. your story is confusing at present.
just put one point in each sentence, so it is very clear.

bassist needed

mari2222 wrote: »

go to court. represent yourself if you dont have free legal aid. tell the judge the full facts. explain the distress etc. explain the costs you incurred trying to resolve it. the judge will see both sides and solve it sensibly.
write down each fact one by one. your story is confusing at present.
just put one point in each sentence, so it is very clear.

Thanks!

I figure it must be a bit confusing. Sorry about that!

It's just so complex and so much has happened, over such an extended time.

So should I, in your opinion, just let their solicitor take me to court, or approach the company and tell them I refuse to pay and that they'll need to take me to court to get the money?? Any opinion on the best route forward?

johnnyskeleton

bassist needed wrote: »

Sorry, do you have an opinions on my situation?

Yes. My opinion is that you can't and indeed shouldn't seek legal advice on this internet forum because it might be wrong. More importantly, you shouldn't expect lawyers to give you free advice any more than they shouldn't expect you as a professional musician to give your music away for free.

If you want free internet advice, go onto askaboutmoney.ie and to the askaboutlaw section. But you do that on your own peril.

bassist needed wrote: »

I checked FLAC, but they, specialise in "family, immigration and employment law".

Did you actually contact them or did you just look at their website and give up?

bassist needed wrote: »

And I am unemployed (well, I'm a professional musician), but my wife works full-time.

Well then your wife can afford to get a solicitor to advise her. She doesn't have to get a solicitor, but if she wants the benefit of professional advice and she can afford to pay for it, then why shouldn't she pay for it?

bassist needed

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Yes. My opinion is that you can't and indeed shouldn't seek legal advice on this internet forum because it might be wrong. More importantly, you shouldn't expect lawyers to give you free advice any more than they shouldn't expect you as a professional musician to give your music away for free.

If you want free internet advice, go onto askaboutmoney.ie and to the askaboutlaw section. But you do that on your own peril.



Did you actually contact them or did you just look at their website and give up?



Well then your wife can afford to get a solicitor to advise her. She doesn't have to get a solicitor, but if she wants the benefit of professional advice and she can afford to pay for it, then why shouldn't she pay for it?

Well thanks for the (again) less than useful response.

Having a job doesn't mean having any spare money. I assume you can differentiate between the two things. I know you like just assuming stuff, but FYI the combination of making stuff up and being rude is pretty unpleasant.

As for giving stuff away, people give away their knowledge and their products allllll the time. Because many people are nice and like to help and because sometimes giving things away for free benefits all parties.

And hey look, someone on this very thread offered to give me an opinion without making stuff up about my situation and without the attitude. Try that maybe?

In addition to that, places like the US make their solicitors take on a certain amount a free legal aid.

Maybe the Irish system isn't as generous?

mari2222

I suggest you write down all the facts chronologically, e.g.

1 Feb. XX phoned and offered me Y. Evidenced by: recording.
3 Feb. I asked XX for Z. They agreed to ZZZ. Evidenced by: letter.
5 Feb. Blah-blah happened. Evidenced by: Nil

etc etc

Then look over what you wrote - you may see that you have got caught up in the emotional side of it. Based on what you write down, do you consider you owe some money, if you owe something what is your estimate of this; write to the company and tell them your estimate is € and you are willing to pay € per week to clear the account; ask for written acceptance.
However, if you dont think you owe anything now,or if they wont respond, go off to court and have faith in the judge.

MagicSean

I wish I could say I was shocked. I've had similar problems with nearly every phone/tv/broadband/gas/electricity provider. These companies all seem to have useless corporate structures and nobody who works in them appear to be able to do anything with mistakes. Threatening letters are the norm.

If you want to know how much you owe them work it out using the meter readings on bills and see how much you've paid on your bank statements.

bassist needed

mari2222 wrote: »

I suggest you write down all the facts chronologically, e.g.

1 Feb. XX phoned and offered me Y. Evidenced by: recording.
3 Feb. I asked XX for Z. They agreed to ZZZ. Evidenced by: letter.
5 Feb. Blah-blah happened. Evidenced by: Nil

etc etc

Then look over what you wrote - you may see that you have got caught up in the emotional side of it. Based on what you write down, do you consider you owe some money, if you owe something what is your estimate of this; write to the company and tell them your estimate is € and you are willing to pay € per week to clear the account; ask for written acceptance.
However, if you dont think you owe anything now,or if they wont respond, go off to court and have faith in the judge.

That's a brilliant opinion!

To be clear I do owe them some money, I don't think that their recognizing of the amount is accurate. They have a long and documented history of being dishonest with me and others and I feel that they would happily, either through sloppiness or through malicious forethought, send me an erroneous bill.

So, what want is a way to have some sort of third party determine what I owe and arbitrate the payment arrangement.

Basically, I feel like I'm arguing with the mob here... they scammed me, then screwed up my bills then offered me a service they'd been legally forbidden from selling, then billed me when they swore they wouldn't, then charged me late fees based on a due-date they never informed me of, after sending me a bill for a product I didn't use.

I'm very suspicious and don't feel I should even be dealing with them.

My wife, literally, on two occasions burst into tears after hearing about these issues, that's how broke we are... to them it's just the old, "the harder we make it the more likely they'll just give up and pay" routine I assume, but I refuse to be scammed THEN bullied into paying money I can barely afford, when the total is very suspicious and probably incorrect and when they ACTIVELY refuse to engage me in discussing the bill.

Sorry, I'm stressed.

bassist needed

k_mac wrote: »

I wish I could say I was shocked. I've had similar problems with nearly every phone/tv/broadband/gas/electricity provider. These companies all seem to have useless corporate structures and nobody who works in them appear to be able to do anything with mistakes. Threatening letters are the norm.

If you want to know how much you owe them work it out using the meter readings on bills and see how much you've paid on your bank statements.

They never sent me even electronic bills.

They just direct debited an amount based on an estimate.

And yeah, I've had nightmarish experiences as well (including one company that mailed my bank details to a stranger), but this abusive, dishonest and threatening behaviour has to stop here... even if it means going to court (something I DREAD).

mari2222

It is understandable you are stressed. Take a few deep breaths. You are in control of the situation, and not burying your head in the sand!

Nothing is as bad as you think.....even going to court!

What you need now is clarity and coolness. The facts are what the court will consider. The company will be risking reputational damage if they are wrong in seeking a court award against you.

If you have behaved reasonably with them, and can evidence this, you have nothing to fear.

I should tell you this is not "legal" advice - just friendly suggestions.

But I was over-billed for a utility myself, and sorted it out by presenting the facts in a letter to the billing company.

bassist needed

mari2222 wrote: »

It is understandable you are stressed. Take a few deep breaths. You are in control of the situation, and not burying your head in the sand!

Nothing is as bad as you think.....even going to court!

What you need now is clarity and coolness. The facts are what the court will consider. The company will be risking reputational damage if they are wrong in seeking a court award against you.

If you have behaved reasonably with them, and can evidence this, you have nothing to fear.

I should tell you this is not "legal" advice - just friendly suggestions.

But I was over-billed for a utility myself, and sorted it out by presenting the facts in a letter to the billing company.

Thanks again for your opinion...

The thing that really set me off was getting them to repeatedly state that no action would be taken while the formal complaint was being resolved, then having them charge me a late fee a week later...

d'oh!

mari2222

I think its often not worth ringing up these companies. Better to go into print, and keep a copy. Address it to the customer services manager and cc it to the Chief Executive.:)

Het-Field

Save for what JohnnySkeleton has said, what other posters have said cannot constitute more then a friendly word.

JohnnySkeleton has actually given you the best advice by pointing you to FLAC. They would be your best port of call, and I believe they will be capable of dealing with the matter in which you find yourself embroiled.

bassist needed

Het-Field wrote: »

Save for what JohnnySkeleton has said, what other posters have said cannot constitute more then a friendly word.

JohnnySkeleton has actually given you the best advice by pointing you to FLAC. They would be your best port of call, and I believe they will be capable of dealing with the matter in which you find yourself embroiled.

A friendly word was all I was looking for...

I checked with FLAC and because I'm not on government support (just an unpaired professional musician with no government support), they cannot help me.

Again, I'd be better off on the dole. You'd think they'd reward people for NOT sucking on the government teat, but hey... I guess it's just self-representation after a letter laying out my position to the company.

I also think I'm going to stop all phone communication with them. Full-stop. If you knew how difficult it was to get these recordings... just... wow.

As far as his advice, it was useful, as far as his assumptions and attitude, much less so.

But everyone else has been great and friendly... yay!

Het-Field

bassist needed wrote: »

A friendly word was all I was looking for...

I checked with FLAC and because I'm not on government support (just an unpaired professional musician with no government support), they cannot help me.

Again, I'd be better off on the dole. You'd think they'd reward people for NOT sucking on the government teat, but hey... I guess it's just self-representation after a letter laying out my position to the company.

I also think I'm going to stop all phone communication with them. Full-stop. If you knew how difficult it was to get these recordings... just... wow.

As far as his advice, it was useful, as far as his assumptions and attitude, much less so.

But everyone else has been great and friendly... yay!

FLAC run clinics where you can meet a solicitor/barrister face to face. I suggest you go to your nearest centre, and talk to the person operating the centre. Let them know of your circumstances (employment status), and see if they will accomodate you.

mari2222

Hope all goes well for you - do let us know!

Bassist I have to agree with Het-Field and johnnyskeleton. It's impossible for you to give us all the necessary details through this forum and, consequently, any advices you may get here would be flawed.

Furthermore, and quite understandably, your view on this is skewed by your obvious emotional involvement and consequent stress. Your opinion about whether it was a scam or not is actually quite irrelevant at this stage. The one good piece of advice you have gotten is to get all the events in order. Put together all the letters you have sent and received, make notes of the dates and times of any phonecalls you have had/will have with their representatives and always get the name of the person you are speaking to. That way if/when you speak to a solicitor it will save you time and money as they get up to speed with the issues.

Best of luck with it but I would give you one further piece of advice, when someone like johnnyskeleton tries to give you a good piece of guidance (as he did) rather than discouraging others from doing the same perhaps try to understand why he gave you that advice and why it was more valuable than the advice Mari2222 gave you. (No offence Mari but it was, chronology thing aside obviously)

bassist needed

Deleted User wrote: »

Bassist I have to agree with Het-Field and johnnyskeleton. It's impossible for you to give us all the necessary details through this forum and, consequently, any advices you may get here would be flawed.

Furthermore, and quite understandably, your view on this is skewed by your obvious emotional involvement and consequent stress. Your opinion about whether it was a scam or not is actually quite irrelevant at this stage. The one good piece of advice you have gotten is to get all the events in order. Put together all the letters you have sent and received, make notes of the dates and times of any phonecalls you have had/will have with their representatives and always get the name of the person you are speaking to. That way if/when you speak to a solicitor it will save you time and money as they get up to speed with the issues.

Best of luck with it but I would give you one further piece of advice, when someone like johnnyskeleton tries to give you a good piece of guidance (as he did) rather than discouraging others from doing the same perhaps try to understand why he gave you that advice and why it was more valuable than the advice Mari2222 gave you. (No offence Mari but it was, chronology thing aside obviously)

They have admitted it was a scam, and that the "rogue employee" was fired for "lying to customers".. I have those exact words on tape.

I was then told, "multiple employees" had done the same thing and that it was a "big problem" for a "lot of customers". I have all of this on tape, so this is not an "opinion".

I also have the date at which they were legally able to stop selling a product, from the regulator. I have multiple employees recorded from the company promising to sell me that product, as soon as I did x,y and z. When I DID do x,y and z they then said they'd never offered me that.

That's not me being emotional. In fact, I was willing to let the WHOLE thing slide if they'd simply let me confirm the total of their statement as being legitimate, but they actively refused to stick to their own agreement (again recorded) and instead wove a "due date" out of thin air (it's not on the statement) and when I hadn't paid the entire amount (even though we'd agreed to pursue a payment plan), by this date they never informed me of, they referred me to a solicitor.

99% of the contact to the company has been initiated by me, I paid all my bills until they stopped taking my money and I agree I owe them a figure, which needs to be agreed upon, (due to them being unable to send me an accurate invoice and me wanting to get some outside advice from family due to the complexity of this issue).

I am upset, and have admitted as much. Like I said, I'm being bullied and it's directly impacting my actual life. But, I have tried very carefully to always make sure I represent the facts honestly.

I'm glad you understood my point...

You see the facts as giving rise to one scenario. An outside, dispassionate observer may see problems in those facts that you do not see. Speak to a solicitor to ensure that you have everything straight before you go before any judge. That's all I am saying to you.

bassist needed

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm glad you understood my point...

You see the facts as giving rise to one scenario. An outside, dispassionate observer may see problems in those facts that you do not see. Speak to a solicitor to ensure that you have everything straight before you go before any judge. That's all I am saying to you.

I genuinely appreciate your... opinion

BTW: Thanks everyone! I know I came here with a crazy rant, but I just needed to explain it somewhere... and see if anyone had any good ... opinions...

bassist needed

bassist needed wrote: »

I genuinely appreciate your... opinion

BTW: Thanks everyone! I know I came here with a crazy rant, but I just needed to explain it somewhere... and see if anyone had any good ... opinions...

I am officially now rooting for the phone company.

bassist needed

Deleted User wrote: »

I am officially now rooting for the phone company.

... luckily for me it's not a phone company then...whew

bassist needed

bassist needed wrote: »

... luckily for me it's not a phone company then...whew

That was just my ... "opinion"

bassist needed

Deleted User wrote: »

That was just my ... "opinion"

If you watch, "Good Wife" this whole "opinion" lark is especially hilarious.

"In my opinion"

bassist needed

bassist needed wrote: »

If you watch, "Good Wife" this whole "opinion" lark is especially hilarious.

"In my opinion"

I don't but I'm sure you're right.

nuac

I agree with Mari222

You should set out the problem in a succinct chronological statement.
Edit it down to the essentials.


If you cannot get a solicitor in your locality, a Citizen's Advice Bureau may be able to help.

Het-Field

bassist needed wrote: »

I genuinely appreciate your... opinion

BTW: Thanks everyone! I know I came here with a crazy rant, but I just needed to explain it somewhere... and see if anyone had any good ... opinions...

Honestly, there is no need to be a smart arse.

The position of the moderators of this section of the website has been made abundently clear by JohnnySkeleton, Kayroo and myself. You cannot get legal advice on boards. We do not know the full story, we are not aware of the nature of the company which you are having difficulties with, and we do not know the nature of your relationship with the same company.

In your OP you asked for "Legal Advice". We cannot give that to you. However, FLAC can. JS, Kayroo and myself have all directed you there, and I have even suggested a course of action if you feel that you do not qualify for the scheme. There is also value in noting down your experiences with the company, and putting some kind of an order on the matter. However, that is the best advice boards.ie posters can offer to you.

bassist needed

Het-Field wrote: »

Honestly, there is no need to be a smart arse.

The position of the moderators of this section of the website has been made abundently clear by JohnnySkeleton, Kayroo and myself. You cannot get legal advice on boards. We do not know the full story, we are not aware of the nature of the company which you are having difficulties with, and we do not know the nature of your relationship with the same company.

In your OP you asked for "Legal Advice". We cannot give that to you. However, FLAC can. JS, Kayroo and myself have all directed you there, and I have even suggested a course of action if you feel that you do not qualify for the scheme. There is also value in noting down your experiences with the company, and putting some kind of an order on the matter. However, that is the best advice boards.ie posters can offer to you.

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.

bassist needed

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.

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

Wile E. Coyote

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

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

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

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

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.

bassist needed

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

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

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.

234

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

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?

bassist needed

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.

bassist needed

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

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.

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

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.

234

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

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]

234

bassist needed wrote: »

[rolls eyes]

[kicks out of office]

bassist needed

234 wrote: »

[kicks out of office]

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

234

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