Household charge letter from "McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors"

Nulty

This has been doing the rounds on Facebook. I don't know how reliable it is but obviously I'm quite skeptical.

Can any one verify what it claims? I'm going to call them tomorrow to see if they were actually responsible for it.

Arciphel

It's fake as a three pound note.

Tom Young

Complete fabrication, see here:http://www.mccannfitzgerald.ie/news-media/news/article/4046/statement-from-mccann-fitzgerald.aspx

Nulty

Wishful thinking :rolleyes:

chasm

They issued a statement on their website last week saying they had nothing to do with it and they intended to investigate how their name was linked with it.

benway

Here we go again. Really need a sticky or two for this stuff.

mprgst78

I truly hope enough of us refuse to pay it. scumbag thieving politicians

mprgst78

mprgst78 wrote: »

I truly hope enough of us refuse to pay it. scumbag thieving politicians

Good reasoned argument there.

mprgst78

Deleted User wrote: »

Good reasoned argument there.

Nice grammar. Never heard of something being "good reasoned":rolleyes:

mprgst78

mprgst78 wrote: »

Nice grammar. Never heard of something being "good reasoned":rolleyes:

Another good argument. Well played.

PcAngel

Kayroo wrote: »

mprgst78 wrote: »

Nice grammar. Never heard of something being "good reasoned":rolleyes:

Another good argument. Well played.

Is it legally correct?

Procrastastudy

PcAngel wrote: »

Is it legally correct?

It's never legally correct to use poor grammar.

Scealta_saol

Irish Times had an article about it too...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0224/breaking35.html


Whoever circulated this wasn't thinking with a full deck of cards... it's an offence to pretend to be a solicitor...

let's hope they have some way of catching the culprit.

nuac

Would not have thought McCann Fitz to be big fans of the Freeman nonesense.

Tom Young

PcAngel wrote: »

Is it legally correct?

No.

Delancey

Scealta_saol wrote: »

Whoever circulated this wasn't thinking with a full deck of cards... it's an offence to pretend to be a solicitor...

Thats interesting , I never knew that.

johnfás

Yup s56 Solicitors Act 1954 as amended.
Prohibition on pretending to be solicitor.

56.—(1) A person who is not a solicitor shall not pretend to be a solicitor or take or use any name, title, addition or description or make any representation or demand implying that he is a solicitor.

The current fine for the offence is in the region of €4,000. Obviously you would also be liable on an almost unlimited basis to anyone who suffered damage in reliance on your representations.

Marcusm

Tom Young wrote: »

No.

Surely that is straying into the provision of legal advice (on a fake piece of legal advice)!!!!!!!:D:D

Avatargh

PcAngel wrote: »

Is it legally correct?

Think about it for more than two seconds, and maybe less than seven.

Then think about whether rapists can avoid "statute" because they don't "consent" to it.

You'll get your answer.

jargon buster

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=201670

Rob Menard posted it on David Ickes and the thread got locked and he got banned once the mods found out about the solicitors investigation.

Lockstep

I emailed them about this and got the following reply

Thank you very much for getting in touch and bringing this email to our attention - a number of people have done so. The email did not originate with this firm and does not express any legal opinion from this firm. We are investigating how our name has come to appear on the email.

Thank you again.

They've since released the press release saying it's nothing to do with them.

It bugs me that people are willing to fabricate legal info to further political points. God help those who believe this stuff.