Suing a solicitor for professional negligence

Through Hell and Back

Hey,

Has anyone ever done this, or had to go through with this?

Pat Mustard

Happens all the time. Ring the Law Society and ask them for a list of solicitors who deal with this type of work.

fraxinus1

Through Hell and Back wrote: »

Hey,

Has anyone ever done this, or had to go through with this?

Good luck with that. Mod - remark deleted. Be nice here...

Through Hell and Back

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Happens all the time. Ring the Law Society and ask them for a list of solicitors who deal with this type of work.

Thank you, yes I am aware of contacting the Law Society. I would be interested in hearing about someone who has sued their former solicitor for professional negligence, and if not that, could anyone direct me as to where I can find out about law firms that previously successfully sued solicitors?

I would appreciate it.

Victor

Through Hell and Back wrote: »

where I can find out about law firms that previously successfully sued solicitors?

Note that it is the client that does the suing, the lawyers just do the paperwork and arguing.

Get the list of names and Google those firms.

buiscuit2168

Hi I was told by a friend who is a solicitor that the reason solicitors stick together is purely financial. They said when one is sued their insurance pot is depleted and every other solicitor legal insurance will be increased.

seamus

The effect on everyone else's insurance premia is negligible unless you manage to land a settlement in the tens of millions of euro. And in that case the solicitor's fees will massively outweigh any increase in their professional indemnity insurance.

The observed effect of solicitors "sticking together" is much the same as why doctors or accountants tend to stick together and not contradict a colleague - because Ireland is a small country and being known for rocking the boat can limit your career prospects. The guy you successfully sue for professional negligence or misconduct, might be the guy (or a friend of the guy) who has the final decision on your next big career move.

It is dropping away though, in all the above spheres, and it's far easier nowadays to find a competent solicitor who's willing to take on such a case.

CIARAN_BOYLE

seamus wrote: »

The effect on everyone else's insurance premia is negligible unless you manage to land a settlement in the tens of millions of euro. And in that case the solicitor's fees will massively outweigh any increase in their professional indemnity insurance.

The observed effect of solicitors "sticking together" is much the same as why doctors or accountants tend to stick together and not contradict a colleague - because Ireland is a small country and being known for rocking the boat can limit your career prospects. The guy you successfully sue for professional negligence or misconduct, might be the guy (or a friend of the guy) who has the final decision on your next big career move.

It is dropping away though, in all the above spheres, and it's far easier nowadays to find a competent solicitor who's willing to take on such a case.

Honestly more to the point they tend to have the same training so if one doesn't think he was negligent another shown the same facts won't think he is negligent either.

chunkylover4

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Honestly more to the point they tend to have the same training so if one doesn't think he was negligent another shown the same facts won't think he is negligent either.

That doesn't make any sense. A solicitor will/really should know clearly what breaches the standard of care owed to a client better than anyone else.

seamus

I guess his point is that someone who has lost any kind of case is quite likely to assume that it's someone else's fault. If you believe you're right but you lost in court, then most people will have difficulty accepting that. Instead they will assume that they chose the wrong solicitor, they picked one who didn't represent their interests properly and who didn't present the case properly in court.

So they go to another solicitor to sue the original solicitor. The new solicitor will look at the case and find that there's little to be getting excited about and advises the client to drop it.

Net result is that the client goes away thinking, "I'm not wrong, it's the solicitors all looking out for eachother".

Pat Mustard

Through Hell and Back wrote: »

Thank you, yes I am aware of contacting the Law Society. I would be interested in hearing about someone who has sued their former solicitor for professional negligence, and if not that, could anyone direct me as to where I can find out about law firms that previously successfully sued solicitors?

I would appreciate it.

Mod note:

The forum charter does not allow recommendations for solicitors so nobody is allowed to direct you to any solicitors on this forum, unfortunately.

If you have a problem, you can either contact the Law Society or ask somebody to recommend a good solicitor, who may be able to speak to you. Even if that solicitor cannot deal with the matter for you, he or she may be able to point you in the right direction.

Ireland is a small place and solicitors tend to come in contact each other in the course of their work, especially if they are in the same locality. If for no other reason, it is often wise for solicitors to avoid acting against their colleagues, in such circumstances. This is why many solicitors avoid work of this nature. However, there are a certain number of firms who will agree to act. It sounds like you need to speak to somebody in one of those firms.

CIARAN_BOYLE

seamus wrote: »

I guess his point is that someone who has lost any kind of case is quite likely to assume that it's someone else's fault. If you believe you're right but you lost in court, then most people will have difficulty accepting that. Instead they will assume that they chose the wrong solicitor, they picked one who didn't represent their interests properly and who didn't present the case properly in court.

So they go to another solicitor to sue the original solicitor. The new solicitor will look at the case and find that there's little to be getting excited about and advises the client to drop it.

Net result is that the client goes away thinking, "I'm not wrong, it's the solicitors all looking out for eachother".

This is my point exactly.

I'm an accountant. We don't always agree but shown the same facts we will come up with the same treatment 9 times out of 10. It's not covering each others backs it's having the same training and the same facts and making the same decisions.

Now a previous firm I worked with was in an informal network with a few other firms. They would cover each others backs but they wouldnt take the work if someone came in and say we have this problwm with x. They would say x is my buddy and i wont fight him try a different firm.

NUTLEY BOY

If the client can satisfy the required standards of proof in relation to negligence and quantum there should be no difficulty in getting a new solicitor to take instructions to act against the previous solicitor.

Where you might have problems is if you live in a small community i.e. everyone knows everyone else. In those circumstances you might well find understandable difficulties in the form of reluctance by one local solicitor to act against another.

Otherwise, it is as others have suggested.

Be aware that professional negligence claims can be very messy and quite costly, especially if you lose. Get a S. 68 letter estimating potential costs. You may end up paying several hundred euros to get a considered opinion(s) advising you that there is no worthwhile cause of action - that is money well spent if it avoids speculative litigation.

Mr. Incognito

Hello there,

I've done it professionally where a colleague was negligent. He put his hands up and advised his client to sue on his insurance.

Negligence is quite vague. Firstly you have to satisfy another solicitor that it was in fact negligence and not you not getting the result you wanted.

In my experience negligence, true negligence, is rare. The latter however is quite common.

coylemj

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Honestly more to the point they tend to have the same training so if one doesn't think he was negligent another shown the same facts won't think he is negligent either.

That doesn't even apply when it comes to two lawyers interpreting the same piece of legislation which in many ways is the core function of the profession. Look what happens when they become judges! And it's even less valid when discussing competence in managing a practice.

You seem to be suggesting that the body of lawyers in Ireland is a homogeneous bunch of clones. Nothing could be further from the truth.

hullaballoo

If we all agreed all the time, there'd be no need for Courts.

Victor

In construction arbitration, the usual would be "I know that person, I would find it difficult to be completely objective in dealing with them."

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I've done it professionally where a colleague was negligent. He put his hands up and advised his client to sue on his insurance.

Would that invalidate the insurance?

Mr. Incognito

Victor wrote: »

In construction arbitration, the usual would be "I know that person, I would find it difficult to be completely objective in dealing with them."

Would that invalidate the insurance?

No?

Insurance is for professional negligence.

He was professionally negligent.

No different to a driver assuming responsibility for an accident.

gimli2112

It's generally a policy condition that you do not admit liability, without Insurer's consent. You can prejudice cover in doing so.

Mr. Incognito

gimli2112 wrote: »

It's generally a policy condition that you do not admit liability, without Insurer's consent. You can prejudice cover in doing so.

Insurance law never ceases to amaze me the way that they will attempt to weasel out of paying out on a claim.

Pat Mustard

Certain types of insurance policies tend to contain a clause which prohibits the insured from making an admission of liability or offer to settle, without the prior consent of the insurer.

A quick look at Austin Buckley's old book on insurance law shows that making such an admission of liability is not necessarily a bar to indemnity, provided that liability had been arrived at by agreement or compromise which was not improvident, unreasonable or mala fide, per General Omnibus Company Ltd. v London General Insurance Co. Ltd [1936] IR 596.

tommyit

The first answer was right they all stick together and they are self-regulated so why rock the boat and the end of the day it is a business and you are the punter there is an option of the disciplinary tribunal but is much the same the government have been talking about a regulatory board since Alan shatters time it was due to go live 2014,2015,2016,2017 a guess some solicitor has final sign off.
interesting reading
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/2k-a-week-for-law-society-of-ireland-president-373610.html

Pat Mustard

tommyit wrote: »

The first answer was right they all stick together and they are self-regulated so why rock the boat

We are talking about negligence, not misconduct.

If a solicitor's negligence causes loss to his client, the client can sue him. This is why solicitors have insurance.

There are solicitors who will act against other solicitors, so your suggestion that they "all stick together" is incorrect.

NUTLEY BOY

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Insurance law never ceases to amaze me the way that they will attempt to weasel out of paying out on a claim.

If you give them the excuse....

That is why it is important that policyholders read and understand their contract documents.

Mrs Shuttleworth

chunkylover4 wrote: »

That doesn't make any sense. A solicitor will/really should know clearly what breaches the standard of care owed to a client better than anyone else.

To the OP - breaching the standard of care isn't enough in a professional negligence case. Nor is being de facto negligent.

The plaintiff has to prove that but for the negligent act, a chain of events would not have unfolded that resulted in the plaintiff suffering material loss.

Causation is key in a professional negligence claim.

OP you will not only have to find a solicitor to take the case but the solicitor acting for you will also have to get an independent expert (possibly from the UK) to verify that the defendant's alleged negligence resulted in loss.

Claw Hammer

This is a case in which a solicitor was found negligent and there is a considerable discourse on the topic by the trial judge. Note that the experts were 2 solicitors in this jurisdiction. A number of previous cases are also mentioned.
http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2010/H236.html

There is a principle of law that a professional cannot be sued for negligence unless the party suing has obtained an expert report from a professional in the same profession showing that negligence has taken place.
Negligence of its nature requires loss before the tort is complete.