# My Solicitor is vey friendly with opposing Solicitor



## Kerrigan (11 Nov 2011)

is this something I need to worry about?


----------



## dereko1969 (11 Nov 2011)

No you shouldn't worry about it at all. I would have thought it quite normal for them to be friendly with people they probably see every week of the year. It may even lead to a greater desire to beat his/her friend!


----------



## nuac (11 Nov 2011)

Solicitors often know each other if they practice in the same geographical area or same area of law.   Will not affect the quality of th eir representation


----------



## onq (11 Nov 2011)

Standard practice.

I'd be worried if the *weren't* cordial to each other.


----------



## Kerrigan (11 Nov 2011)

Thanks guys for your responses.

I queried my solicitor about his 'over friendly' approach with the opposing side and I got a firm dressing down.  'I will not have a client tell me how to run my practice and will not always cooperate with everything you ask me to do'.  That pretty much told me!

A bit of back ground - got a discovery order on my ex spouse (going through a divorce).  They lied on the discovery order.  When I approached the subject of getting a forensic accountant on the case my solicitor thought it OTT.

She wrote again to the ex's Solicitor and our only reply back was, 'we cannot deal with this matter now as we are going on holidays'!!!!!!!

This has been three months ago and we have still heard nothing.  Yet my Solicitor tells me they speak to the opposing Solicitor regularly in Court.  And here's me thinking they were still on holidays!!


----------



## nuac (11 Nov 2011)

Forensic accountants are expensive.  Unless assetsa re large here it might be better to leave it to th e solicitors to work it out


----------



## aristotle (11 Nov 2011)

Kerrigan said:


> Thanks guys for your responses.
> 
> I queried my solicitor about his 'over friendly' approach with the opposing side and I got a firm dressing down. 'I will not have a client tell me how to run my practice and will not always cooperate with everything you ask me to do'. That pretty much told me!
> !!


 
I would be changing my solicitor, if anyone spoke to me that way I would be sure that they wouldn't be getting any of my money.


----------



## z107 (11 Nov 2011)

aristotle said:


> I would be changing my solicitor, if anyone spoke to me that way I would be sure that they wouldn't be getting any of my money.



Why?
What's wrong with what they said? sounds more assertive than rude.


----------



## T McGibney (11 Nov 2011)

As a practising accountant, I would be shocked if a client saw fit to question whether it was proper for me to be friendly with say, a tax inspector.


----------



## dereko1969 (11 Nov 2011)

I'd be thinking "nightmare client"


----------



## aristotle (11 Nov 2011)

umop3p!sdn said:


> Why?
> What's wrong with what they said? sounds more assertive than rude.


 
Because it sounds like they will be difficult to work with. Of course I am reading into a sentence so maybe their tone of voice was totally different.


----------



## onq (11 Nov 2011)

In contentious situations, I tend to be very frank and open with clients about my dealings with other professionals, both on our side where I am the design team or inspection team leader, as well as on the other side, where I prefer communication to be open and transparent at all levels.

In this regard, I prefer e-mail communications, as opposed to huddles in hallways, but that is part of what I do - I set things up so that clients legal representatives can "do the deal" that needs to be done, my work adding pressure to perform on the other side.

Deal-makers, whether legal or property (estate agents) generally preserve their cordiality towards each other to allow the best chance of a favourable reception for their clients proposed deals or settlements - it confers no benefit on anyone if an entrenched attitude leads to three days in court at considerable expense when a morning would do.

The trouble is that clients can be emotionally involved in the proceedings and may be looking for revenge, a penalty against the other party, or the stiffest sentence and this is precisely the wrong way to present with a judge or the other side, who can form the opinion that you are unreasonable and possible a less than frank witness.

So therefore, clients should let the professionals do their work, but where solicitors are concerned its no harm to keep on their case to get people to the table - otherwise just let them sort themselves out in terms of their professional relations with the other side.


----------



## patrick1 (11 Nov 2011)

During my court-case some years ago I discovered that my solicitor was trying to strike a deal with my ex-husbands solicitor which was not in my best interest at all.  I would advise to be very careful with the solicitor concerned.  I would not trust them.  There main issue is to get the case sorted and there money earned.  The more times the case is adjourned the greater the expense for the cliet.


----------



## ClubMan (11 Nov 2011)

I thought it was a case of clients instruct, solicitors act - regardless of their personal dealings and relationships with their colleagues?


----------



## Daisy2012 (11 Nov 2011)

The bottom line in this instance is that the client is asking the solicitor to do something and the solicitor is "flipping the bozo bit" with them. They appear to be forgetting that their client is a customer. If they don't think that something is the right thing to do, then they should explain to their customer why, in their professional opinion, it is the wrong thing to do.

If the client declines their advise, the solicitor ought to accept the instruction from their client, or resign. In no circumstance should the solicitor get shirty with the client and tell them that they won't have a client tell them what to do. Their job is to accept instruction from the client and act on it.

We have gotten some awful advise from solicitors (and other professionals) which if we had just accepted their word that it was normal and standard we would have been in terrible situations. Solicitors, like any other professional (or tradesperson) can be good and bad. 

If you don't like how the solicitor is treating you, you should fire them and make a complaint to the law society. Equally, if you are a solicitor and don't like how a client is treating you, fire the client.

Simples.


----------



## serotoninsid (12 Nov 2011)

Daisy2012 said:


> They appear to be forgetting that their client is a customer.


Well, they say we shouldn't tar everyone with the one brush (and of course that's true) but there are major issues with the legal professions in this country.  It has taken the IMF to tell us that we can't have them 'self-regulate' themselves. 

However, it's such a fundamental function in any country - the client has to be exactly that - a 'client' - and treated as a client.  Not shady dealings being done behind their backs.



			
				Clubman said:
			
		

> I thought it was a case of clients instruct, solicitors act - regardless of their personal dealings and relationships with their colleagues?


In theory - and taking an ethical standpoint, then your absolutely right.  However, do you believe that it plays out that way given the current state of the legal profession?


----------



## T McGibney (12 Nov 2011)

serotoninsid said:


> It has taken the IMF to tell us that we can't have them 'self-regulate' themselves.



Don't take IMF statements as Gospel, these are the guys who have told us to increase VAT to 23% even though the last increase to a 'mere' 21.5% caused serious damage to the economy and ended up having to be reversed.

In relation to ethics, I would be more concerned with a situation where a solicitor, accountant or other professional is servile to the whims and prejudices of a client, and not sufficiently assertive to be prepared to tell the client what they don't want to hear.  This is the sort of situation where rules end up being bent and laws broken.


----------



## nuac (12 Nov 2011)

I recall one distinquished counsel tell a client who wanted a particular (irrelevant ) question asked " if you employ a singer you do not tell him how to sing the song.


----------



## Vanilla (12 Nov 2011)

There's a difference between taking instructions from a client and taking dictation.

Dictating clients get shown the door as if they are dictating to me, why do they need my advice at all?


----------



## Kerrigan (12 Nov 2011)

Hi,

I'm far from a dictatorial type person; respect the law 100% and would never in a million years think of telling a Solicitor or Barrister their job.  I'm an average lay person.  I don't know the Law so I am relying on the advise of the Legal person and hope they will put me right to the best of their ability.

I did on this occasion happen to mention to my Solicitor about the overly friendly approach to the opposing side.  He took my comments very badly.

Keep in mind that the opposition lead us all to believe that they were on holidays.  That was three months ago!  My Solicitor has told me that he has spoken to them on numerous times in Court.  

I happened to ask why they had not responded to our letters even though they were obviously well back from their break.  This didn't go down well either.

I simply asked - maybe we are being too friendly with these guys, lets get a bit tougher.  He blew his lid over that!


----------



## onq (12 Nov 2011)

You weren't dictatorial and your solicitor may have over-reacted a little.

Some professionals can be very touchy if they feel you're questioning their integrity.

If the delay was not an issue I'd say he was within his rights, but it is and you deserve a response.


----------



## onq (12 Nov 2011)

nuac said:


> I recall one distinquished counsel tell a client who wanted a particular (irrelevant ) question asked " if you employ a singer you do not tell him how to sing the song.



He who pays the piper calls the tune.


----------



## Daisy2012 (13 Nov 2011)

nuac said:


> I recall one distinquished counsel tell a client who wanted a particular (irrelevant ) question asked " if you employ a singer you do not tell him how to sing the song.



I would normally completely agree with this. However, my recent experience with a solicitor and other experiences with other professionals means that this is frequently not as easy as it sounds.

There are often cases where you (the client) knows more than the solicitor because of past experiences or experiences of close friends/family. 

It's not quite the same as the singer analogy - as when the singer sings, it's a subjective opinion as to how good they are. When a solicitor solicits, it can cost you buckets if they miss a note...


----------



## nuac (14 Nov 2011)

Daisy2012 - note your comments.  In the case I remember the question the client wanted counsel to ask would have been completely irrelevant to the case, and would have annoyed the judge,


----------



## madiha85 (6 Dec 2011)

you dont need to be worry. Most of the times they already know eachouther especially when they are in the same area they see eachother almost every time. I had the same problem, i thought alot about it. I have seen the same in london court and even the same here in ireland. they are just professionals they cant ''eat'' up each other as we are thinking at that moment in the court. In a way we are enemies and filing cases on each others but the solicitors and barristers they are just professionals who deals with each other everyday normally and they dont have any concerns about ''our'' feelings.


----------



## Ham Slicer (17 Dec 2011)

I would certainly be keeping an eye on the case and I wouldn't be afraid to express my opinion to the solicitor or indeed barrister in the case.

I was involved in a case recently where my "friend's" solicitor was very friendly with the other side.  In my opinion they were in cahoots to maximise the fee and drag the case out as long as possible.

If I had not intervened in the case it would still be going on....not just the case but the lying and cheating too


----------



## bab1 (18 Dec 2011)

*Solicitor with 'attitude'*

When I was looking for a conveyancing solicitor for a property purchase I visited three practices, effectively looking for quotes. I asked the most expensive of the three something along the lines of "tell me why I should engage you even if I find a cheaper quote". I thought this would give the solicitor a chance to point out their particular expertise etc. They did not take this question at all well! Maybe they had no particular expertise? So I did not engage them. If they had given a convincing answer I might well have gone with them even though they were the dearest.

Bottom line: you need to have a good working relationship with the solicitor which includes you being able to put the hard questions and they being able to answer them. If you detect any 'attitude' I would suggest saying a polite goodbye.


----------



## Kerrigan (18 Dec 2011)

Apologies for not updating this thread. 

Since my last post I had heard nothing back from the solicitor in question. I contacted them on Friday asking for an update. I was politely told that these things take time and that they believed the opposing side would get back to us in their own time. The same line has been spoken for months and I did smell a rat. All I wanted was my solicitor to instruct a barrister to find out his/her opinions. My solicitor did not want to rush into this for some reason. I asked for my documents to be sent back to me as I felt I was not being represented properly and I needed to engage a different solicitor.


----------

