# Writing letters "without prejudice"



## Jer1 (2 Sep 2010)

Can someone lend there expertise to the following - the solicitor for the defendant is communicating with me with proposals to solve a  dispute before it reaches court. he is writing his letters "without prejudice". can i refuse to acknowledge these letters unless "without prejudice" is removed? all my letters have been written without including "without Prejudice". what would be his reaon be for writing lettters like this?

any help would be appreciated.


----------



## pudds (2 Sep 2010)

> A statement set onto a written document such as a letter, which  qualifies the signatory as exempt from the content to the extent that it  may be interpreted as containing admissions or other interpretations  which could later be used against him or her; or as otherwise affecting  any legal rights of the



http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/W/WithoutPrejudice.aspx


Allows him to communicate  in writing without anything he writes been later used against him or his client. Think that's the jest of it.

I suggest you should do the same. Mark your letters ditto if its not too late.


----------



## Jer1 (5 Sep 2010)

i am the plaintiff. if the solicitor for the defendant writes a letter to my solicitor headed 'without prejudice'. does my solicitor have to:  

1. reply to this letter
2. can i use this letter later in future correspondence or in court 

Thanks in advance to anyone that can help


----------



## Joe Q Public (5 Sep 2010)

Jer1 said:


> i am the plaintiff. if the solicitor for the defendant writes a letter to my solicitor headed 'without prejudice'. does my solicitor have to:
> 
> 1. reply to this letter


They would probably respond in some manner.


Jer1 said:


> 2. can i use this letter later in future correspondence or in court


 No.


----------



## Jer1 (5 Sep 2010)

Referring to ' A guide to professional conduct of solicitors in Ireland' - 'Failure to reply to letters' it says a solicitor should always answer letters from another solicitor, in particular those which make inquires on behalf of a client. 

The letter that was written 'without prejuidce' by the defendants solicitor to my solicitor was clearly making inquires on behalf of the client and the inquiry was also in the best possible interest of the client. So my question is does my solicitor have to answer the letter?


----------



## Joe Q Public (5 Sep 2010)

They would answer it but whether they put without prejudice on it is a matter for them.


----------



## Jer1 (5 Sep 2010)

I would prefer it if my solicitor did answer this letter. So my solicitor should answer the letter and then it is upto him to write it without prejudice or not.


----------



## Kate10 (6 Sep 2010)

Jer1 you are paying your solicitor good money to advise you.  Is there any reason that you are not comfortable talking to him about all of this??


----------



## Jer1 (6 Sep 2010)

He wont be getting paid if he does'nt do his job ha ha.

The solictor for the defendant has raised a VERY important issue by letter regarding the proceedings that I have been advised to initiate. My solicitor is not replying to this letter. all this 'without prejudice' stuff is making me uneasy and suspicious.


----------



## Kate10 (6 Sep 2010)

Jer you really need to talk to your solicitor - he will not be able to represent you well if you don't have an honest dialogue with them.  Letters are written without prejudice when the writer does not want the other side to be able to exhibit a letter in court.  There are many reasons why someone might want to do this.  Your solicitor will advise you as to how best to deal with the letter - there may be tactical reasons not to respond to it at this time.  

Take some responsibility here.  You are instructing this solicitor.  You will have to pay his bill.  You are wasting his time and your own if you won't talk to him openly about your concerns.

Kate.


----------



## Jer1 (6 Sep 2010)

I have actually written a letter to him myself raising the same issue as the defendants solicitor and he wont answer my letter either. I wonder who should be honest with the dialogue!!

Anyway I guess my only option is to let him go and take charge of the proceedings myself.


----------



## Joe Q Public (6 Sep 2010)

That may be for the best.


----------



## Kate10 (6 Sep 2010)

I doubt it but best of luck!


----------



## DeeKie (10 Sep 2010)

Kate10 said:


> Jer you really need to talk to your solicitor - he will not be able to represent you well if you don't have an honest dialogue with them. Letters are written without prejudice when the writer does not want the other side to be able to exhibit a letter in court. There are many reasons why someone might want to do this. Your solicitor will advise you as to how best to deal with the letter - there may be tactical reasons not to respond to it at this time.
> 
> Take some responsibility here. You are instructing this solicitor. You will have to pay his bill. You are wasting his time and your own if you won't talk to him openly about your concerns.
> 
> Kate.


 +1 very good advice. Clients that "hide" things from solicitors are fools.


----------



## Jane Doe (11 Sep 2010)

sorry for butting in. I once wrote to a solicitor and headed it WP. The solicitor wrote back and said it* was not WP and was on the record*. Can he do that?

I thought it was up to the judge to decide if a letter was WP as, to my knowledge, I stand to be corrected, WP only applies if one is genuinely trying to come to an agreement


----------



## Jane Doe (11 Sep 2010)

Jer1 said:


> I have actually written a letter to him myself raising the same issue as the defendants solicitor and he wont answer my letter either. I wonder who should be honest with the dialogue!!
> 
> Anyway I guess my only option is to let him go and take charge of the proceedings myself.


If you are not happy with solicitor get another one. i was involved in an issue, the solicitor said she would be unable to make enquiries on a certain issue which even i knew how to do. I wrote to head honcho in the firm and asked him did he want the case or not and that if she could not do it i would go elsewhere. Got done then, successful outcome too


----------



## Time (12 Sep 2010)

Jane Doe said:


> sorry for butting in. I once wrote to a solicitor and headed it WP. The solicitor wrote back and said it* was not WP and was on the record*. Can he do that?
> 
> I thought it was up to the judge to decide if a letter was WP as, to my knowledge, I stand to be corrected, WP only applies if one is genuinely trying to come to an agreement


You can only use WP when discussing a settlement. 

You can't admit liability via WP. It cannot be used as a device to hide evidence.


----------



## Jane Doe (12 Sep 2010)

Time said:


> You can only use WP when discussing a settlement.
> 
> You can't admit liability via WP. It cannot be used as a device to hide evidence.


I was not admitting liability or hiding evidence


----------



## Time (12 Sep 2010)

I didn't say that. Some people try to be smart with WP.

Unless you are discussing a settlement any other chit chat etc is on the record.


----------



## Jane Doe (12 Sep 2010)

Time said:


> I didn't say that. Some people try to be smart with WP.
> 
> Unless you are discussing a settlement any other chit chat etc is on the record.


OK i am too smart to try to be smart when dealing with a solicitor. he was claiming to be doing something he had no right to do, being a bully but not any more


----------



## Jer1 (12 Sep 2010)

Time said:


> You can only use WP when discussing a settlement.
> 
> You can't admit liability via WP. It cannot be used as a device to hide evidence.


 
The solicitor for the defendant writes a letter to the plaintiffs solicitor that more or less says the case been brought against the defendant should be brought against another party. the letter was written WP. this is clearly not a dispute or trying to reach a settlement. i think the solicitor should answer the letter plus the letter should be used in court. does someone else have an opinion on this? i would like to hear it.


----------



## Time (12 Sep 2010)

Yes, that is an abuse of WP. 

If he won't respond get someone else.


----------



## Jer1 (12 Sep 2010)

The solicitor for the defendant writes a letter to the plaintiffs solicitor that more or less says the case been brought against the defendant should be brought against another party. the letter was written WP. this is clearly not a dispute or trying to reach a settlement. i think the solicitor should answer the letter plus the letter should be used in court. does someone else have an opinion on this? i would like to hear it.


----------



## Time (12 Sep 2010)

No need to keep posting the same thing over and over.


----------



## Jane Doe (12 Sep 2010)

Jer1 said:


> The solicitor for the defendant writes a letter to the plaintiffs solicitor that more or less says the case been brought against the defendant should be brought against another party. the letter was written WP. this is clearly not a dispute or trying to reach a settlement. i think the solicitor should answer the letter plus the letter should be used in court. does someone else have an opinion on this? i would like to hear it.


get a real solicitor


----------



## McCrack (15 Sep 2010)

Jane Doe said:


> get a real solicitor


 
Who exactly is your smart comment aimed at and please explain your reasoning for suggesting this?


----------



## Jane Doe (15 Sep 2010)

McCrack said:


> Who exactly is your smart comment aimed at and please explain your reasoning for suggesting this?


at the solicitor the op has, does not seem to know what to do or how to do it.my suggestion is  a proper solicitor would be able to deal with it. if i had a solicitor whoses actions caused me to seek advice on a webpage i would not be long firing him. so i meant get a real solicitor who can do the job he is being paid for. and i did not think it was a smart coment just common sense. teh guy does not seem to know what he is doing


----------



## McCrack (15 Sep 2010)

I'm sorry but there is nothing the OP has said that suggests any lack of competence from his instructed solicitor. 

Nobody here is privy to the facts, circumstances and indeed the written correspondence between the parties so to suggest that the OP's solicitor is in some way incompetent and to say he/she should dis-engage and instruct another solicitor is silly. 

You don't have enough information and I would suspect legal experience/training to make that suggestion


----------



## Jane Doe (15 Sep 2010)

> Nobody here is privy to the facts, circumstances and indeed the written correspondence between the parties so to suggest that the OP's solicitor is in some way incompetent and to say he/she should dis-engage and instruct another solicitor is silly


if the soilicitor is competent why does the op have to post here. asking legal advice here after hiring a solicitor is like getting a dog and barking yourself. why not ask the solicitor the reasons and if he cannot answer them then i would not call him competent



> You don't have enough information and I would suspect legal experience/training to make that suggestion


i gave an opinion as i am entitled to do. no one is obliged to agree with it. i do not intend to get into further argument about this it is going ot


----------



## McCrack (15 Sep 2010)

Askaboutlaw is the forum so people are obviously going to ask about legal issues.

The average person I would suspect would not understand "without prejudice" and its significance or indeed other legal practice that only lawyers would as it's used in the day-to-day course of their practice.

I'd bet my last euro the OP solicitor would know and be able to explain to the OP if asked.

Again I would reiterate that there is nothing to suggest incompetance by the OP solicitor to warrant you saying he/she is is and to "get a real one" and yes you are entitled to your opinion but if you express it publically expect it to questioned expecially when it is silly (in my opinion).


----------



## Jer1 (16 Sep 2010)

my solicitor has not answered my letter with the issue i raised. i tried to ask him face to face but he was dodging the issue. even though the defendants solicitor has raised the issue on behalf of his client the letter was still written WP which i feel should not have been done. I do not want to bring the wrong person to court so the issue should be treated with high importance.


----------



## SmithTown (4 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> You can only use WP when discussing a settlement.
> 
> *You can't admit liability via WP. It cannot be used as a device to hide evidence*.


are you sure. i have seen an insurance company tell blatant lies under WP about someone who was in an accident. they claimed the person refused to go hospital when there were medical records proving the injured did.


----------



## Time (5 Nov 2010)

They can lie all they want and the letter will be admissible as evidence.


----------



## Jer1 (5 Nov 2010)

Hello OP here, if anyone is interested in how I have been getting on with my solicitor I have dropped him from the case and have taken proceedings myself.I dropped the proceedings against the party that my solicitor wanted me to bring to court and have instead brought proceedings against the correct party. My ex solicitor being incompetent had nothing to do with it.


----------



## SmithTown (6 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> They can lie all they want and the letter will be *admissible* as evidence.


you mean inadmissable?Or if they lie under WP can it be submitted as evidence?

My understanding was anything said cannot be submited as evidence without consent of both parties.Am I wrong? What do you meant then by



> You can only use WP when discussing a settlement.
> 
> You can't admit liability via WP. *It cannot be used as a device to hide evidence.*



Thanks


----------



## Time (6 Nov 2010)

If someone *abuses *WP, the letter and its contents are admissible. 

So, if I wrote a letter under WP and admitted liability for an accident for example offered 20K to settle and I then withdrew the offer, you could use my admission against me in court. If I made some libelous comments about you those would not be subject to WP and could be admitted as evidence. 

Writing WP at the top of a letter does not automatically allow blanket protection to the writer.


----------



## SmithTown (6 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> If someone *abuses *WP, the letter and its contents are admissible.
> 
> So, if I wrote a letter under WP and admitted liability for an accident for example offered 20K to settle and I then withdrew the offer, you could use my admission against me in court. If I made some libelous comments about you those would not be subject to WP and could be admitted as evidence.
> 
> Writing WP at the top of a letter does not automatically allow blanket protection to the writer.


*Oh I see thanks for clarifying.* So the letter with lies would be admissable. Weird that an insurance company did that. As far as I can recall they also told lies about the garda that attended


----------



## Eamonn T (8 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> If someone *abuses *WP, the letter and its contents are admissible.
> 
> So, if I wrote a letter under WP and admitted liability for an accident for example offered 20K to settle and I then withdrew the offer, you could use my admission against me in court. If I made some libelous comments about you those would not be subject to WP and could be admitted as evidence.
> 
> Writing WP at the top of a letter does not automatically allow blanket protection to the writer.


 
Hi Time,

  You seem to know what you are talking about here, I wasnt aware that there was actually a way of getting a WP letter admitted as evidance if it went to court. 
My situation relates to a letter my solicitor recieved from the other party where I am the defendant in the matter. They have accused me and my partner of certain things that are untrue. for example, They accuse my partner ( Who is not named as a defendant ) of giving the plantiff information by text message when it was infact me that give this information by text message, I have the text still on my fone. 

They also falsely accuse me of other issues in this letter which I can prove with text message copies, however, at the end of this 3 page waffle they offer to settle for €1500 which is half of what they were originally seeking. 
Can I present this letter as evidance given the fact that my partner has been accused wrongly of providing certain information to the plaintiff and I am also wrongly accused of some ludicras nonsence in the letter. 

Thanks


----------



## CashAdv (1 Dec 2010)

I had a solicitor for family law case, he wrote to the other party's solicitor on numerous occasions and the other solicitor never responded. Is it in the code of conduct or best practice that the other solicitor should respond?

I have since stopped using my solicitor and brought proceedings myself as he was clearing not acting in my best interest. I plan on taking the case to the law society.

Also I have tried communicating with my ex directly, but am being accused of "harassment" by sending letters on email.





"  _The extended letters / emails you have begun to send me are in my opinion are unnecessary and very often threatening in their tone and I would be very grateful if you could desist from sending them to me._"


I am wary of sending any further emails or letters as I have been accused of Verbal abuse, text message abuse, Skype abuse and now email abuse.


Is it appropriate to make direct contact with her solicitor?


I represented myself in the District Court recently and the other party's Barrister attended. In fact he spoke with me directly before the hearing. Are Barristers allowed to do this, there was no solicitor attending??



EDIT: Am I foolish representing myself when other party has a Barrister?


----------

