I defended my comment against your claim that my original comment was disingenuous - I didn't deny it was sweeping.
My later posts commented on the explanations by others of the delays in getting payment and while such may be the case, there is no logical reason for extended delays except to suit the client and/or keeping money in solicitors client accounts.
My posting history to this forum reflects my respect for the people who post here and the profession in general, but I deplore the payment of third parties and witnesses aspect of it.
While another poster suggests that everyone, including plaintiffs solicitors, may have to suffer this unfair wait, I know at least one solicitor who didn't on a case where everyone else did and where they are unlikely to be paid - this is a third case, recently before the courts and separate to the ones I referred to previously.
Instead of defending a convention which puts payment to others on the long finger, I respectfully suggest that it would give a better impression of the profession if posters here at least considered the issue instead of merely giving reasons for it or rebutting it out of hand.
It is an insupportable convention, and points to part of the difficulty litigants have of obtaining legal redress in a timely and cost-effective manner.
The law favours those with money who can wait at the top and and those eligible for FLAC who can wait a the bottom end and the way justice has been delivered has been the subject of many, many debates over the past ten years.
-------------------------------
On the separate but related issue of client accounts and the monies in them and what interest the client is entitled to, that was covered in this post on AAM
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1029843&postcount=9
1. Solicitor Keeps money in a client account specifically for that client.
In this case the Client is entitled to all the interest earned no matter how much it is.
2. Solicitor keeps money in a general client account. (Probably an amalgamation of the monies of several separate clients.
In this case the client has no entitlement whatsoever to the interest earned. It belongs solely to the solicitor and is specifically excluded from the definition of client monies. However, the client has the following entitlements.
There are two situations where he is entitled to an amount equivalent to the interest his money (on its own) would have earned if the solicitor had kept it on demand deposit at his principal bank.
The first is if that amount is greater than €100.00
The second is if he asks for it. (In this case he will be given the equivalent amount no matter how small it is).
This distinguishes between the interest earned by the Solicitor (None of the clients business) and the Solicitors obligation to his client. Generally SOlicitors eanr a higher rate than they have to pay because of the accumulation of multiple clients funds.
The current position appears to be [broken link removed] and please correct me if I am in error
-------------------------------
On the abuses uncovered in the last three years or so in the way solicitors use their client accounts I note that even a cursory search throws up a lot of results -
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/solicitor-struck-off-after-plundering-client-account-1975112.html
[broken link removed]
[broken link removed]
I'll stop there because I don't wish to give the impression that I am trying to bring the entire profession into disrepute or cast aspersions on the posters here.
I am well aware that there are examples of a lack of integrity in all the professions and that each profession has to guard against this.
Nor am I suggesting that the OP should be worried in case the solicitor in this case will do such a thing.
However...
Please accept that laypeople have legitimate concerns about the conventions regarding payment in the profession - which need to be addressed by the profession, urgently IMO - and that there are significant numbers of cases in the public domain where the actions of the few cast aspersions on the integrity of the many.
There is a public relations and regulatory issue here for the profession as a whole which needs to be addressed.
It could start with adopting a practice for the profession of solicitors ensuring that people or firms who have provided a witness service or a professional service are paid by the clients within 30 days from the date of invoice like any other business.
IMO it would give a better impression of the profession and the Incorporated Law Society if this practice was brought in voluntarily as a response to the current economic difficulty an as part of a modernizing and streamlining of the profession.
I am sure there are legitimate reasons for not bringing in this measure, such as increased overheads for accounting for funds all during a case as opposed to at the end and feel free to make them.
ONQ.