Solicitor does not want to represent me

Thanks for all the replies, particularly MOB who says “She can come off record. If another solicitor does not take over the case, she will apply to the court, and this will be by Notice of Motion”. It probably will be granted because of the difficulties that have arisen between us but it will be professionally embarrassing for her to have to admit in open court that she acted illegally by failing to send a Section 68 letter informing me IN WRITING of the actual charges, an estimate of the charges or the basis on which the charges are to be made.

To answer all the other posts, although it does seem strange that I still want her to represent my son, this is simply due to the fact that everything between his mother and I is so contentious that it would be easier to let her continue than to instruct another solicitor.
Also, I don’t believe there is much chance in the case being successful as he wasn’t involved in the accident (the claim is for Nervous Shock) and I am only pursuing it after being told, by this solicitor, that my son could sue me if I don’t.

"but I gather it happens quite regularly." - certainly not true- Ask all the deaf soldiers and the residents of the homes who were sexually abused.

"If I was wrong, she would not have given it back." - certainly not true: no solicitor wants a Law Society complaint. Waiving a fee or part of a fee - even if properly due - is often an easier way to deal with the matter than having to put up a detailed defence.
Are we to believe that my solicitor is so well paid that she would simply give back €6,000 that she was properly due simply because it was easier than putting up a detailed defence? Solicitors regularly put up defences for other people because that is their job. Try asking your doctor, plumber or shop keeper for the money you paid that they were properly due it. Imagine a car mechanic giving someone even sixty euro cause they didn’t want to bother servicing their own car or a painter paying someone to paint their own house. Unbelievable.

Bronte says “To answer your second point, you have found out from the courts that a certain document needs to be sent in. So you need to find a new solicitor to act for you and get the file from your old solicitor.
The Courts have told me this over the phone but won’t tell me where the regulations for this exist. I need to know this before I decide what to do next. In relation to finding a new solicitor, I have dealt with three in the past two years (insurance claim, family law and conveyance) and have made successful complaints against them all. I simply don’t know where I can get a good solicitor as all three were recommended personally but all three were breaking the law themselves.

So, I still need to know what rules and regulations govern solicitors coming of record.
 
bond-007 said:
Could give an example of Solicitor and client costs that are not recoverable from a loosing party?
Click to expand...

Just see this part of the extract.

"Party and Party costs:
Party and Party costs cover all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred by one party for the purposes of the relevant proceedings which the other side is obliged to pay. There may be costs in an action that are not allowable as Party and Party costs. The party claiming costs must justify why they were incurred and why those costs should be allowed. The Party and Party Costs may not cover the whole of the costs incurred in an action and the courts have held that:-

In costs between party and party one does not get full indemnity for costs incurred against the other. The principle to be considered in relation to party and party costs is that you are bound in the conduct of your case to have regard to the fact that your adversary may in the end have to pay your costs. You cannot indulge in a 'luxury of payment'. "

A classic one would be a difficult Testamentary Case - family arguing over a will. You may have a difficult/nervous/agitated client who wants constant reassurance/contact/updates(when there is none!). Costs are not always awarded out of an estate so before deciding the odds/chances of success there may be extensive consultation with Counsel etc.,etc., Costs are incurred there and they would be unlikely to be recoverable from the unsuccessful party.

Most Court cases are about one of two things:
1. Liability - is one person entirely to blame?
2. Quantum - how much?

In cases where there is no dispute, settlement is easy. Where there is a dispute, its for the Court to tease it out and the Court ultimately decides costs.

mf
 
"In relation to finding a new solicitor, I have dealt with three in the past two years (insurance claim, family law and conveyance) and have made successful complaints against them all. I simply don’t know where I can get a good solicitor as all three were recommended personally but all three were breaking the law themselves."

Oh dear. Or to paraprhase Oscar Wilde: to complain about one or two solicitors is tragic but to successfully complain about three is just downright suspect!

mf
 
If we're paraphrasing writers' quotes about parents then maybe [broken link removed]* is apposite here too?

* Contains strong language!
 
"Are we to believe that my solicitor is so well paid that she would simply give back €6,000 that she was properly due simply because it was easier than putting up a detailed defence?"

Yep.

That is what I would probably have done; because the work I had to do defending myself would have been unpaid work, and the time lost could be more profitably spent dealing with clients who want my services and are happy to pay me. There is only one way for a solicitor to win in a dispute with a client and that is to not have it. Only if the matter goes public and reputation is at risk would any sensible solicitor feel a need to deal with a dispute on the merits. Otherwise, the sensible practice is to just get it resolved, get rid of client's files to someone else and move one.

"The Law Society found in my favour on all three counts". Sorry. My apologies then. I had understood that you had threatened action and that the solicitor had taken the step of unlaterally refunding the disputed charge rather than go down the road of a full investigation. However, if the solicitor in fact only gave back the charge on foot of an investigation and a finding by the Law Society that she should do so, this completely changes the complexion of the thing. Though, to be fair, this was not at all obvious from your post. It is still the case, of course, that many solicitors would unilaterally refund a disputed charge rather than go through a Law Society investigation.

".......but it will be professionally embarrassing for her to have to admit in open court that she acted illegally by failing to send a Section 68 letter informing me IN WRITING of the actual charges, an estimate of the charges or the basis on which the charges are to be made."

Are you seriously suggesting that, somehow, you could force a solicitor to continue acting for your son by a threat of embarrassing her in the High Court? And that your already toxic relationship with this solicitor will not suffer even more? And that none of this will cause grave difficulty in her representing your son's interests? For goodness sake, you have a situation where your son very clearly needs new representation. Would you not just get on with it.
 
"Are we to believe that my solicitor is so well paid that she would simply give back €6,000 that she was properly due simply because it was easier than putting up a detailed defence?"
Yep. That is what I would probably have done; because the work I had to do defending myself would have been unpaid work”

Sorry, MOB, but the failure to defend herself, if she truly believed she was in the right, cost her €6,000 so its not right saying this was “unpaid work”.

Your son very clearly needs new representation. Would you not just get on with it. Its not that easy when I’m separated from a women who fails to accept that parents are equal. Getting a new solicitor for him will be next to impossible. Given the problems I’ve had with the solicitors I’ve recently dealt with, how can I possibly get one that will be any better than this one?

This is getting a bit of track. I still need to know what rules and regulations govern solicitors coming of record. Can anyone tell me?
 
Per MOB's earlier post.

"She can come off record. If another solicitor does not take over the case, she will apply to the court, and this will be by Notice of Motion.

I have a real difficulty with the idea that anyone could simultaneously believe their solicitor was a cheat and still want that solicitor to represent them (or their child). Something here simply does not add up. I don't think the court will entertain this sort of hair splitting.

Her application to come off record will certainly be granted in circumstances where her client's father (who instructed her) does not trust her."

You cannot compel her to continue to act for you/your child. The Court may query why she is making the application and, given that there is a minor child involved, may seek to adjourn things until you find another solicitor. But you're in a real bind, you say the case is probably not great anyway ( so why would anyone want to take the case on?) and you've successfully reported three solicitors to the Law Society. So why would any solicitor want to act for you/your son?

So - what happens?
1. You can move the file - I understand that there are some very good solicitors out there - but they may not want to act for you.
2. You can let it sit and let the current solicitor either do nothing or make her application.
3. You can discuss this with the childs mother and see does she want to take the case over as the childs mother maybe through her own solicitor?
4. You could decide the case is useless and try to walk away from the case entirely.

mf
 
OP I can't believe you've had 3 such bad experiences. It seems quite unbelievable. Maybe you should try one of the solicitors that reply here on AAM but they might be a tad afraid of you methinks. It seems your options are a) to go to a new solicitor and if not b) your current solicitor can apply to court to no longer represent you or c) represent yourself.


MOB - very sad you would rather give up 6K than prove you were in the right. I mean that from the point of view of the law being something to uphold and you being part of it. Something wrong with the way these things are working then.
 
I agree it is very strange that a solicitor would simply give up €6000 if they are in the right.
 
Not so strange - in fact extremely commonplace. Sad but true.

There is hardly a business in the country that has never written off a bad debt, even when they are totally in the right and the defaulting customer is totally in the wrong.

Quite commonly in such situations, it is simpler and less stressful for the business to write off the sum owed, put it down to experience and put the issue behind them, rather than wasting further time and money in chasing a debt that might never be paid.

Remember, a solicitors firm is a business like any other and the same rules apply. In fact I attended a credit management seminar last year and the presenter explained how in his opinion solicitors are the worst of all businesses in managing their debtors and collecting the debts owing to them.
 
bond-007 said:
I agree it is very strange that a solicitor would simply give up €6000 if they are in the right.
Click to expand...
It comes down to simple maths.

How much time do they expect to have to spend defending themselves against the law society case? => A
How much do they charge by the hour? => B
How much is the disputed fee? => C

If A * B > C, it's not financially worth fighting.

Other considerations are what would have to be delayed/rejected due to the time taken to defend the law society case.
 
When I say I would write off the fee in such a situation, this is from a perspective of this sort of thing never having happened to me. I do admit I once had a complaint (a justified complaint) about delay, and to bring things to a quick conclusion I firstly finished the job and secondly reduced the fee (and having done this off my own bat, I had a client who sent a nice letter off their own bat to say they were now completely happy), but that is about it. It may be the case that there are solicitors who tend to rub up clients the wrong way, who get complaints and who tend to defend everything. But I think my perspective is that of the majority - forget about winning the war, just avoid the war in the first place.
 
Ubiquitous, you musn’t have read my earlier posts. You say that solicitors are the worst of all businesses in managing their debtors and collecting the debts owing to them. This wasn’t a debt. She got the cheque for my compensation and took €6.000 from it, then gave me what was left. If it was a debt, I would have owed her money and your explanation might make sense but she gave me back the money!!!

Bronte, yea, that’s how bad it was. Thanks for the recommendation.

mfi asks as the case is probably not great anyway ( so why would anyone want to take the case on? I have been told by this solicitor that if I do not pursue the case on behalf of my son, he may pursue me for not doing so when he becomes 18. I’d rather have the case go ahead and be thrown out than explain this situation to him in ten years time. Don’t start on about our relationship now cause he gets a hard enough time from his mother about me at the moment. No idea how we’ll end up, friend or foe.
A solicitor who does everything above board and upholds the law would have nothing to fear from me. All my complaints have been upheld by the Law Society and so quite obviously the 3 solicitors were in the wrong.

I still need to know what rules and regulations govern solicitors coming of record. Can anyone tell me?
 
I think there may not be any specific "rules and regulations". Just a matter of the solicitors own decision.
 
Thanks, putsch, but I think there are. A solicitor came off record recently in my family law case but my wife opposed it. Luckily, he had got me to write a letter consenting to this and had signed an affidavit for me so there must be some sort of regulation on the matter.
 

I did read your earlier posts. If you read mine, you will see that my comments were general ones and had no specific relevance to your particular case.
 
Ubiquitous says, in relation to not reading my posts
“If you read mine, you will see that my comments were general ones and had no specific relevance to your particular case”.
Sorry but I wrongly presumed that anyone posting on this thread would have been commenting on this particular case and not using it to discuss other issues.You made out that this was a bad debt in your referral to Bond who said
“I agree it is very strange that a solicitor would simply give up €6000 if they are in the right”
and you responded by saying
“Not so strange - in fact extremely commonplace. Sad but true. There is hardly a business in the country that has never written off a bad debt, even when they are totally in the right and the defaulting customer is totally in the wrong”.
Start a thread about people not paying solicitors fees and about solicitors not bothering to pursue them if you want but by going off the subject here (solicitors taking money that wasn’t theirs), I may not get an answer to what I thought was a reasonably straight forward question which was
“Can she come off record or is she obliged to continue her representation?The court have told me by phone that my solicitor has to submit a Notice of Motion and an affidavit but they are unable to tell me where these rules or regulations are so I cannot quote them”.
I later said “So, I still need to know what rules and regulations govern solicitors coming of record”.
Afterwards, I said “This is getting a bit of track. I still need to know what rules and regulations govern solicitors coming of record. Can anyone tell me?”
(Yea, I’ve asked three times now and no-one has come up with an answer I can refer to)
 
I am very sorry indeed for the delay in dealing with the original request. I confirm that the relevant rules and regulations depend upon the court. For example, in the High Court this is governed by Order 7 of the Rules of the Superior Courts which states in the relevant part:

"3. (1) Where a solicitor who has acted for a party in any proceedings has died or become bankrupt or cannot be found or has failed to take out a practising certificate or has been struck off the roll of solicitors or has ceased to act for the party, and the party has not given notice of change of solicitor or notice of intention to act in person in accordance with the provisions of rule 2, any other party to the proceedings or (where the solicitor has ceased to act) the solicitor may, on notice to be served on the first-mentioned party, personally, or by letter addressed to his last-known place of residence, unless the Court otherwise directs, apply to the Court for an order declaring that the solicitor has ceased to be the solicitor acting for the first-mentioned party in the proceedings, and the Court may make an order accordingly."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register