Advanced search

to think that legal aid should not be restricted only to those who are the alleged victims of domestic violence

(16 Posts)
babybarrister Wed 17-Nov-10 12:18:11

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EldritchCleavage Wed 17-Nov-10 12:37:15

Agree. I've read that Djanogly letter and it is bizarrely naive. Why do politicians endlessly fall into this trap of thinking their grand plans will only have the consequences they intend or have foreseen? And why don't they consult practitioners properly? The people at the cola face generally have a good idea of how these things are really going to pan out.

EldritchCleavage Wed 17-Nov-10 12:37:54

Er coal face. Not sure what the cola face is but I don't want to go there.

marlowwills Wed 17-Nov-10 12:38:54

Haven't looked at the proposals, just headlines on the radio, but presumably the public funding runs out once the injunction's been made, so the client still has to fund ancillary relief, children act and main suit themselves?

babybarrister Wed 17-Nov-10 12:50:05

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

2shoes Wed 17-Nov-10 12:52:11

sorry but I don't know why mn seems to be only concentrating on the divorce aspect.
there are other big issues as well like clinical negligence, yet they seem to be over looked

babybarrister Wed 17-Nov-10 12:59:12

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

popelle Wed 17-Nov-10 13:00:47

Can't most clinical negligence cases be funded through no win no fee arrangements

curlymama Wed 17-Nov-10 13:03:52

I think the system of awarding legal aid has always been unfair anyway, so I don't feel that this makes a huge difference. It certainly won't make any difference to those on low wages that would never have qualified for legal aid, but could still never hope to afford solicitors fees. Whether it be for divorce, clinical negligence or anything else.

2shoes Wed 17-Nov-10 13:36:47

popelle no
not the ones caused at birth

2shoes Wed 17-Nov-10 13:38:03

curlymama yes it will make a difference, the way it stands at the moment the case is in the childs name, as they have no income they get legal aid(same way any pay out belongs to them)

NomNomNom Wed 17-Nov-10 13:38:11

It's pretty shocking actually imho. Just think of the SAHMs posting here whose husbands let them have only the child benefit and keep all their income to themselves. If they ever try to get out of their marriages, those women will face huge difficulties.

Sure, they can read things on the internet, but what if they don't quite understand it, or when they have to represent themselves in court and their ex H has a nasty barrister with clever tactics. And just think of the endless forms and the background knowledge they require.

And why do solicitors and barristers go through several years of training? What's it all for if you can apparently gain the same knowledge from reading stuff on the internet?!

I don't know a lot about legal aid, but I think this is going to have a major impact on society. In a bad way.

popelle Wed 17-Nov-10 13:44:20

2shoes-why can't clinical neglience as birth be done by no win no fee lawyers. Surely if the case is strong enough then some will take it on. (I know nothing about this though so could be very wrong)

curlymama Wed 17-Nov-10 13:51:56

Nom, that can happen in divorce cases where up until the need for divorce, the wife had had almost unlimited access to her husbands fortune. The system has always been unfair.

2shoes, you are obviously speaking from personal experience, and if your dc has a claim of negligence and you can't afford the costs of taking it to court, then of course you should be funded for that. My point is simply that there are lots of people that have needed help with legal fees for a number of years, but they have never been entitlied to it either.

Out of interest, with the way that legal aid has been granted in the past, would your dc have been given it even if you were a high rate taxpayer, as the case would be in her name?

babybarrister Wed 17-Nov-10 14:36:40

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

QueenGigantaurofMnet Wed 17-Nov-10 14:44:07

It is wrong on so very many levels.
I agree BB. This will lead to false accusations of dc which will bring doubt upon genuine victims.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: