how are copies of emails viewed when used in a complaint to a regulatory body ?

[lamettarules]

Does anyone know ?

I'm in the midst of bringing a professional persons actions to the attention of their regulatory body - SRA .

This involves emails and other documents completed by the person in question .

Just wondered if emails are dismissed as not being " evidence " .Does anyone know ?

We have already been told that incorrectly completed paperwork where a direct question is asked and the NO box completed is not proof of intent . Which I understand ,it could be an error ,albeit one that is repeated . So I can see that it will be hard to adequately verify what has taken place ,so expecting the emails to be dismissed as well .

[tuesdaysfreshhell]

We do work investigating regulated professionals and emails are evidence. You need to show the to, from, date etc, ie the full email.

[lamettarules]

Great ,thanks for that speedy response .

[greenlanes]

Are there any restrictions on how much material can be provided for a complaint against a professional? I am (sadly) looking at reporting my solicitor to the SRA but there is so much material.

[lamettarules]

greenlanes - I don't think there is a restriction .Why don't you ring them first ? I found them helpful on the phone .

Not so much now as it seems I'll need the skills and training of a lawyer to get my point across . Of course I understand the need to establish facts ,but if someone fills out a form denying something and that's not evidence because it doesn't prove intent ......

I'm complaining about a person who is a solicitor who I believe has acted incorrectly/dishonestly in a position of trust in his personal life .But if you are complaining about a solicitor you have instructed doesn't the Law Society suggest the Legal Ombudsman ?
www.lawsociety.org.uk/For-the-public/Using-a-Solicitor/Complaints/

But I imagine ringing the SRA would answer that,

Good luck ,it's horrid isn't it ?

[DGRossetti]

tuesdaysfreshhell

Out of interest, is there a general presumption that an email is what it is, unless one side raises an objection ? Or do some firms try and insist they never sent the email in question ?

[tuesdaysfreshhell]

the investigating officer will be looking at all the evidence not just individual pieces.

It's hard to deny sending an email tbh - and anyway if you click on the email (if you have the original) you shoud be able to get it to 'show original' which will show the message ID. You can copy and include this as evidence if you think they are going to deny sending it.

Far more likely is to deny receiving an email :)

[DGRossetti]

Tx for that.

I guessed it would be the case.

Of course acknowledging existence of an email is not the same a acknowledging the content. A big IT department will be geared up to ensure that journals and logs can be used to rebut that ...

I'm more interested in the digital provenance than the legal side ...

I wonder if this is why so many big companies are laggards when it comes to doing anything meaningful by email ? Call recording is cheap, easy, and well understood, and having a phone call as proof a good backstop. Trying to achieve the same with emails introduces a bit too much geekery ???

[lamettarules]

@tuesdaysfreshhell sorry to ask another question but do you know if a recording of a voicemail would be regarded as "evidence" ?

[MusterMark]

If you show full headers of an email there is a series of Received: headers which starts at the originating computer and ends at the recipient's mail server, in reverse order (they are added to the top as the message is passed around). These are hard to fake.