To ask that people STOP giving incorrect Legal advice!!!

Touché 🤣

😁

Pretty sure from the style and bad grammar the OP isn't actually a solicitor. More likely a receptionist that has experience in a single solicitors' firm.

As a lawyer, could I ask that everyone ignore the OP and continue giving really bad legal advice so I have a steady income please ?

Anyone who gets legal advice from layperson is getting better advice than my mate has received from hugely expensive professionals. He owns his house - he has paid for it! His neighbour tried to defraud him out of his land and when he looked into it he found that the LR had registered part of his and to his neighbour. He investigated and found that when his neighbour's property was registered, it was done on forged papers - that means the neighbour's registration was void. He wrote and complained to the LR and managed to get the land removed from his neighbour. But the neighbour had taken him to court while the LR were still investigating the matter. When he got to court - they refused to allow his evidence, he was not allowed to speak in court and he was not allowed to give a statement, he had a duff solicitor who had not sent in papers to court when he should have done, he had got another solicitor costing £6000 who did nothing, he got a barrister who was too terrified of the judge to speak on his behalf. His neighbour's solicitor was greedy and talked my mate out of seeking relief from sanctions, The neighbour's counsel in court took a document out of his disallowed evidence and misdirected the court on the facts in favour of his client, and the judge believed him. He lost his case and had £54000 to pay - he does not owe the money they will not listen to his evidence, he is now unemployed and he has a charging order on his house, He has done nothing wrong! Get out of that one! Many lay people know far more about the law than legal people! I told him, to send his story to the papers - it will be the story of the year.

Some of this is inaccurate OP.

You absolutely can be awarded the house because you are at home with the children without a mesher/having to sell at a later date. I was.

My ex also named my partner in proceedings.

I hear you OP. I am not a solicitor but I had to learn family law inside out to represent myself effectively in court during a very protracted and difficult divorce/ancillary relief proceedings. If I give advice on here, it's factual and if I'm unsure, I won't say anything. I've seen some horribly incorrect advice on here, meant with kindness, but misleading nonetheless.

Recently I was asked for advice by a school mum who was aghast that her ex husband was not going to be ordered to pay her mortgage, forgo settlement from the family home and have to pay substantial spousal on top. This was all on £30k a year. However, somebody had told her that this was fact and I'm afraid I had to put her straight.

The one thing I would say is that I do agree that it's wise to gather up information quietly if you can. I regret not doing this. It made my case very difficult with an uncooperative respondent. Of course this isn't possible for everybody.

Surely having sone idea of your partners finances is a good idea? Proof of a bank statement or savings account or pension statement.

Just so you know if they hide the information later down the line.

That's practical advice, not legal advice.

YANBU and it applies to motoring, consumer rights and especially matters around payroll, tax and employment rights, there is utter shit spouted on here that is the diametric opposite of the true position on most threads.

To be honest I agree, I mean asking a public forum is never going to go well, but am often stunned at th4 stuff I read.

the common law wife myth, through to the get all your ducks in a row nonsense that people trot out, record him, photograph his documents, snoop on his phone, you will get a mesher order, you can keep th4 house, you can have such a high percentage as you don’t work, some people act like they are James bloody bond.

I think there is some similarity though.
I hurt my hand at the weekend, I went to a+e and saw once clinician throughout. She triaged me, sent me off for an xray, told me the results, cleaned my wound, steristripped it, strapped it and gave me antibiotics

She was a nurse. I didn't see a Dr face to face throughout. I'm not sure if she was a nurse prescriber, or was working with a Dr but you'd be 100% forgiven for blurring the nurse Dr role.

There's plenty of people who would have no idea that the people they saw in A+E were nurse consultants, paramedics, advanced practitioners, nurse prescribers etc and assume they were drs

In the same way people assume most people in a solicitors office are solicitors and don't realise they encountered a paralegal

I think it's the same of whatever area your expertise is. You assume advice/the media/others are correct even though they frequently arent

For example I know a fair amount about native uk animals, and see lots of inaccurate information being given out everywhere from mums net to my local mp for example. I clearly see news reports widely shared that have massive inaccuracies that make the whole story likely fake

However.....

I don't see this when it's a subject I don't know well, I assume that that news article is right, I end up goggling for advice etc

It's like an odd mix of optimism and naivety

Nurses and doctors are very different. Completely different roles and skill sets. Not at all similar to the relationship between Paralegals and solicitors.

All the recommendations to “photocopy his documents” makes me wince.

Unlawfully obtained documents will not be admissible in litigation. Fair enough, if he leaves stuff on the table. But rifling through drawers? Big no.

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/family-and-children/imerman-disclosure-and-self-help-in-financial-proceedings

.

Exercise and dietary advice on here is often appalling if not outright dangerous.

I would just add advice on benefits is very frequently wrong there are good free sources of information out there and as with other issues the answer is probably it depends

Yep, comprehension (because most of us do understand context!) wasn't the problem, it was being lectured by an 'expert' who then couldn't see the irony of the typo in that context...
😀

Yes, I think there's a soothing effect that's being sought out, that cushions the reality of what has to happen. The difficulty is when this becomes accepted as reality. I stopped expecting actual useful advice from any kind of forum a long time ago.

Half the fun of this place is reading the half baked crack pot advice dished out by loud ill informed morons thinking they are an authority on a subject because they watched a few episodes of Suits or Ally McBeal.

I think YABU OP. Firstly, you won't stop people doing it so why get het up about it; secondly, why not produce a factsheet for guidance and post it (rather than criticism). Yes every case is different, but what do you think people should do generally? What is worth doing? That could actually help rather than saying what doesn't help.

Meh, MN is an unregulated chat forum. People should take everything with a pinch of salt, be that advice, opinion, anecdotes or recommendations. MN should never be the only place you source information from.

Or any other kind of mistake!

Oh yes! Especially when someone pipes up about adjustments at work, omitting to mention or even understand the word 'reasonable'. People with the 'they can't sack you if you are disabled'. I feel sorry for posters who believed this and got fired.

I thought I'd read that you used to be able to if you were divorcing on the grounds of adultery, but last year or the year before they brought in no fault divorces so I don't think you need to give a reason anymore.