Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

Original poster

To think the biggest problem with the legal system is that those with money have an advantage?

23 replies

foxinsocks · 21/05/2011 08:11

surely in court, everyone should be the same?

Yet the IMF banker can afford bail as he's so well off - I bet someone not earning that sort of salary wouldn't have been given bail (or wouldn't have been able to afford it and the conditions with it).

And the super injunctions are only accessible to those with loads of dosh.

Surely we need a process where money doesn't equal advantage in the legal system?

OP posts:

beesimo · 21/05/2011 08:25

The fact is OP money talks and sometimes it shouts, there was a horrible incident with my twins years ago which was entirely accidental and the biggest regret of my life. The next day the SS and the police swooped down on me but my DH and our solicitor got the investigation stopped in its tracks because we are 'rich and respectable and know the right people because he's in the masons' ect.

I was in the wrong over what happened but I was never 'punished' for it because lets face it its only poor or powerless people who lose their bairns.

beesimo · 21/05/2011 08:27

I was punished actually because I punished myself over it for years and years.

GentleOtter · 21/05/2011 08:31

Let's say, for example, that a landowner is a multimillionaire Law Lord.

What if you had to take legal action against him which financially brings you to your knees, win the case, then he reneges?
The only solution is to begin the entire process again.

This would never happen in real life. Allegedly.

MoreBeta · 21/05/2011 08:34

In commercial cases. All that matters is the money. I know a small business run by two nice people who simply had their trade mark and brand stolen by a big really well known business. They simply had not got enough money to fight their case.

Original poster

foxinsocks · 21/05/2011 08:35

Poor otter :-(. What is happening with it now?

Bees, doesn't it make you want to stand up more for those who don't have those advantages?

OP posts:

DillyDaydreaming · 21/05/2011 08:36

beesimo - if your DTs had really been at risk then no amount of money would have stopped a proper investigation. Don't keep punishing yourself for it - whatever "it" was, just put it behind you. A solicitor knows he/she cannot step in and prevent safeguarding stuff - just see that the procedures are followed properly. Don't beat yourself up - accidents happen.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 21/05/2011 08:39

Civil actions are influenced by how much money you can afford. Not-so-wealthy people don't tend to sue lightly, in other words, and they are also at a disadvantage if they person they want to sue has access to a lot of cash. Criminal situations are different... you can pay for a fancier lawyer but that doesn't necessarily improve the outcome. It's a more level playing field. And I think you'll find bail is variable and reflects individual circumstances.

GentleOtter · 21/05/2011 08:44

A family I know are being asked to pay several thousand pounds for quotes made by a company who were contracted by the landowner to the exclusion of the tenant. Payable to the landowner.

If the family do not pay up then their house is not mended.

I have been to their house recently and you can see the sky from the kitchen as the inbetween floors have collapsed as has the roof.

Allegedly.

lovecorrie · 21/05/2011 08:47

I wanted to go through some legal issue earlier in the year but was basically via my solicitor, 'threatened' by the other party that they could afford to lose, whereas I couldn't. It stinks.

nannyl · 21/05/2011 08:52

YANBU

I know a very very wealthy man who managed to get away with murdering his baby, because he had enough money to throw at it and get away with it on a technicality...
The people who know him well all know he did it.... the baby did NOT die 'legally' or through anything natural.... but threw all his money (and used his ex public-school connections / friends to find THE best lawyer, and got off scott free with it)
(at the time it was pn the front page of national news papers, and on BBC News etc etc, & for days and days the long trial was on the local news too)

He got off Scott free... any normal person WOULD have gone to jail for murder

Original poster

foxinsocks · 21/05/2011 08:56

How awful otter. It sounds like a nightmare.

The whole thing makes me cross. So much for Lady Justice being blind!

I wonder if most of the judges come from priviledged backgrounds? I have no idea if this is the case or not.

OP posts:

LynetteScavo · 21/05/2011 09:02

The biggest problem with life is that those with money have an advantage.

GentleOtter · 21/05/2011 09:04

Many judges can be found on the grouse moors or by good salmon rivers on their days off...... although this would not determine their background but it does take a certain salary and social group to afford that sort of recreation.

PeppaPigHonk · 21/05/2011 09:09

It can work the other way, though.
We were intimidated and ripped off by thousands of pounds by shonky builders who didn't think we would go to the expense of suing them and that we would write it off as a bad experience.
We didn't. We sued. We won and because we could afford to do that these bastardscowboys won;t be able to do it to anyone else who might not be able to afford to pursue them.

Nanny - I NEED to know which case you are talking about!

Original poster

foxinsocks · 21/05/2011 09:11

That's true Lynette but we are all supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law. Even playing fields and all that. Just that some seem to be more equal than others.

OP posts:

MoreBeta · 21/05/2011 10:25

Incidentally, in civil cases and commercial cases judges know full well they can bring a case to a close very swiftly by forcing the financially weaker litigant to put a very large deposit of cash down to cover the other litigant's expenses should they lose. Of course by forcing them to do the judge knows the weaker litigant will just withdraw their case or settle for a fraction of the damages. I also have heard that banks will sometimes swap information about the relative financial strength of litigants and wil come to an agremeent to withdraw their financial backing of the weaker litigant to force settlement if it is in their overall commercial interest.

Its a game between lawyers and judges and sometimes banks in the end in whch litigants with little cash and good cases often cannot bring their case to a successful conclusion. There are investors who do finance cases on behalf of litigants but the cost if huge and they take a large part of any damages you win as their return on investment.

ScousyFogarty · 21/05/2011 10:32

Foxinsoxs YES. IT IS TRUE....people with money do have an advantage in our court system...criminal and civil. You wont gat barristers and judges admitting that (very often)

NerfHerder · 21/05/2011 10:38

People with money have advantage in every area of life- this is the capitalist system- why limit that to the legal system?

nijinsky · 21/05/2011 10:42

The wealthy and the dregs of society, who get legal aid to sort out all their troubles and do not have to worry about paying legal fees like the rest of society.

reallytired · 21/05/2011 10:49

We sued some really evil tenants. The court awarded us substantial damages, but we had no way of enforcing a county judgement. I feel that it should be criminal offence to ignore a county judgement.

However the very poor are entitled to legal aid in some circumstances.

bubblecoral · 21/05/2011 11:53

Legal aid is a joke. We would not qualify if we ever needed it, but that doesn't mean we could come anywhere close to being able to pay for a lawyer. Seems like one again it's those in the middle that are the most screwed.

Itsjustafleshwound · 21/05/2011 12:01

As others have said money shouts and especially coming from a country where the disparity between the haves and have nots is so huge it is clear that cash buys you the sympathetic ears and pushes your agendas like nothing else.

I don't just think it is confined to the courts either - medical, educational, political advantage can all be bought ...

Cocoflower · 21/05/2011 12:10

I agree with bubblecoral

We are somewhere in the middle.

Last year dc's dad out of the blue decided he suddenly wanted access to dc. So he gets a load of free legal aid even to the point he strated another dispute up that my dc wouldn't refer to him as 'dad' (for a man that walked out on her at 1 and she hd no idea who he was). Luckily it was laughed at but it was the sheer waste of time,money and unfair stress it casued.

This man has wrecked peoples lives and sits around all day getting drunk but is treated as some poor victim with his free legal aid.

Meanwhile DH and I as hardworking people had to pay all our own legal costs as we had an assest and an income.

In the end dc dad couldnt actually be bothered to see her anyway so the tax payer get their money wasted on scum like him while we are left deeply out of pocket.

How is this fair?

Flip