Litigation Loans to fund divorce

[Highlandheath]

Any views, experiences, recommendations please, or do these contribute to what Mostyn describes in JvJ as "gross leaching of costs" and solicitors charging for nothing but time?

@RChole (that name strikes me as more than appropriate!!!) If you're well informed enough about the law to have a considered view on Mostyn J's merits as a jurist, why did you enter into a litigation loan when you were adamant it was not in your interests to do so?

You are absolutely right!!! the fact that I can read a newspaper, and form views and opinions on the news qualifies me to understand a complex, new and largely unregulated area of lending..... I am now e expert in the all aspects of litigation funding and lending!!! I will be charging my time at £595 an hour pro rata from now on, you wouldn't expect me to work for free, after all... Now would you!

Now if you don't mind my time is precious and unless you have something I agree with to say I'm out of here... :-D (think I'm getting the hang of this @hiddentruth

People can get very upset in divorce. Sometimes it is better just to forget about it all and move on.

I paid my own and my husband's solicitors' costs which solved the problem of funding the divorce I suppose and certainly helped concentrate the mind on negotiating a settlement without any hearings.

Loans for legal csts are not that new. Isn't that how the legal aid scheme worked/works - that it is a loan and when you win or get the house or whatever you then pay the state back?

These divorce loans sounds reasonable for some people although as most lawyers would agree it tends to be better to compromise and avoid these long winded divorce cases if you possibly can.

"how often is the money taken off the top for the entire loan (before division) and how often is it taken just from the loan holder's settlement?" I don't know enough about these loans to know the answer to that. I presume there will be a distinction between cases that go to a full hearing and the judge makes an order which might deal with that point and the vast majority of other cases where it settles before that and then it will just be what the parties agree.

Tis the season to say Ho Ho Ho

It is about as agreeable as a spell in the house and a contempt vote!

Btw your hourly rate is rather keen...have you got a special offer on?

Thanks @Xenia for entering this rather uppity thread with a calm and reasonable answer.

Yes you are right about the legal aid formula as far as I understand it too and there is a massive question here as to who is providing the funding for these loans and whether that is open to all sorts of additional risk because there are investors monitoring private cases ... blow by blow if they so wish by solicitor updates...and this is a sharing of information which is beyond comfortable comprehension. One should at least know about it especially since the loan set up can be called in with a regular stamp on an envelope and these people behind the loan will consider that is issued.

This is the stuff of dodgy loans and cloak and dagger tactics which is certainly not transparent. So the loan holder presumably or the other joint owner of assets on which these loans are held can find their assets being sold ....by whom? Whose property is it to sell if this 2nd class stamp is issued calling it in....

Who gets to instruct the estate agents...for both these people when one of the solicitors is acting only for the loan holder but is ordered to do the conveyancing. They get to handle the cash but have no direct contractual duty of care to both parties.

This is where the issue of how the loan is repaid comes in. It seems that they are being advertised as a way to get the other side ie. The non loan holder to pay the legal bill of the loan holder. The loan gets repaid first it seems before everything else which is why I ask if it comes off the top as this is not what the debt agencies say should happen.

Hence why those who handle this will know ....

I was never offered a sensible route and was taken to court.

It seems to me op should go through the proper channels if they have a specific complaint rather than airing the issue here which is inappropriate not least because unless they are willing to publish the loan documents and verbatim court report, alongside all other documents of the divorce it's impossible to add anything helpful.

This thread just says it all - waste of time posting in legal unless you play by the rules - say anything contentious and there must be something wrong with you - or you just don’t get it.

The thing is we do get it - we get it too much - that is our downfall - we enter into this process because we know we need help - we know we are vulnerable - most of us coming from a place where financial and emotional abuse has already existed. We know what we are up against but nobody believes us - we must be neurotic, the bitter ex, the greedy ex, highly suspicious - and it’s all a joke to you?

I can quite believe it - it’s all in a days work for you - but this is people’ s lives you are talking about, people’s homes you are putting at risk, people’s mental health you are playing with and this is before we even start on the children.

Of course you can’t put a cost on the emotional and financial abuse - it doesn’t factor in splitting the assets - but you can be sure as eggs are eggs that legals know it exits even though they won’t acknowledge it - because the more acrimonious the case the more they earn-

My original solicitor who left the firm that then abused me through the court process told me to pursue this as far as I could. Except when you go to the LO and SRA you are just dealing with people that pretend they are there to protect the publics interest but really they are not.

Who can define “reasonable” to me? Is it quantifiable? Or is it just one of these words that you think means something but really it means bugger all because the context can be interpreted any way you like but only if you are in the profession - one meaning for the professional a completely different meaning for joe bloggs!

My final hearing was the biggest load of old bullshit I have ever heard - even in the midst of an extremely traumatic experience I could still pick up the bullshit - it was like being in a parallel universe - except you couldn’t call it for what it was as it’s not the done thing - after all these people have spent years perfecting their art - yet one minute we can pretend we are in an ideal world to make a point - but turn it back on the profession - oh no you can’t do that - after all you are just a joe blogg - no legal training but a brain!

Why is it that evidence that is submitted prior to the final hearing can be ignored by the judge? Evidence that totally refutes what the other party is saying and should have a significant impact on the outcome. But it’s ignored! Why does the judge allow continual harassment of joe bloggs by allowing questioning of her mental health when it is clear from the file that joe bloggs is already vulnerable and judge had previously met her mental health support worker as the judge did not accept what she had been given by GP, by psychiatrist by witnessing joe bloggs herself. Why was it deemed reasonable that the barrister could just not turn up at court to represent joe bloggs because her mother had died but it was not deemed reasonable that joe bloggs should be allowed a retrial due to her 20 year mental health issues or allowed to appeal.

Why is the time frame restricted to 28 days to appeal - most joe bloggs going through what I did cannot function for 28 days never mind come to a decision to throw themselves back in the lions den

And then you get a comment like this

most lawyers would agree it tends to be better to compromise and avoid these long winded divorce cases if you possibly can

Now why didn’t I think of this - yes let’s compromise -

And then we should just forget about it and move on - yes bloody lovely - except we are not in a position to do this because we have been shafted financially and then just to make sure we are totally unable to stand up for ourselves let’s add in the emotional abuse too!

I am disgusted by this thread - I am even more disgusted that just on this thread there seems to be a vein of abuse going on - women who have lost their all are now looking to try and put this right - probably too late for themselves - but you know what maybe they can help prevent other women going through what they have been through and you get two blokes laughing and minimising their whole ordeal

You should be fucking ashamed of yourselves - not as a lawyer or arbitrator but as a fucking human being!

Greenberet.... Thankyou Sister!!! I think you and I have been on a similar journey. On the one hand, on this thread alone the lawyers are saying "you don't understand - I'm a big clever lawyer, worth every penny I know all the answers" and then two posts later "well, if you are able to form an opinion on Mostyn J how come you signed up for a loan".... Because the big clever lawyer told me it was the ONLY option... "But NO lawyer would do that"..... well these lawyers did... And there are lots of other people in the same position .... either "you've got an axe to grind" or "you don't understand" or "you understand too much" or "that would NEVER happen" or "we don't know the facts" but they've been repeatedly posted, so then "we don't believe you". It's what I expected TBH...

You should be fucking ashamed of yourselves - not as a lawyer or arbitrator but as a fucking human being!

Wow. To be fair to Legal myself and Ex Wife were advised by the Judge at the FDA (First Directions Appointment) to settle amicably to avoid Courts as the costs would escalate quickly.

Sadly did not happen as Ex made the Divorce a revenge contest. Two years later she still blames Legal for the end result. I disagree as I don't believe 4 consecutive Law Firms would give bad advice. More likely to be the case that she was not hearing what she wanted to hear which was I should be homeless and bankrupt.

Throughout the proceedings her expectations were not only unreasonable, but also impossible. Demanding that she should be given all three properties in the family plus my parents house too! Also wanted Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance that ran into the thousands per month!

At Final Hearing Judge stated that Applicant's demands were unreasonable and based on greed as opposed to need. Judge even questioned why the Solicitors had been prepared to put forward such demands. Solicitors not present at the Final Hearing as they were on holiday. So the unfortunate Barrister who was appointed only a few days earlier had to try and explain it all.

Punchline is:

Be upfront with disclosure and provide solicitors will the full story. They will then be able to decide what is a fair deal and settle amicably without the need for Courts.

However, if one or both make the Divorce a contest and cherry pick what information they provide to solicitors then courts will unavoidable.

MissedTheBoatAgain

I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone gets told that - play nicely to save yourself a few bob- BUt there’s a glaring contradiction here that we wouldn’t be going through the court process if we were able to do this.

I started at mediation only option as the only money I had access to was £6k of children’s saving - i was totally reliant on x as he ran the company and could decide how much to dish out - I tried as so many suggest on these boards to take advantage of money going into a joint bank account but this was used against me.

before even starting the divorce process x dealt his hand by trying to hide his affair make out it was just a case of fallen out of love and wanted to do right by his kids - stupid bugger put all this in a letter and I could tell it wasn’t written by him - his OW had helped compose it!

She too threatened to report me to police for looking at her linked in account! Nasty pair!

I tried constantly to get x to disclose information direct with me - especially as x continually said money was tight as company was going down the pan - my solicitor was aware of all this - except x refused to deal direct with me - unless it was to intimidate me or confuse me or throw me off course which he did many a time - even his solicitor wrote saying it was getting too confusing - complete bollocks - she was assisting him in his game plan.

Now my corrupt solicitor told me she had “seen all this before” she had dealt with lots of cases where there was abuse - if so why did she let it continue - she started off ok seeming to fight but then went “missing in action” - funny too she was always on holiday just before a critical point - ie going to court for the forced sale of the family home - did she prepare before she went away - no - because her advice was to sell the home “ no lawyer in the land would say anything different” except at this point the company had not been valued correctly and when it was there was enough money in the pot to offset house for company and pension - except house had now been sold!

I had an offer I wanted to accept about a year in - but I was told I would not be able to manage without joint lives spousal and this was “secure” - I told sol x would never pay this - even if court ordered he would find ways of getting round it - pretty easy as a company director - just look at the hassle I’ve had with CMS - he was taking me to court to dispute what he had been told to pay - Maybe a bit like you with 3 different versions of maintenance from CMS - or just because he knew it would play on my mind? - who knows but he cancelled it a couple of weeks before - probably because he got wind off here that I was going to use it as an opportunity to get a lump sum of arrears ordered!

You’ve mentioned that both you and your ex wife started court proceedings I can’t remember who did what off hand but I’m pretty sure your ex wife would have a different story - yeah we got told at court too -FDA - that spousal was highly likely and for x to basically stop mucking about with company valuation - but we never saw this judge again!

Even his solicitor abused my mental health - towards the end as LIP she was preparing the court bundles - did she send it to me completed - nah did she fuck - she sent it in dribs and drabs so that I had to put it altogether myself - not very easy when you are veering from suicidal to basic capability and having to check every bloody piece of paper she sent - and surprise surprise was she selective with paperwork - you get!

Apparently court bundles had been couriered to me - but she would never supply courier details when questioned. She knew of my intention to try and get one hearing adjourned but told court she never received email. X statement for house sale “ was not received by my solicitors” - it went into a junk folder and was only discovered after I’d been to court - but his costs order was received and which I was ordered to pay!

Personally I can quite believe 4 consecutive law firms would give bad advice - or certainly enough to try and draw you in! I had one who assumed she had been appointed at £26k - yes I was desperate at this time but not stupid! TOok a few letters to put this right!

I think you try to portray that you “support” your ex wife and kid - but something is amiss - why have you had 3 variations in calculating payments from CMS - why are you even having to use CMS if it is your x wife who is the greedy one - why have you not reached an amicable agreement?

You are probably very much like my x - it will be all me who was greedy, who didn’t listen to solicitors, who got her wrists slapped for harassment and “concerning” behaviour - yet I can prove otherwise - he too has an “image” to protect - if his kids are his priority why the need for CMS - oh and we are fighting over a difference of 3k - which in the words of CMS “ he can quite clearly afford it” - it’s not about affordability though is it - it’s about continuing the abuse through the system - his kids are coming up to a levels next year - mocks after Christmas and they know I may not be able to keep the former family home going - their home that they have lived in since age 2 - their home that they told their father they wanted to stay living in when he asked them what they wanted! Except they cant have this as this means I got to keep the home too - so how do we get round this and come out the good guy - I know we look up our old paperwork from when we headed up a campaign to stop development of the field behind the house - you know the campaign where we got all the neighbours involved and the press involved and somehow managed to defeat the developers!

Then out of the blue just as my honest solicitor talked about trying to reach a settlement very very early days where I keep house and x gets company and pension up pops this letter from the developer wanting to buy our house - not for the millions it is probably worth but enough for the x to continue his game plan and enforce the sale of the home - for financial reasons - nah - from spite - except currently I can’t prove this - the letter was redirected to him apparently but Royal Mail confirmed they don’t redirect joint mail - all joint mail goes to the original address - I was not allowed to attend meetings - why because I was unhinged - more likely that I would suss out it was a done deal before this letter was even typed. My father wasn’t even allowed to go along in my place - emails never received again or ignored or maybe it was the junk folder?

You see it’s all bullshit and we ladies on here know this - but we are fighting a system that seems entrenched in bullshit - not only this but you lawyers have been hoodwinked into thinking your bullshit makes you “a superior being” actually it just makes you a master of bullshit!

We still have a lot of bullshit to get through but we will - especially when we come together and compare stories and can see that this bullshit is endemic!

I’m not fighting for myself, I’m not fighting for justice, I’m not fighting because I have an axe to grind - I’m fighting because all along I have been told “kids are a priority” in all this by the law, by the x. Really? Nah from where I see it money is the priority - who can earn the most? Who can keep the most and the kids - oh well they will survive divorce they all do! - a child of 13 should NEVER

Pressed post as though I was going to lose it!

Where was I oh yes

I CHILD OF 13 SHOULD NEVER BE MADE TO FEEL SUICIDAL BECAUSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES CREATED BY A PARENT - A PARENT WHO CLAIMS HE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD SCHOOL FEES YET HIS LIFESTYLE INDICATES THE BLOODY OPPOSITE - A LIFESTYLE THAT WAS APPARENT ALL THROUGH THE COURT PROCESS BUT WASNT WHATEVER THE WORD IS THAT IS USED - A LIFESTYLE THAT THE CHILD COULD SEE. A PERSON FEELS SUICIDAL WHEN THEY ARE TRYING TO PROCESS CONFLICTING INFORMATION - WHEN AN EXTERNAL FIGHT BECOMES INTERNAL BECAUSE NOTHING MAKES SENSE - THEY SEE ONE THING BUT ARE BEING TOLD ANOTHER THEY KNOW IT IS NOT RIGHT BUT THEY CAN NO LONGER MAKE SENSE OF IT AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO CARE THE MOST WELL THEY ARE CAUSING THIS BLOODY ANGUISH! AND THEN DISMISS IT AS A SCHOOL BOY PRANK,

So yes I’d love to move on - put all this behind me - but my kids are not yet 18 - they are negotiating the next stage of their lives - a stage that should have been easy because it was prepared for during the 20 years of marriage - but this is before Ow and her kids factored into the equation !

I should have been out of this mess - it will be all over the judge told me once the divorce is through - can get a fulltime job and everything will be tickety boo! Except she didn’t read the bloody file did she - not mine anyway - read the x’s and was “helped” in her decision by x’s barrister who just happened to be from her old chambers!

But none of this goes on does it - lately I’ve taken to collecting flying pigs - I wonder if this is symptomatic? - I wonder how many I have now? - I wonder if there is any correlation between the number I have and the number of times I was fed bullshit - one day I will count!

But right now I have to get up and do “Christmas” when really I can’t be fucking arsed - because I have so many loose ends - because this shite has been going on for four years - because I’m mentally fucking exhausted but I have kids!

Someone told me you have 6 years to bring a claim for professional negligence - you may know this on here - if so I need one more piece of the jigsaw to drop into place - a bit that should have been dealt with by the lawyers and let’s add another professional into the mix here - at the time! But no they wanted the easy option the route to quickest money - never mind it’s the kids home we are talking about - they can be rehoused in a fucking shed - and they are nearly 18 anyway and we all now what happens when kids get to 18 don’t we - one day they are being supported by parents and the state - overnight they are discarded into the fire of l
And you question our sanity - I think you need to look in the bloody mirror! - we are not the ones playing a game!

@Highlandheath I’m with you!

Missed the boat again is on this and the other litigation loan thread to gloat about how he ditched his wife and left her high and dry financially, and to have a go at other women.

Mrs Wobble isn't divorced and isn't a lawyer, but I'm guessing she benefits from the profits of divorce either through her husband or family.

However, everyone who has had experience as a client on these threads has serious issues with these loans, and with the conduct of their solicitors (in my experience, for the most part, the Barristers were a different breed - I wish I had known about direct access) but rather than consider why that might be, the lawyers (and their wives) blame the clients..... So we pay for expensive solicitors, but when they have a negative impact on our cases, we are to blame.... There is a clause in these loans (and I've had sight of a few now from other women who have been harmed by them) which says you cannot unreasonably refuse to follow the advice of your solicitors - otherwise the loan defaults, so these are unlikely to be cases of rogue clients going against sound advice - these are cases where the advice is seriously flawed. FYI, the wait list for a file even to be opened by the Legal Ombudsman currently stands at six months.... That's a lot of people complaining.

I am sorry people have had a bad experience of divorce. I am on this section because I was divorced. I am certainly not an expert on divorce loans.

I do understand the need for clause about taking advice from your solicitors in these cases of the loans. It is the same point asin no win no fee deals (I don't do those either - I only act for people who pay - although I have once or twice in the past but they don't sit particularly comfortably with me - that is for a few reasons - why risk never getting paid when people will instead pay you for the work done each month (I've children to feed like most of us) and secondly (and this is why this kind of funding used to be banned) it brings a kind of potential conflict. It took years to about the late 90s I think it was to allow that kind of legal funding - no win no fee etc. because it wa such a difficult topic. If you get a reasonable offer that means the client gets paid and you get paid your cots but the client wants to go to court to get every last penny but might lose and no one gets anything that is when you need those clauses about who decides what and where. In other types of work subject to duties to the court and acting within the law, the solicitor can take it all the way if the client wants to take an informed risk to do that even if they have a 10% chance only of winning as the client is paying every month etc and it is their choice.

There seem to be many different issues howeve ron the thread and like most divorce topics people are very hurt by the process which I understand, as someone who paid both side's lawyers on my own divorce. That meant we had no court hearings, no disclosure, no mediation (as we knew everything about the other's finances) and both wanted to negotiate and get it done which i know is unusual.

Those who do not like using solicitors can certainly use direct access barristers as someone mentioned above for those barristers who choose to do so and can act for themselves.

I don't think my suggestion above that if people can settle early on it tends to be best can really be criticised. One of the problems is divorce law is so unclear. If could devise an on line tool people could use to get a rough idea of finances on divorce even if it were rough and ready where you key in your debts, assets, income, expenses and then get at least a range even if not a fixed figure that might help people on the financial side of it.

To GreenBeret

FDR's are booked at 3 per hour according to posts made by Legal on another thread so not much chance of a meaningful recommendation being made that takes into account all the facts and disclosure.

Judge at my FDR said Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance for Ex wife even though she was under 50, in good health, had a job and was offered the bulk of the assets to reflect that I would always be able to earn more. Judge also stated that Ex had to sell the house in her native Country. Worst of all Ex had not even filed their Form E by time of FDR, but judge still made a recommendation!

Could be coincidence, but both Barristers and the FDR Judge were based in the same Chambers. Did they speak to each other beforehand and conspire how to ensure that neither I nor Ex would agree? Ex always said she would never sell the overseas property regardless of UK Court Order. Likewise I would never agree to Joint Lives in the circumstances.

All very different at the Final Hearing.

Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance is very rare apparently. Even if one partner has a genuine need such as an illness or disability that prevented them from working it would not be awarded if the partner being asked to pay did not have the means to pay.

CMS became involved as Ex thought what the Courts had ordered was too low. She ended up with less. The first assessment of 7 pounds per week was obviously wrong, but even as the end of 2018 approaches CMS are still looking at 2016 earnings!

Xenia - thanks for your understanding - in some respects you have been lucky!

Missedtheboat - I’ve said before I may have you wrong - but my ability to trust has been destroyed - I’ve been told I’m very astute and my perception is pretty spot on but it’s difficult on here on so many threads and with so many details

Just want to add final shaft at final hearing was through a direct access barrister - she did not turn up - Long story with Ill mother who died but still believe she was negligent.

@Xenia I may Pm you as you have just said something that is relevant to me but I need to get off here today - already derailed me!

Well following @Jack65 on 8th December I am pleased to see people talking again

I re-read @MissedTheBoatAgain posts on the @Highlandheath Litigation Loan first thread and I simply don'T get your story on that one and how it changed to an aggressive stance on this one. I really think that needs explanation as you simply belittled and scoffed with @Collaborate

What astounds me is that people are being made to go into hearings where papers have not been filed properly or at all (ref @MissedTheBoatAgain. ..how on earth can an FDR go ahead at all without a Form E!!!!! Why were you not kicking off about that!?)

I said in court that a 2 year old could have done a better job of these finances than all the lawyers combined.

Lawyers have proven themselves to be a disgrace. Funerals seem a favourite excuse. Mine did not attend final hearing fgs because of one ...allegedly...oh but he could attend the morning bit when his application to turn the Final into an FDR woukd be heard listed same day .,,concurrently with Final Hearing. He failed to send even a colleague from the firm when he had said he would. He had chosen a barrister for me from same chambers and who shared the same room as ex's part time judge barrister. I ditched him saying it was spare sharing conflict of interests and so did FH with my father as a McKenzie friend who witnessed the utter scandal of victim blaming and unwarranted cost awards against me by the judge (no grounds, I had not prevented any hearings) who switched the tape off while he pompously berated me saying I had refused to allow the former MH be marketed when he had solid evidence it had been on the market.

Solicitors jump dump clients. Never because they say there is a conflict of interest or they see professionally compromised but when they defer to the other side to just get rid of it.

Yes shame in abundance on the 'profession' if you can call it that.

The few good lawyers out there need to step up and use the Red Alert Line more with the SRA and report the appalling behaviour they must see. The public are at risk...you have duty of care...read the SRA news release on solicitors carrying out litigation.

SRA are lazy deferring complaints to LO. Their duty is over their solicitors behaviour. That new guide will give complaints a steer. Complain...get them to refer your matter to their legal team as they have posted as well that a better use of their resources is to get an early legal view on certain allegations. HOORAY! !! Quote their claims back at them. Go to level 1, level 2 and level 3 complaint...independent Reviewer. Then they may listen.

It simply is not good enough and the profession should be rightly scared by now. They have created this appalling mess.

I am not sure lawyers or I should say solicitors and barristers (as anyone can call them a lawyer if they want to as it is not a protected word) have ever been veyr popular.

Henry VI (1591)
"ACK CADE. Valiant I am.
SMITH [aside]. A must needs; for beggary is valiant.
JACK CADE. I am able to endure much.
DICK [aside]. No question of that; for I have seen him whipp'd three market-days together.
JACK CADE. I fear neither sword nor fire.
SMITH [aside]. He need not fear the sword; for his coat is of proof.
DICK [aside]. But methinks he should stand in fear of fire, being burnt i' th' hand for stealing of sheep.
JACK CADE. Be brave, then; for your captain is brave, and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven half-penny loaves sold for a penny: the three-hoop'd pot shall have ten hoops; and I will make it felony to drink small beer: all the realm shall be in common; and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass: and when I am king,– as king I will be,–
ALL. God save your majesty!
JACK CADE. I thank you, good people:– there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.
DICK. The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers. "

A lot of people who don't go before the courts do not practise as part of a regulated profession so the interesting issue is if people on this thread would rather we moved to that. i could do just about all my work without the solicitor word and save thousands and thousands of pounds in surance and being regulated and I doubt I would lose any business. That may be the way we are going but I am not sure it is great news for the general public however.

If there is not much advantage to being regulated and it is expensive and complex solicitors might just choose to practise outside that regulated word as it were.

You are so right Hiddentruth, and it seems that Green beret has the same experience, so do I - adjournment for a funeral.... It seems that Solicitor's families have an unusually high death rate compared to the rest of the population! Mrs Wobble take note!!! And Greenberet, I am with you, one of my children attempted suicide by drinking bleach at the idea of leaving his life long home..... I tried mediation but the mediations said it was unsuitable, I asked the solicitors IN WRITING to try and settle as fast as possible, without taking any but marital assets into account, but they refused very forcefully, and sent incredibly provocative letters to the ex - which I pointed out were like pouring petrol on a forest fire... but they knew what they were doing, apparently! Well, actually they did, they were running up fees for their benefit, at my expense....

Not all lawyers are negligent and greedy, but many are, and one negligent, greedy lawyer can have a grossly detrimental impact on their client which ripples through that their life and the lives of their children, and parents, across the generations. To Xenia's comments, many of the solicitors I have dealt with behave as if there are no regulations anyway - and as the professional negligence insurance settles the issue, the impact is not felt as heavily by the solicitor as it is by the client - it seems the SRA and the LOS only penalise smaller practises, and there is an overwhelming number of solicitors from ethnic minorities who are sanctioned, yet the majority of practising solicitors are not from ethnic minorities. Now are you going to argue that solicitors from ethnic minorities are more likely to be negligent? Or might the LOS and the SRA be less likely to find against those who most resemble them?

@Xenia

Love the quotations.

Litigation has rules. Solicitors...barristers... do need to be regulated I feel and the regulators held to task on their role but their people need to self regulate too otherwise the only cases the SRA will see are the ones with enough puff and vitriol behind them to demand attention and that is unfair and unrealistic since their role is to ensure the vulnerable...Remember anyone can be vulnerable at any time in their life..,are protected and they do not have that ability necessarily. Literally these cases are ruining lives.

Many of these cases stray into fraud and police work.

But you raise an important point. Whether or not lawyers in their broadest sense have audience or not which means whether they can appear in court. Not all have as you say so that here people are being made vulnerable by lawyers taking them on then not seeing it through.

So maybe a check through on that point will unearth some answers. However a direct access barrister should have audience surely and if part of a chambers should be able to get another to cover a case???

Perhaps you can comment on this as I don't think the profession are helping the public understand what they can and cannot do.
Also if a representative does step away from a case suddenly do they have a duty to tell their client who they are effectively letting down their reasons? If the case has compromised them and there are professional breaches on the other side to make them need to do this, does the client have a right to know why they are now left high and dry?

This would be good to know...

Missed the boat again - as Hidden truth has pointed out, you clearly have not been open with your finances, to the point where you acknowledge that the CMS awarding just £7 a week to your children in Child Maintenance was clearly too low. You say your ex wife tried to represent herself, she would have done this in order to save funds, and because she did not have the means at your disposal to engage lawyers. She is criticised by you for that and also criticised by you for taking out the litigation loan. You gloat about the fact that you left your children and their mother, and think it's ok that in addition to losing a husband and father they should also lose the standard of living they previously had. These are your children, yet you feel no compunction about pulling their lives apart - those children have had to explain to their friends why they can't live where they did, why they can't have what they had - all the while feeling devalued and worthless because of their father's actions. Because of your actions. You could have done what Xenia suggested, and offered to pay reasonable costs for your ex wife's representation. You did not, but you blame her. You are an adult too, the responsibility lies equally with you. In addition, your profession means that you have a greater awareness of the legal process than the average layperson. So you were even better placed to make a judgement and act in a reasonable way. You chose not to. I know from my own children and from the adults children of fathers who have behaved like you, what your future relationship with these children looks like. My heart breaks for my children, I have wonderful parents, and a kind, reasonable and decent father who would turn the world upside down to help his children, I protect them as much as possible from their fathers actions, even if it means lying to them about what he does and has done, and covering up his failure to support them, and making excuses for him so they don't feel the full pain of realising that to their father they are just pawns in his abusive game - but as they grow older they see him more clearly and already they are judging him. Your children see you, they see what you have done to their mother, and to them, they see your game playing, they see your cruelty, and they see your meanness and they feel it. Children are deeply moral, and have a natural sense of fair play - as the years go by those children will pay you back, they will see you less and less, and, in the end, they will leave you. You will deserve it, I know so many adult children of men like you, and they have given up on their fathers completely, and many of them say their mothers never spoke a word against their fathers, my friend who told her father she would rather her mother walked her down the aisle at her wedding and the anguish she felt at doing so - coupled with a feeling of complete revulsion that he should get to do that, and her mother be obliged to watch. The sons I know who never see their fathers anymore, and keep their children away from him. You will never take responsibility, you will blame your ex wife, you will blame your children, but the person who created this was you, and you could still manage things differently by ensuring your children are properly financially supported, maybe you would have to go out for dinner less, but hey, so do they! You won't though, the desire to be unkind to your ex wife is too great, you left her, get over it and behave like a decent father and a decent man.

To HighlandHeath

My ex wife did not take out a litigation loan and her application for legal services order was rejected twice.

CMS have my tax return and have obviously not taken unearned income into account. For that to be resolved ex must apply for a Variation.

People raising a lot of different points.

On a solicitor choosing to stop litigation in the middle I think they need the court's permission which may well have to be at a hearing on that point so clients are not left high and dry - that is when active court proceedings start. Remember most legal work is nothing to do with litigation and even if it is most cases settle well before there is any kind of hearing at all in most areas of law.

On the question of who has rights of audience it depends on the type of legal proceedings eg patent attorneys (who are not solicitor or barristers) have a right of audience in patent cases. I expect employment law is different again. Quite a lot of barristers do not want to offer direct access as that can mean more work for them for less pay but some choose to offer that service I believe. It used to be that barristers, not soliictors, had rights of audience in court but that has changed.

Most legal work is not "reserved work". So the task i am sitting here doing which is a contract you could hire me, my neighbour, the cat's mother, just about anyone. You would choose based on who you thought could do it best and what was in your budget or you might feel well able to it yourself.

So you probably want a qualified surgeon operating on you and you probably also want a qualified solicitor or barrister representing you in court (or to do it yourself).

Changes so that solicitors are encouraged to become unregulated may not be to the clients' advantage although some might support the change - if you are not required to have insurance people's p[rices might go down. There is a very recent change that for people doind some standard types of work (not my areas of work) you have to put your price indications on your website as of last week. non solicitor lawyers would not have to do that.

On the issue of complaints and race I don't know enough to comment. I have never had a complaint ever.

You really are incapable of taking responsibility for your actions Boat! Your wife must apply for a variation via the CMS because you are such a control freak, and shit father you won't come to a reasonable arrangement with her direct - that is YOUR choice. The CMS will skim money off what she receives and what you pay - it could all be avoided if you had a decent bone in your body and were capable of acting with an ounce of consideration for your own children! You are using your little bit of power in a repulsive way, and blaming your wife for YOUR actions.... You left her, get over it, take some responsibility, if you are incapable of compassion and empathy, which from your previous posts you appear to be, then be aware that EVERYONE is bound to judge you harshly - deservedly so - for the way you are willing to deprive your children to jerk the chain of a woman whose life you have done your best to screw up. I wish her every happiness, and I pity your poor children growing up with such a mean spirited, narcissistic father

By the way, there is no obligation for any parent to go via the CMS, decent fathers make arrangements which are fair and equitable for the support of their children, and even to recompense the mother for the loss of earnings caused by her shouldering the day to day work of raising children who have TWO parents, single handed - and that work is never ending. Boat has benefitted from the privilege of his gender, the gender pay gap his "unearned income" and I would guess is using the loophole of self employment so he doesn't appear to have any earned income.... He is avoiding taxes, and avoiding providing for his children, and Boat is fine with that. Boat thinks it's up to his former wife, and the DWP to ensure he provides for his children in a reasonable way. Boat would be outraged if the DWP intervened in such a way in any other area of his life, Boat is making excuses for his vile behaviour. Boat believes that the CMS alone should decide how much he contributes to his children's living expenses but Boat has chosen not to look at his income honestly, and do his best to provide for his children, Boat is every bit as bad as any skank, worse, because Boat can clearly afford to contribute to his children. At least Scrooge didn't deprive his own children of financial support, but if Tiny Tim had been Scrooge's son, his line would have mirrored that of Boat: "Sorry tiny Tim, the CMS haven't taken into account my unearned because I haven't told them about it, and, actually I'm fully aware the CMS rarely take unearned income into account in CMS calculations.... " Explain that to your children Boat - go on, you know you are totally justified, so tell the children how it is. And Scrooge when you are down the pub being mister generous, buying your mates another round, or pathetically dribbling over some poor girl who is way too young, and who with an ounce of intelligence, would see right through you..... Just be honest and tell them all "I'm buying you all drinks, but I don't pay a penny to support my own children....Happy Christmas!" I'm sure they will all understand that you have every reason not to contribute towards your own children, I mean, how unreasonable, expecting fathers to contribute in the same way as mothers must, because if I didn't contribute to my children there would be no food on the table, no clothes on their backs, no shoes on their feet - I am sure, all your friends in their cups will, like you, blame your behaviour on your ex wife, and the CMS.... So go ahead, tell them "What can I get you guys? and by the way I'd rather pour my money into beers going down your necks, which you could afford to buy for yourselves, than support my own children who can't support themselves". Or try this one "Hello beautiful (woman vomits a little bit into her own mouth) What can I buy you to drink? Whatever you like darling, because I'm flush - I've got children but I'd rather spend my money, which I don't earn, on getting you drunk in the hopes I might get a fumble...." You stand by what you do you believe you are right - try it out on a few people, see how that goes Ebeneezer! Be out and proud! Don't hide behind a nick name on mums net go and tell the world about how wonderful you are!

Gosh