Solicitor Sanctioned by Law Society

[Luternau]

Does the finance loss relate to the mortgage provider or the solicitor?

You might have a case with the mortgage provider, if possible via the Financial Services Ombudsman.

It's hard to advise when you are being to cryptic.

It has nothing to do with a mortgage.

I am aware this is a public forum and posting some information may not be in my best interests.

Their practice was falling apart, and they had been bankrupted or were close to that. They needed money to keep the business going so the duty care to me went out the window to get cash. It also transpired there were addiction issues and these were clouding their judgement in a significant way. Their fee was deducted from the client cheque without any discussion or agreement on fees. I understand they are prohibited from doing this and that is where I first became aware that all was not right. Via the law society I became aware that at the time I was being bullied/primed into settling, my case had been struck out for want of prosecution. The solicitor never communicated this to me. It's quite possible they agreed a compromised settlement to get paid. They were at that stage on the back foot Its impossible to know and some of the explanations given were bizarre.
The sanction may be good for others to be aware but it's not right that a regulated professional can get away with this.

 

[Luternau]

A solicitor being sanctioned by the Law Society does not necessarily mean that the solicitor was negligent.

You really need to go to an experienced solicitor in negligence for definitive advice, I can highly recommend https://www.holohanlaw.ie/staff/bill-holohan/ who does take on negligence cases (provided he does not have a conflict.)

Jim Stafford

Thank you for the recommendation. Much appreciated.

The law society sanctioned for negligence. It was not deemed gross negligence meriting a strike off though.

 

[Purple]

The sanction may be good for others to be aware but it's not right that a regulated professional can get away with this.

It sounds like it's a failure of regulation alright.
Solicitors are just as susceptible to human weakness as anyone else so it's important that regulation works and is seen to work. That said you are not going to overhaul the legal industry, even Ministers for Justice can't do that.

 

[T McGibney]

It sounds like it's a failure of regulation alright.
Solicitors are just as susceptible to human weakness as anyone else so it's important that regulation works and is seen to work. That said you are not going to overhaul the legal industry, even Ministers for Justice can't do that.

+1.

Also, regulation will never be fully effective. There is no limit to the level of human ingenuity when it comes to scamming people and any system that would protect 100% against this would probably be so complex and expensive to implement to be impracticable. For this reason it's especially important when choosing a service provider where you are likely to be vulnerable if it all goes wrong, to try as much as possible to select someone of the highest integrity.

 

[DirectDevil]

Much good information provided above. Just my 10 cents worth;

QUOTE from Law Society "The professional indemnity insurance (PII) details of solicitor firms are a matter of public record in accordance with the provisions of section 47 of the Solicitors Act 1954, as substituted by section 54 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994."

Look at this link. https://www.lawsociety.ie/Solicitors/business-career-resources/PII/Firm-PII-Search
Put in the name of your solicitor and you should get details of the insurers.

Your claim lies against the solicitor as Brendan correctly pointed out . However, you are quite entitled to approach the professional indemnity insurers directly and I would do so for a reason. If there is any danger of insolvency on the part of the practice and the Law Society Compensation Fund did not apply here you could be left to prove as a creditor. For that reason I would advise you to establish formal contact with the insurers to try - theoretically at any rate - to protect yourself against this by virtue of the CivilLiability Act 1961 section 62.
LINK https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/41/section/62/enacted/en/html#sec62

The idea here is to put yourself in to the position against the insurers as if you were the policyholder. There is negligble case law on this procedure so we follow English precedents on the analogy of the Third Party Rights against Insurers Act 1930 [UK law too]. That means that you need to act as if you were the policyholder in complying with conditions including notification !

Best to get your own legal advice before proceeding but do not hang around.

 

[DirectDevil]

P.S.

PI policies are written on a "claims made" basis. That means that the claim is dealt with by whichever insurers were on cover at the time of notification.

This is also why I would be anxious for you get the insurers involved and on record now. I would nearly bet that your solicitor has not notified their PI insurers such, it seems, was the utterly chaotic state of the practice.

It also needs to be established that there was actually a policy of PI insurance in place at all. I do not know if it is possible for a PI policy to be cancelled or allowed to lapse without that fact being notified to the La Society. If there is no PI in place that might be another cause for complaint to the Law Society.

Just to amplify the point at post #25 above. In the case of Farrell -v- Federated Employers [1970] EWCA Civ J0728-2. policyholders failed to notify an industrial accident and claim to the insurers. The defendant became effectively insolvent. The insurers repudiated the claim for non-notification and argued that against the claimant who was deemed to have the obligations as well as the rights of a policyholder !

 

[Luternau]

Thanks all for the useful information on PI.

On the claims made basis, the solicitor advised me they could not get cover earlier this year. I assume that also means they cannot get a practising certificate? There is nothing listed on the link provided for a current insurer anyway.

Is the last known insurer, the insurer of record ? I have sent an email to the relevant section looking for previous insurers.

My concerns is has taken a long time to get to this point and I have then sat on it a bit. If there is something to pursue, I would engage a solicitor.

The solicitor was highly recommended but things went downhill at a point afterwards. I had a feeling all was not right and threatened to change solicitors. Things improved for a while and I stayed. Its something I regret, but cannot change now.

 

[Dazzler123]

Thanks all for the useful information on PI.

On the claims made basis, the solicitor advised me they could not get cover earlier this year. I assume that also means they cannot get a practising certificate? There is nothing listed on the link provided for a current insurer anyway.

Is the last known insurer, the insurer of record ? I have sent an email to the relevant section looking for previous insurers.

My concerns is has taken a long time to get to this point and I have then sat on it a bit. If there is something to pursue, I would engage a solicitor.

The solicitor was highly recommended but things went downhill at a point afterwards. I had a feeling all was not right and threatened to change solicitors. Things improved for a while and I stayed. Its something I regret, but cannot change now.

This is the important bit. Depending on how long ago this issue took place, your case, regardless of how good or bad it is may be statute barred.

Go see a solicitor as soon as possible.

 

[DirectDevil]

Just a brief note to clarify the "claims made" concept.

PI policies are written on the claims made basis. This is because of their nature as there is rarely a specifically identifiable time, place and date at which an alleged act of professional negligence happened.

The insurer of record is usually the one on cover at the date of notification to them but see the next paragraph.

A claim is deemed to be "made" when the policyholder becomes aware of circumstances that might lead to a claim or an actual claim is notified - whichever comes first. A policyholder becoming aware of circumstances that might lead to a claim and who decides not to report it is probably in breach of policy conditions. That could ground a refusal of indemnity by the underwriters of the policy.

 

[Luternau]

Thank you for that.
I am seeking advice on how to proceed. There is no valid cover in place now but I have managed to get the insurer at the time of the issue subject to the disciplinary matter.
I will also explore the Law Society Compensation Fund.