14-08-2012, 09:21 AM
11
Re: No win no fee
There was a great deal of argument took place before the Conditional Fee “no win – no fee” legislation was enacted in the UK.Although it sounds a great idea, a man can go to law with no prospective loss come what may, in reality the lawyer who takes on his case will weigh his exposure if the case is lost. The obvious result is that many cases that are borderline or do not have a very high chance of success are turned down.
After all, why should a lawyer expose himself to loss if the balance of probability is that he stands to loose the case? Lawyers are in business to make a profit, not provide a “Pro Bono Publico” service.
What is worth keeping in mind is that many household insurance policies include a “Legal Insurance” section, and if such is the case that should be brought to the attention of the solicitor at the first consultation.
An initial consultation with a High Street is in almost all cases offered free of charge, and if present that insurance may well provide the wherewithal to pursue a case that might otherwise be turned down as being too risky.
Nevertheless a lot of people don't realise they have access to legal costs under their household insurance. In MY opinion it's money well spent.
Such cover is usually either included as a “sweetener” for free or for a few pounds only. The amount of cover varies but is usually around £50,000 or so, likewise what is covered also varies so it's more than worthwhile spending a bit of time over the small print and maybe taking a third parties advice.
14-08-2012, 09:59 AM
12
Re: No win no fee
Originally Posted by anniemuldoon
->
Sorry Cookiecate I called you the wrong name.
14-08-2012, 10:48 AM
13
Re: No win no fee
Yes matey, but iut wasn't only personal injury which was removed from Legal Aid, but the whole of the 'civil' law, so that for instance, Social Security and Employment Tribunal cases. These were taken up by CABx, Neighbourhood Advice Centres and Law Centres. The vast majority of which were funded by local authorities. Some of those Law Centres, being able to employ Solicitors were also able to generate extra income by providing 'Legal Aid' Green form advice. Once the Legal Aid system was cut back and then eliminated, many Law Centres ran into financial difficulties which were compounded by serious cut-backs in local authority funding too. As a consequence it is now almost impossible to find someone who has knowlewdge of and is prepared to provide representation at either Social Security/Disability Tribunals or Employment Tribunals to name but just two civil law matters that affect a large number of the population.14-08-2012, 10:55 AM
14
Re: No win no fee
Vexations and bogus claims inevitably have consequences.As for employment legislation, that has had a dreadful effect on employers ability to conduct their business. Employment tribunals became a zero cost opportunity for bogus claimants to trouser cash to the disadvantage to the few genuine cases that did warrant a formal review.
Easy in and easy out is the best strategy for employers and employees.
14-08-2012, 11:06 AM
15
Re: No win no fee
No way matey, if recalcitrant Employers want to try treating their workers with disrespect, then there is a cost to them for doing so. As one of those who not only know about Employment Law, but am prepared to provide such representation (Voluntarily and free) then Employers in this area had better behave or suffer the consequences.14-08-2012, 11:33 AM
16
Re: No win no fee
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
No way matey, if recalcitrant Employers want to try treating their workers with disrespect, then there is a cost to them for doing so. As one of those who not only know about Employment Law, but am prepared to provide such representation (Voluntarily and free) then Employers in this area had better behave or suffer the consequences.
It's them who put up the risk capital and while employees should not be abused and some protection is obviously a good thing at present it's the employers who are being abused and that has to stop.
When al is said and done workers are a resource. A resource that requires special management and looking after but a resource nonetheless.
If I buy a “Floggle Toggle Press” and it doesn't perform as it should - and can't be made to perform as it should – then I must be able to get rid of it, not be required to keep it on costing me money all the time.
So an employee who doesn't or won't perform as he should must be disposed of.
When the cost of disposal starts to exceed the cost of continued ownership then be it a thing that is hardware, software, or meatware has to be reviewed very carefully before being taken on.
It means that short term rental or short term contracts come into their own – or the process that needs to be done is “Off-Shored” to where no such costs are involved and guess what? Just look around to see the truth of this.
|
|
