|
Post by foster on Feb 19, 2021 15:46:11 GMT
Why is it so expensive in the first place? Makes me (at least) wonder what these people do to earn get such ridiculous sums of money. Always since the invention of law the main priority of lawyers is to make money actually upholding the law is of secondary importance In this day and age and technology that is available why does it take months to exchange contracts on houses Could it be no bugger would pay there fees if they tried to charge it for half a days work And as for divorce they create problems to extend the hours they can charge Defence lawyers defending the indefensible are the worst. How anyone can defend terrorists and the like is beyond me. They just shouldn't do it. Apparently there are some kind of rules on ethics but clearly even those are fucked up.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 19, 2021 15:55:20 GMT
Why is it so expensive in the first place? Makes me (at least) wonder what these people do to earn get such ridiculous sums of money. Always since the invention of law the main priority of lawyers is to make money actually upholding the law is of secondary importance In this day and age and technology that is available why does it take months to exchange contracts on houses Could it be no bugger would pay there fees if they tried to charge it for half a days work And as for divorce they create problems to extend the hours they can charge Last time I bought a house I actually read the contract, it was an absolute joke grammar and spelling wise, so much so I couldn't see how it could legitimately be called a legal document. What alerted me to possible/probable errors was the sentence that started with "I am singing this contract..." During my divorce her own solicitor spelt my ex wife's name wrong on one of the documents. Over £200 an hour most of em...
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Feb 19, 2021 17:02:04 GMT
Will anyone resign over this ruling I wonder?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 19, 2021 17:39:23 GMT
Always since the invention of law the main priority of lawyers is to make money actually upholding the law is of secondary importance In this day and age and technology that is available why does it take months to exchange contracts on houses Could it be no bugger would pay there fees if they tried to charge it for half a days work And as for divorce they create problems to extend the hours they can charge Defence lawyers defending the indefensible are the worst. How anyone can defend terrorists and the like is beyond me. They just shouldn't do it. Apparently there are some kind of rules on ethics but clearly even those are fucked up. You can't live in a civilised country where you can pick and choose who deserves a fair trial or not.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Feb 19, 2021 17:44:25 GMT
Defence lawyers defending the indefensible are the worst. How anyone can defend terrorists and the like is beyond me. They just shouldn't do it. Apparently there are some kind of rules on ethics but clearly even those are fucked up. You can't live in a civilised country where you can pick and choose who deserves a fair trial or not. Who said anything about a trial? Terrorists and the like can defend themselves. I certainly wouldn't take money to defend them.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 19, 2021 17:49:35 GMT
You can't live in a civilised country where you can pick and choose who deserves a fair trial or not. Who said anything about a trial? Terrorists and the like can defend themselves. I certainly wouldn't take money to defend them. I assumed by "defence lawyers" you were talking about lawyers offering a defence in a trial? Are there other kinds I'm not aware of?
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 19, 2021 17:52:25 GMT
Always since the invention of law the main priority of lawyers is to make money actually upholding the law is of secondary importance In this day and age and technology that is available why does it take months to exchange contracts on houses Could it be no bugger would pay there fees if they tried to charge it for half a days work And as for divorce they create problems to extend the hours they can charge Last time I bought a house I actually read the contract, it was an absolute joke grammar and spelling wise, so much so I couldn't see how it could legitimately be called a legal document. What alerted me to possible/probable errors was the sentence that started with "I am singing this contract..." During my divorce her own solicitor spelt my ex wife's name wrong on one of the documents. Over £200 an hour most of em... That’s nowt mate, I once put the wrong name in my lady’s Valentines card😉 Mind you I don’t command £200 an hour, I’ll use that excuse next time
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 19, 2021 17:56:35 GMT
Last time I bought a house I actually read the contract, it was an absolute joke grammar and spelling wise, so much so I couldn't see how it could legitimately be called a legal document. What alerted me to possible/probable errors was the sentence that started with "I am singing this contract..." During my divorce her own solicitor spelt my ex wife's name wrong on one of the documents. Over £200 an hour most of em... That’s nowt mate, I once put the wrong name in my lady’s Valentines card😉 Mind you I don’t command £200 an hour, I’ll use that excuse next time I got the wrong "fiancèe" card once, didn't even know there was more than one at the time
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 19, 2021 18:23:29 GMT
Will anyone resign over this ruling I wonder? If you're referring to the government acting unlawfully, no chance! No-one cares.
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Feb 19, 2021 18:31:53 GMT
Will anyone resign over this ruling I wonder? If you're referring to the government acting unlawfully, no chance! No-one cares. Is acting unlawfully the same as breaking the law? Shouldn't there be some form of punishment?
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 19, 2021 21:01:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 19, 2021 23:58:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Feb 20, 2021 8:32:52 GMT
Who has to pay the government's £200k legal bill? The Conservative party or the taxpayer? The tax payer of course It's a very worthwhile case though, I had thought without looking into it they had been refusing to publish the contracts but no the case was they did not publish them within 30 days of signing the contracts, all those crowdfunders will be paying for another windmill for the fox killer.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Feb 20, 2021 8:46:38 GMT
It's a very worthwhile case though, I had thought without looking into it they had been refusing to publish the contracts but no the case was they did not publish them within 30 days of signing the contracts, all those crowdfunders will be paying for another windmill for the fox killer. This is a bizarre case. As you say, they failed to meet a 30 day deadline to publish contracts. It seems these contracts need to be redacted so some work is required. There is no indication that they did not intend to publish. Likewise there is no explanation why they weren’t published in line with the 30 days deadline. The judgement did say it “dismissed the Good Law Project's argument that there had been a department-wide "policy of de-prioritising compliance" with the law and guidance” so I’m guessing workload is the reason. Which I think suggests cock up more than conspiracy. All in all it seems something of a storm in a tea cup. But it doesn’t take much for some folk to work themselves up in a lather.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 20, 2021 8:50:28 GMT
It's a very worthwhile case though, I had thought without looking into it they had been refusing to publish the contracts but no the case was they did not publish them within 30 days of signing the contracts, all those crowdfunders will be paying for another windmill for the fox killer. Exactly one of these political driven litigants are going to cop a large bill and it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Feb 20, 2021 8:51:00 GMT
I’ve read through that and thats just bang wrong isn’t it.....on so many levels To be fair though it’s been going on since day dot, it’s just not been highlighted due to lack of social media back in the day...... Still no excuse though-
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Feb 20, 2021 8:54:19 GMT
It's a very worthwhile case though, I had thought without looking into it they had been refusing to publish the contracts but no the case was they did not publish them within 30 days of signing the contracts, all those crowdfunders will be paying for another windmill for the fox killer. This is a bizarre case. As you say, they failed to meet a 30 day deadline to publish contracts. It seems these contracts need to be redacted so some work is required. There is no indication that they did not intend to publish. Likewise there is no explanation why they weren’t published in line with the 30 days deadline. The judgement did say it “dismissed the Good Law Project's argument that there had been a department-wide "policy of de-prioritising compliance" with the law and guidance” so I’m guessing workload is the reason. Which I think suggests cock up more than conspiracy. All in all it seems something of a storm in a tea cup. But it doesn’t take much for some folk to work themselves up in a lather. Yes not sure the public will be that bothered, the comments to kay's tweet (which is deliberately misleading) don't seem to be going that well for her. Not sure its even a cock up just bigger priorities, the mps got a bit of a kicking from the judge for just adding their names for publicity to the case, the usual stop brexit mps of course....
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 20, 2021 8:58:34 GMT
This is a bizarre case. As you say, they failed to meet a 30 day deadline to publish contracts. It seems these contracts need to be redacted so some work is required. There is no indication that they did not intend to publish. Likewise there is no explanation why they weren’t published in line with the 30 days deadline. The judgement did say it “dismissed the Good Law Project's argument that there had been a department-wide "policy of de-prioritising compliance" with the law and guidance” so I’m guessing workload is the reason. Which I think suggests cock up more than conspiracy. All in all it seems something of a storm in a tea cup. But it doesn’t take much for some folk to work themselves up in a lather. Yes not sure the public will be that bothered, the comments to kay's tweet (which is deliberately misleading) don't seem to be going that well for her. Not sure its even a cock up just bigger priorities, the mps got a bit of a kicking from the judge for just adding their names for publicity to the case, the usual stop brexit mps of course.... Bang on the usual suspects But I wonder at the time if anyone had given thought that in April last year the department of health had bigger priorities Than to file the odd form on time
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Feb 20, 2021 9:10:59 GMT
Yes not sure the public will be that bothered, the comments to kay's tweet (which is deliberately misleading) don't seem to be going that well for her. Not sure its even a cock up just bigger priorities, the mps got a bit of a kicking from the judge for just adding their names for publicity to the case, the usual stop brexit mps of course.... Bang on the usual suspects But I wonder at the time if anyone had given thought that in April last year the department of health had bigger priorities Than to file the odd form on time Hancock should resign for acting unlawfully, hancock should resign over ppe shortages, what a great job hancock is doing over the vaccine rollout oh sorry my bad its what a great job the nhs is doing over the vaccine rollout, but no criticism of nhs procurement, or some civil servant somewhere not doing some part minor part of their job because there were busy.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 20, 2021 9:13:26 GMT
Health Minister in Pandemic acting unlawfully and barely a peep on mainstream news outlets. I'm sure the usual tools and useful idiots will tell us there is still some sort of left wing bias in our broadcast media.
What a vile, vile, rigged, right wing country we are.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 20, 2021 9:15:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 20, 2021 9:18:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 20, 2021 9:28:41 GMT
Guess what if Johnson and sunak get the exit of lockdown right And the economy bounces back hardly anyone will give a flying fuck
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 20, 2021 9:37:14 GMT
I’ve read through that and thats just bang wrong isn’t it.....on so many levels To be fair though it’s been going on since day dot, it’s just not been highlighted due to lack of social media back in the day...... Still no excuse though- I think my point here is major news story about the government breaking the law but it took BBC hours to report it and this morning its disappeared of the news front page how can this be impartial
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 20, 2021 9:40:29 GMT
Guess what if Johnson and sunak get the exit of lockdown right And the economy bounces back hardly anyone will give a flying fuck Apart possibly for the 119000+ familys of those who have died 😟
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 20, 2021 9:41:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Feb 20, 2021 9:43:55 GMT
Guess what if Johnson and sunak get the exit of lockdown right And the economy bounces back hardly anyone will give a flying fuck They didn't give a fuck about 10 years of austerity so of course they won't.........
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 20, 2021 9:46:46 GMT
How many court cases have this Tory government lost now !!!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Feb 20, 2021 9:53:47 GMT
This is a bizarre case. As you say, they failed to meet a 30 day deadline to publish contracts. It seems these contracts need to be redacted so some work is required. There is no indication that they did not intend to publish. Likewise there is no explanation why they weren’t published in line with the 30 days deadline. The judgement did say it “dismissed the Good Law Project's argument that there had been a department-wide "policy of de-prioritising compliance" with the law and guidance” so I’m guessing workload is the reason. Which I think suggests cock up more than conspiracy. All in all it seems something of a storm in a tea cup. But it doesn’t take much for some folk to work themselves up in a lather. Yes not sure the public will be that bothered, the comments to kay's tweet (which is deliberately misleading) don't seem to be going that well for her. Not sure its even a cock up just bigger priorities, the mps got a bit of a kicking from the judge for just adding their names for publicity to the case, the usual stop brexit mps of course.... Something similar happening in Scotland... Worst performance by Scottish Government on freedom of information requests for three yearsI think we can cut the various Governments a bit of slack - but not cut them lose altogether. They still need to be open to allow proper assessment of what they are up to. We need to allow them some flexibility just now. It’s not a blank cheque. Ambulance chasers like the fox killing wanker are best ignored.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 20, 2021 10:26:45 GMT
Guess what if Johnson and sunak get the exit of lockdown right And the economy bounces back hardly anyone will give a flying fuck Apart possibly for the 119000+ familys of those who have died 😟 You’ve been sniffing to much of corbyn's unicorn shit If believe even half that number directly blame the government
|
|