Rough Justice

I have at last revamped my web site. I had intended naming and shaming the firm of solicitors I used illustrated in this
web site, but after seeking legal advice from my insurers, I would have had to have limited the content to the findings of
the law Society, and though this was scathing for the offences they were forced to accept, the fine was minimal, (£400),
and 17 of my complaints were deemed not within the juresdiction of the Law Society which therefore could not have
been included if I had named the solicitor.

The purpose of this web site is to illustrate the pitfalls when using unscrupulous solicitors, and the
difficulties you will encounter when using the Law Society, (in its ever changing guises), to seek
redress. It also illustrates the problems when attempting to use the various Ombudsmen who are
supposed to assist in arbitrating and policing the bodies they in fact represent. This includes the
legal Ombudsman and the Financial Ombudsman. The systems are everchanging in name and
supposedly mission statements, but I can only illustrate what happened to me, echoed by the many
people who have contacted me with similar or even worse experiences, when these bodies ignored
their existing mission statements and written procedures with a disregard that beggers belief, so
what is the point of changing procedures when the old ones were never followed anyway?

You may think the Law Society and the Ombudsmen are on your side, read this web
site, then think again! You may find the advice within useful if you are having
problems with your solicitor.