Archive for the 'whatever' Category

And we’re back

Not Nearly Legal but could have been

A lovely break, thanks, which was spent mostly next to, on, in or under the Mediterranean. Two things made me particularly joyful: getting in a dive; and discovering we were sipping cocktails in the footsteps of Terry Thomas, who is Nearly Legal’s style guru and vocal coach. But such happiness cannot, in this fallen world, be complete. And so it was that there was a pinch of sand in the sun tan lotion, namely that dining at our favourite tapas restaurant carried with it the threat and all too often the actuality of being subject to accordion playing.

I detest the accordion, to the point where I have been accused of a phobia. It is the sound of the things, their tone of whiny, passive aggressive sentimentality, combined with the way that they are always wielded by individuals who appear to regard themselves as having a direct link to the whimpering heart of the common folk. This even appears to be so when it is a Spanish accordioniste torturing Rossini before a captive audience of Brits, Germans, Russians and French.

It is most likely the French who are to blame, having somehow managed to pass the wheezing horror off on visiting Americans as the authentic sound of the vrai Paris, or even La France Profonde. This is utter nonsense. In fact when the monstrosity first hit the faubourgs in the late 19th Century, it was generally regarded as being the commercialised instrument of destruction of the old traditions of song and music making, at least until the gramophone came along.

As the sheer volume of the thing - not for nothing are bellows involved - means that no escape or inattention is possible, it is only a sustained campaign that can rid us of the accordion. I beg you all - do not encourage or condone accordion playing, not even by a smile of vague amusement or desultory hand clap at the merciful conclusion of a performance. Only then will it finally wither and die.

Now, back to housing law…

Happy happy

I can’t resist the third person, so..

Nearly Legal has an assistant solicitor post in a damn good housing department in a good firm now sorted out for post-qualification in October. No, I’m not telling you where, nor am I casting aside anonymity. Not now anyway.

Nearly Legal is also off on holiday for the next 10 days or so. I’m not going near the internet, so anything that comes up in the meantime will have to wait for my return.

Just passing

I have been and remain extremely busy, but thankfully there has been nothing of significance to post about. I’m toying with a summary of the fascinating and now very, very lengthy comment thread on the Malcolm post, but that too will have to wait.

While I am here, may I just say that probably the last place I anticipated jaw-dropping procedural topsy-turvydom in a hearing was the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. A long story that I can’t actually tell here, but damn, that was like Alice in tribunal-land. Or I am being naive?

On the naughty step

Having discovered that I am the receipient of John Bolch’s coveted post of the month award for the last Naughty Step post, it seemed like time for another. Given that the award was only received due to the unreasonable delay of Geeklawyer in delivering his Blawg Review (caution NSFW and likely to leave you pleasured but having lost all self-respect), it seemed appropriate that this time it should be ‘barristers’ behaving badly on the step.

First up, John Wilmot, barrister, who has just been sentenced to 5 years for VAT fraud, after having conducted his defence in person from the cells, while refusing to come into Court.

Wilmot, imaginatively, claimed to have sold four Boeing 747 jet engines to a contact in Iraq for £117.5 million and sought to reclaim £17.5 million in VAT. The non-existence of the engines or deal was a minor hiccup in his otherwise routine claim to HMRC. He had laid, or rather made, a careful trail of evidence: invoices from a company in Croydon (who had never heard of him and didn’t deal in second hand aero engines on this scale and who apparently used redundant Argos VAT numbers); and details of shipping via a cargo ship (which was carrying beans, not jet engines).

The contact in Iraq? Well, the contact, Mr Al Majari, was never forthcoming, but Wilmot claimed he had (and I love this detail) met him at a Chambers garden party. Now which Chambers was it? Various articles cite him living and working at Temple Chambers in the City, but this is just an address, not a set. Anyone know? Google isn’t my friend in this.

Next up, a not criminal but morally, shall we say, debatable barrister, Mr Barclay Littlewood, late of ‘training at Grays Inn’ (which, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I take to mean that he never had pupillage and is not and never was a practising barrister). Mr Littlewood is ‘Chief Operations Director’ of UKessays and founder of Academic Answers Ltd. I was prompted to consider Mr Littlewood by Charon QC’s podcast with Prof Geoffrey Alderman and by this article in the Grauniad.

Mr Littlewood runs an online factory providing essays for undergraduate and postgraduate students. He thus profits, apparently very well indeed, from human stupidity, laziness, ignorance and greed. Wait, I hear you object, how does he differ from the entire legal profession in this? He doesn’t, and it is not for this reason that he is on the Step. No, Mr Littlewood occupies the Naughty Step for the sheer buttock-clenching, cheek chewing odiousness of his and his setup’s hypocritical blather.

Plagiarism is an academic and professional offence - hello Raj Persaud - and it is massively on the rise amongst students. Mr Littlewood runs a service in which, for a price between £120 to £16,000, one can have written for one an undergraduate essay or dissertation or Masters dissertation. (Prices double for a guaranteed first, up to the £16K).

Aware of the obvious implications, Mr Littlewood’s website is at pains to point out that it isn’t offering these essays for the purposes of passing them off as your own. Not at all. These are ‘model answers’, for up to £16K. (No links, for the obvious reasons, but from the UKessays site).

[I]f you use our model answer in the same way that you would use a journal, newspaper article, question and answer study book or past paper, there is absolutely nothing dishonest in what you are doing.  Our service can be used honestly.  If you do your own 100% original work and your own research, using our answer as a guideline, then this is no different from finding a journal article that deals with all the points you need to make in your essay

But sadly, disappointingly, some people will abuse this generous service:

We do understand that some students will use our work dishonestly.  This is because there are a lot of essay companies who permit students to simply pass off the work as their own, and so a minority of students confuse us with those companies and assume we offer the same service.  We also know that because our work is 100% original and plagiarism free, there is little we can do to regulate that misuse.

Ah yes. These model answers are guaranteed plagiarism free, so that they will not fall foul of plagiarism checking services used by Universities. UKessays is so proud of this fact that at the very top of the home page, they trumpet their ‘£5000 no plagiarism guarantee’. Given that elsewhere on the site, they claim that a first class degree over a 2:2 is worth ‘a million adjusted for inflation’, a £5000 payment for completely screwing your academic prospects seems just a little, well, cheap. But never mind that, because there is nothing at all hypocritical in offering a plagiarism guarantee for your ‘model answer providing service’, nothing at all. Mr Littlewood will tell you so:

If I wanted to debase the academic system I’d have done it by now, and I wouldn’t just have 2 super cars.
I ‘d have 3 Ferraris, 6 Lamborghinis and a Bugatti Veyron for special occasions.
Try ringing ukessays.com and telling us you want to use an essay to cheat with and see what you’re told, indeed you’re likely to get a better lecture on plagiarism that any University could give you. As I’ve said before I turn away thousands of pounds a week due to my ethics, so I can’t see how they can be in question.

And you can tell Mr Littleknob is ‘a barrister’ from the same post

The key [...] is how it’s used, the act or actus reus of buying or reading an essay isn’t plagiarism, it’s the mens rea that counts, how its it used and with what intention.

This is, of course, utter gibberish. How the essay is used is actus reus, not mens rea and I would submit that the requisite mens rea could safely be inferred from the act of handing in one of these essays without mentioning one hadn’t actually written it. I trust that Mr Littlewood doesn’t actually turn his hand to writing a ‘guaranteed first’ law essay for his service from time to time.

But will he submit the essays written for students to the plagiarism detection services, this being the obvious solution to their mis-use? No. Or not until:

Universities [...] promote us as the legitimate research aid to students.

That said, he claims that UKessays has

extensive measures to prevent the dishonest minority from using our service

These extensive measures apparently being, like the US military, a don’t ask, don’t tell policy. But such is Mr Littlewood’s sense of injustice that until the Universities see sense and promote his service:

if there is some unethical use that manages to slip through undetected I’ll consider it part payment for the thousands of honest users they deter every year (through their misinformation) from using our service.

You do that, Mr Littlewood. In the meantime, you’ll forgive me for considering you to be a loathsome, self-serving hypocrite and strongly suggest that you do nothing but stand against this wall until the revolution comes.

I give in.

I have ignored this question, then I have mocked it. But dammit, the google searches for ‘what is Anor in legal terms’, or variants thereof, keep flooding in. They are now up to about 15 or more a week.

So I give in. Clearly absolutely nobody is able to deduce meaning from context any more and I must pander to the new google literalists.

Anor in legal terms is an abbreviation for ‘another’, as in X and another v Literal Borough Council.

Are you all happy now? Doesn’t it seem suddenly obvious? Just don’t expect a great legal career given that you actually had to ask.

On the naughty step

The family firm.

It has such a reassuring sound, redolent of values of client care handed down through the generations, and the energy of youth brought under the careful supervision of wisdom. The very best traditions of the local small firm, a foundation stone of the community.

Or not.

Karim Solicitors, consisting of Imran Karim (40), supposedly senior partner, his sister Saira (39) and their mother Shamim (65) have all been struck off the roll in one fell swoop, after leaving a trail of dishonesty proceedings and panicking liability insurers behind them.

Exhibit A, Zurich Professional Ltd v Karim & others, (see page 3 of this pdf) in which Zurich sought, successfully, to avoid liability on claims for misappropriated funds by clients on the basis that the claims arose out of dishonesty and/or fraud, primarily by the first defendant, Shamim Karim, who was found to be the controlling power behind the firm. For the detailed factual background to this case see paras 28 - 33 of this account [PDF]

Exhibit B, the SDT, following a decade long investigation, struck all three off the roll (in their absence). Dishonest use of clients’ money, to the tune of £840,000 was not the only problem.

The money, Imran said, had been spent by him on “a Rolex, loose women and drink”. However, his sister Saira took a more prudent approach and invested her money in business ventures, including the ‘Miss Nude UK’ beauty contest. [See BBC story here, featuring Saira as 'founder']

Sadly ‘Miss Nude UK’ proved to be the beginning of their downfall, when in 1999, company documents for the ‘beauty contest’ arrived at the Law Society in an envelope from Karim Solicitors, who then denied all knowledge.

Imran and Saira had put all the blame on Mommy Dearest, who had been found to be the dominant force in Zurich v Karim, but, as in that case, the manner in which the brother and sister had corruptly permitted Shamim to run the firm was enough to damn them. All three were culpable. Interim costs order of £75,000 made.

The Karims have the right to appeal the SDT decision and are apparently intending to do so.

[edit 13 June] This just gets better. See this newspaper story. Imran had a serious premiership footballer and Krystal habit. Saira set up Miss Nude UK with Nick Reynolds, the son of Great Train Robber Bruce ‘Butch’ Reynolds. Despite being on Sky TV, Miss Nude UK wasn’t enough to rescue the situation, particularly as Saira had also also put money into a ‘failed music business’.

Mind you, there was the alleged apartment in New York and the ‘large home in Esher’ (Ahh, fragrant Esher) to console her. Document shredding and claims of being authorised to take mortgage holders money (Eh?) were not enough of a defence.

After a series of raids beginning in 1999 investigators found £450,000 had been misappropriated from the proceeds of a house sale belonging to clients Mr K and Miss D.

A further £390,000 had been taken from mortgage cash advanced by Northern Rock to Mrs Binu Govindan, who sold her home in Brighton Road, Purley and was buying a property on Woodcote Valley Road.

I’ve said it before and will say it again, it is always the conveyancers you have to watch…

defendant

On the naughty step

naughty step badgeOn the naughty step this week is Susan Orton, a conveyancing assistant at Harold G Walker in Bournemouth, at which her husband was a senior partner. Mrs Orton made away with £79,655 from the firm’s client account over 2 years, after blowing £30,000 from the family savings.

In mitigation Mrs Orton blamed the stress and long hours of her job, saying that it caused her to seek relief on the fruit machines at the local Gala Bingo. Her counsel said:

Such was the stress that she turned to gambling and was out up to five nights a week spending up to £500 a night. She spent £100,000 of their own money.

Mrs Orton was jailed for 10 months and Mr Orton left the firm.

I’ve said it before, it is always the conveyancers you have to watch.

On the naughty step

On the very crowded naughty step this week are the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Law Society and, umm, firms of solicitors in general.

Shahrokh Mireskrandari, senior partner of Dean and Dean, has launched a claim for £10 million against the SRA and the Law Society at an employment tribunal, alleging racial and religious discrimination, harassment and victimisation by pursuing ‘numerous’ complaints against the firm over the last 5 years, only one of which produced a, minor, adverse finding. He accuses the Society and SRA of acting

unjustifiably, oppressively, disproportionately and outside their powers.

Meanwhile the SRA has, under pressure, set up a working party to investigate why 62.8% of interventions by the SRA in 2006 were against black, asian or unknown ethnicity solicitors, while 37% were against white solicitors, who make up 78.6% of all solicitors. (I’m very curious about the remaining 0.2% of interventions.)

On the topic of unjustifiable conduct, the Law Society’s own equal pay review revealed the shocking results that the median income for ethnic minority solicitors was 20% less than that of white solicitors. Even once factors like grade, gender, firm size, region, post-qualification experience and hours worked were taken into account, the gap remained at 17%.

Women solicitors earned 32% less than male solicitors. Even after grade, firm size, PQE, hours worked, work breaks taken and area of law were taken into account, the gap remained 7.6%.

The figures are appalling, way beyond any ‘accidental’ disparities. If they are accurate, the figures are a pretty damning indictment of our ‘meritocratic’ profession.

That said, a closer look at the sample size might cause a small doubt over the reliability of the survey.

Researchers quizzed 1,201 solicitors, 9% of whom were BME solicitors and 43% were female – described as a representative sample after weighting. The overall response rate was 76% and 52% for the salary questions.

On my maths that means 109 BME solicitors, of whom 56.7 answered the salary question. That strikes me as small sample and one that is pretty easily distorted, even using a median. This doesn’t mean the findings are wrong though, not at all.

It also suggests a sample of 516.3 women solicitors of whom 268.5 answered the salary question, which ought to be more reliable.

Brit blawg law blog review

Victorian MaidenRuthie’s Law dons the mantle of one of the all-too-rare British hostings of a Blawg Review, and a damn fine review it is. More details on Blawg Reviews here.

I believe Geeklawyer is due to be the next British host, so anyone whose business is dependent on cross-atlantic relations would be wise to sell up now.

World famous round here 2

Nick Holmes of Binary Law, renowned throughout the legal information tech world as being a very nice man indeed, has been generous enough to include Nearly Legal as one of his Blawgs of Note in an article for Legal Executive Journal, April 2008. Apparently, the article also featured a Family Lore post and one of mine alongside the article.

Nick’s blawgs of note included Family Lore, Charon QC and Impact. And who in their right mind could argue with that?

In paper based media, Nearly Legal has now featured in or written for, in chronological order, The Specialist Paralegal, the Solicitors Journal and the Legal Executive Journal. Sweet and Maxwell or indeed Rupert Murdoch where are you? I may need a job in a few months time…

Noted for their rigour

With grateful thanks to JacquiG at Bloody Relations. I couldn’t resist, what with this apparently being exam season for the wannabe lawyers and all..

On use and abuse

Thanks to a reader, I have just noticed that another blog, albeit one now apparently defunct, had used significant chunks of a post of mine unaltered, without attribution and as if the material was theirs.

I’m used to the spam blogs that rip off content in its entirety. These are annoying, but usually short-lived. I’ll aid in shortening their life span where possible. It is a bit different where it is a genuine blog or site taking the material. It is, of course, a breach of copyright, but worse, it is downright rude.

I’ve never actually set out any conditions of use for my material, letting default copyright stand. Until recently, it never occurred to me that the need might arise. But this seemed like a good time to think about it. So…

I am happy for people to quote or otherwise use my material from this blog on condition that:

  1. If it is for non-commercial use, the material is given an attribution and/or link to this blog.
  2. If it is for commercial use, or for use in a paid-for product, permission has been requested and obtained from me.

I’ll put something to this effect in the About page. I doubt there will be that much call for it, though.

‛simply wrong-headed’

Apparently Wandsworth are very very unhappy with the Court of Appeal judgment in Wandsworth v Randall on underoccupation possessions via ground 16 HA 1985. So unhappy that they are lobbying Caroline Flint to change the law via the Housing and Regeneration bill.

There are, of course, extremely good policy reasons for underoccupation possessions. Multiple bedroom council properties are in extremely short supply and demand is high.

Wandsworth, however, are putting more than a little spin on this. Martin Johnson, Cabinet member for housing said:

Our concern is the Court of Appeal judgement provides an incentive for underoccupying successor tenants to artificially increase their household as a way to defeat such a possession application.

The judgment expressly said that artificial inflation of numbers of people living in the property would be an issue for reasonableness at the hearing. It is fully open to the landlord to present evidence on the issue. So to say

the case left landlords with ‘very little power’ to pursue ground 16 repossessions.

is nonsense.

But Mr Johnson is trumped by Brian Reilly, deputy director of housing, who fumes that this is

clearly a case where there has been an interpretation of the law that is simply wrong-headed.

Call me an old stick-in-the-mud, but that would be for the House of Lords rather the deputy director of housing of the frustrated claimant to decide.

I take it that this sound and fury means an application for permission to appeal to the Lords will not be forthcoming, but why ever not, Mr Reilly?

How not to pick a fight

Let us say you were a large US company, looking to throw around your intellectual property muscle for a quick buck by putting a licensing squeeze on small companies. If so, it is probably best not to pick on a small tech company headed by an ex-litigator [link is lengthy but funny].

Libel, fraud and child trafficking

Or ‘On the Naughty Step…’

Thanks to Mark P for the idea, I bring you news of scandal and criminality from the world of housing, albeit with only the most tangential relationship to housing law.

Gentoo, a Sunderland based RSL and its CEO, Peter Walls, won a £100,000 libel judgment against a website called Dads Place and specifically John Finn, the owner of rival housing firm Pallion and a former local council candidate. The anonymous website had been posting “seriously defamatory allegations ranging from corruption to nepotism and the promotion of female employees in return for sexual favours” said Gentoo’s Counsel. Pallion owned numerous properties in areas earmarked for demolition and renewal by Gentoo. The allegations had led to a Housing Corporation investigation of Gentoo. Worth noting this as another example of a determinedly anonymous website failing to be protection against defamation claims, although it took quite some effort to pierce the veil.

Collapsed and bust RSL Ujima, formerly the largest BME housing association and now part of London & Quadrant, is not going quietly. Three former employees have been arrested for money laundering and conspiracy to defraud, amidst allegations that the Housing Corporation acted late and had plenty of warnings of problems.

Then there is this extraordinary story. A London-based housing officer has been convicted of illegally bringing a child, a baby, into the country, apparently to preserve her priority need status on a homeless application after her children went to live with her ex-husband. The day that she returned from Nigeria with the baby, for which £150-£200 was apparently paid, Peace Sandberg presented as homeless at Ealing Council’s HPU to make a fresh application. The child’s original family is not known. I may be being naive but I can’t believe that this is all there is to the story.

News permitting, this may become an irregular feature - On the Naughty Step may return.

Butterfingers

In what must be probably the worst experience a paralegal could ever have, Penny Wadsworth has inadvertently caused the collapse of a 5 defendant, £100,000 drugs trial [Guardian Report]. The ‘Kennington Rastafarian Temple’ trial had been running for 4 weeks when a police officer recognised Wadsworth, a paralegal on the defence team. The officer recognised Wadsworth from earlier enquiries and recalled that she had made a telephone complaint about drug dealing at the Temple, prior to the raid and arrests.

Wadsworth had failed to disclose her complaint or its content to her firm, or the defence counsel. When defence counsel was informed, and told the client, unsurprisingly the client ‘felt he could no longer have complete confidence in the neutrality of his firm of solicitors’, as the judge put it.

The judge called Wadsworth to appear before the Court, but decided that, although the result of her non-disclosure was ‘catastrophic’ for the trial, no action would be taken against her. After the prosecution decided not to offer any evidence or to seek a retrial, the defendants were acquitted.

Oddly enough, Wadsworth had apparently worked for a city firm for 20 years before turning to a criminal firm. A rough introduction and I suspect she may now be an ex-paralegal. Although considering that she did achieve her client’s acquittal, maybe not.

One must have sympathy. It might not have been the birghtest course of (non)action she took, but we do all make errors of judgement at some point. The idea that such an error would result in a dressing down in open court and the collapse of a high profile trial is the stuff of sweat-soaked-blanket nightmares.

On the other hand, the irony content of the eventual effect of her complaint about drug dealing at the Temple is so overwrought as to be a ‘Tales of the Unexpected’ plot (a reference that few born after say 1975 will get. Strewth, I’m old.)

A quick admin question

Could someone who receives posts from Nearly Legal via email drop me an note to let me know whether you receive the post a second time if I have made an edit to it later on?

It shouldn’t do that, but I can’t tell if it is without potentially deluging people with emails.

Thanks. Email to contact at nearlylegal dot co dot uk or via the contact form.

[Edit: Thanks to those that mailed. All is OK].

Nothing for the weekend

It is about time for a break - 13 detailed posts in the last two weeks, coupled with a frantic time at work, has left me lacking oomph, as devoid of oomph as an omphless thing on a bad day. So there will be nothing more here until after the holiday weekend.

Meanwhile, James Stark of Garden Court North has put up a briefing note on the rejection of Payne v Cooper in Porter v Shepherds Bush (he is not happy). Hat tip to Tony Fearnley.

And if you are in search of further housing goodness, a new blog has just started up. Housed is by the person who has been commenting here as ‘housinganger’, a CLS housing caseworker at a CAB. Housed is still unpacking the box marked ‘kitchen’ in search of the kettle, but should be good. I am delighted to be able to welcome another housing blog to the UK law blog scene

At this rate of increase, by the end of 2009, the world will be ours (laughs maniacally). Assuming, that is, that William Flack manages to get his blog working again and finds the time to post something…(hint hint).

No more than expected

LSC introduces new IT system to file matter start funding claims. System promptly doesn’t work. Three months later, system still doesn’t work. Any idea when it will work? Errrr no. So we send in Excel forms instead.

LSC says “It’s not working as well as it could but it’s not meltdown or anything. We are now in the process of a recovery strategy”.

My giggles are not enough to stop me being pedantic. Can one actually be ‘in the process of a strategy’? Does this mean ‘in the process of coming up with a strategy’? Or  ‘in the process of implementing a strategy’? Or, more likely both at once, in the sense of ‘making it up as we go along’?

The hopeful LiP

Although the energy to do proper case comments has deserted me until tomorrow, I couldn’t resist this exchange, which is just about all that is reported of Bedi, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Hounslow [2007] EWHC 3311 (Admin)

  1. MR JUSTICE COLLINS: Now, Mr Bedi, as we have discussed, and for the reasons I have indicated, I am afraid I am going to have to refuse permission. As I say, you at least have the advantage that it has not cost you anything, at least not cost you anything so far as court fees and other side’s fees are concerned, and leave it to you to decide whether you wish to pursue it any further. But you can indicate, if there is any problem raised at any lower court, if you do decide to pursue any claim — and I am not saying that you have a good claim; I have not gone into that — that I have indicated that in my view quite clearly this is a matter that is not a public law claim and which should be pursued, if it is to be pursued, as an ordinary civil claim.
  2. THE CLAIMANT: Thank you, my Lord.
  3. MR JUSTICE COLLINS: All right?
  4. THE CLAIMANT: My Lord, you have mentioned I have not lost anything. I would ask your Lordship to grant me to this cost because I’m litigant in person and I believe I’m entitled to it.
  5. MR JUSTICE COLLINS: No, you are not entitled to any costs. You have not succeeded.

The route to Justice

Funny old day… (click for big pictures).

La Porte d’Enfer
In the sun, it is like a Le Corbusier dream
Outside the RCJ. Big issue seller and McCartney hunters
Evictions weren’t going to make the news

Obvious filler 6

My occasional attempts to get cheap laughs at the expense of passing bewildered internet searchers are getting more difficult. Virtually all of the search terms that have brought people here recently are legally related and most even make sense. I hate it when the lazy blogger’s fall back turns into hard work. So, if you detect any sense of strain in this, should the frantic feet of the serene swan become apparent, be gentle, because I’m doing it for you.

Fortunately, the odder or more hopeless of the searchers come in thematic waves

1. The fixated

shiny shorts

Yes, but only through sitting down a lot. My G.A.Y. days are over.

father

No. Not unless I have a horrible dark secret.

spanking part 1

Part 1? I mean spanking is all well and good between consenting adults, but with an interval? Do you have a g&t and discuss the performance so far? Or just sit in awkward silence pretending to read the programme. ‘Oh I see that that the table tennis bat plays a much larger part in act 2′?

irish hobby horse

I don’t think that this is to do with Tristram Shandy, because next question is…

irish dominatrixes

It’s the red hair and freckles that they dream of in the gimp mask.

dominatrixes of the world

Tired of freckles, he now wants them bestriding the continents, with their PVC leggings chafing the equator.

I’m all for human variety, but sometimes I wish it didn’t end up at this blog. I only get confused.

2. Trouble with the law

legal revenge on neighbours

Again! Let it be or it will surely end up in the Magistrates Court.

justice for litigants in person

Topical but may be related to the next question…

claim struck out can i start again

Nope. What the hell do you think the law is actually for, really? At least have the decency to bring a doomed and hopeless appeal.

pipex notice of copyright infringement rush hour 3

Or the definition of pathos. Of all the films to be done for downloading…

joint tenant court case death divorce

I’m just hoping this isn’t an either/or question.

3. Access to the law

can my mother get legal aid

Maybe, but motherhood per se is not a qualifying state. I’m assuming google doesn’t actually know your mother’s income, but hey, these days…

The next two questions are a sample of five incoming variations on a theme…

what type of help at court can i expect from community legal service funding regarding a housing injunction

what type of legal help can i expect from community legal service funding regarding a housing injunction

Sadly for this determined seeker, I think the answer is ‘depends’. Are you on the receiving end, or seeking to bring a personal injunction? Are there any related criminal proceedings or ASBOs? In any case, you’ll need to find a legal aid solicitor to actually apply for public funding. There are still a few of us.

how do you actually claim legal aid

Leave it to the solicitor, really. Frankly, it is a painful process and you won’t get it without a solicitor anyway. Consider it one of the many ways in which we try to make your life easier.

chambers barristers one stop shop

Now there is an idea. A Myspace of Counsel, perhaps, or an Amazon of the Bar, with customer reviews. “I was disappointed that barrister X had both a chin and a trace of a northern accent. Frankly this was not what the brochure had led me to expect. I eagerly awaited being patronised, and finding my concerns sensibly addressed was, I felt, poor service. And their coffee was weak. Two stars”

4. Becoming a lawyer, or not

does finishing lpc make one a lawyer

Dream on. It’s not like those poncy ‘non-practising’/couldn’t get pupillage barristers you know.

what happens after the lpc

Depends. Hopefully, at some  point, a traineeship. Otherwise, have you considered media sales?

i need an lpc licence but can t pass the test for counseling can you help

Eh? and no. And whatever this is, should you have the licence without the counselling test? It sounds, you know, quite important.

4. Life as a lawyer

what is anor in legal terms

A short legal career.

if a slicitor has been lied to by his client can he drop him

Did they lie about paying the bill?

housing law made easy

I do my best, I really do, but it isn’t. Sorry.

5. History

when was lambeth settled

It never has been and still isn’t.

Green Ink and old Olivettis

With my usual and frankly uncanny ability to be a couple of days ahead of the zeitgeist, I posted on litigants-in-person a few days ago, only to see the Guardian do a feature piece on LiPs today. Granted they put a little more effort into it, and actually interviewed people and things like that, but we say pretty much the same things.

In addition, my post is much, much shorter, and so, brevity being not only a virtue but a mark of elegance, I can only pity the poor Guardian having to play catch up by substituting a modicum of effort and research for pith.

The Guardian article is actually quite an interesting piece. It cites a 2005 survey that found many that LiPs considered that:

lawyers were not necessary or not best placed to advance their interests. They saw themselves as more factually expert in their dispute and more able to manage their case than a lawyer - or they just wanted to “have their say”. Less constrained by legal notions of relevance, they could advance arguments or raise issues that a lawyer would not.

But of course, they can’t, because that is not how the Courts work. The result is, as the survey showed, that:

those who handle their own litigation make more mistakes than lawyers do - and more serious mistakes - and that the outcomes of their cases are generally worse than for those who are legally represented.

Nonetheless, their numbers are on the increase, driven by income limits on legal aid. Apparently Family matters have the largest proportion, which should come as no surprise.

There is one quote, from an Appeal Court Judge, that eloquently sums up the view of the LiP at appellate level. Forgive me quoting at length:

There is no sight more depressing than that of a litigant in person, borne down by frustration, anger and plastic bags filled with unsorted paper, staring up at the judge in the expectation of some quietus. What he wants, no court can give: some public acknowledgement and satisfaction for a deeply felt grievance, some release from the anger and misery induced by a resentment growing ever stronger as the years have passed. If only someone had listened and appreciated the hurt early on.

But by the time the litigant in person gets to court it is all too late. The time for listening has passed. The court, often faced with vituperation expressed in green ink or inadequate spacing between the lines typed on an old Olivetti, cannot hear what may have been a genuine cause for complaint because the complaint is lost in the sound and fury, and the litigant won’t listen because no one has been prepared to listen to him in the years gone by.

What is needed is not only understanding but therapy. The courts grapple with the former, but they inevitably fail to provide the latter.

This is unfair to many LiPs, who are doing it because they have to. However, the desperate and hopeless appeal, made in the conviction of the utter rightness of the cause, is the mark of the archetypal LiP, and, going by my visits to the Admin Court office or the Court of Appeal office, there are no shortage of those at present. The real question is why are they always in front of me in the queue?

The CAB at the RCJ is also mentioned in the piece. Given the number of what might be euphemistically described as ‘interesting’ calls we get from people who say that this CAB has ‘referred’ them to us, their daily work must be extraordinary.

Later on, I ended up browsing the list of vexatious litigants at the HMCS site. Now there is a documentary waiting to happen. How about:

ARNOLD, Dorothy Mignon (aka Gracie) who became a vexatious litigant on 17 December 1956

or BEBBINGTON, Ann Marjorie (aka EASTON, Ann Cholmondeley) - 31 January 1969

or O’NEILL, Thomas (aka Lord Charles Leslie Falconer of Thoronton) - 9 June 1998

The idea is going cheap…

Caroline Flint speaks her brain

Caroline Flint being brightIn a time when the shortage of social housing is at something of a crisis point, the housing minister has some thinking to share with us. Unfortunately, it is this. (Also BBC news page and the Guardian).

Let us make the rash assumption that this proposal to eject work-shy malingerers from their council tenancies is not an empty piece of vote catching cynicism, in fact let us go so far as to assume she might actually mean it. What we are then left with is something very silly indeed, lacking as it does both carrot and stick for those subject to this return of the un/deserving poor distinction.

The only carrot on display (apart from actually being allowed to have a council tenancy) is employment. That is not necessarily so attractive to those involved as it is to the government. Anyone earning above a very low threshold has to pay a large proportion,or all of their housing costs (rent, council tax), and of course there are the additional expenses of childcare, transport, tax credit overpayment deductions etc.. Tax credits don’t cover the difference, particularly for lowest paid.

Many of the people I see who have fallen into rent arrears have done so precisely because they have taken a job without having carried out the complex calculations on benefit eligibility, likely tax credit level etc. necessary to work out if they can afford to do so. It is unsurprising that they can’t do this, as it is apparently beyond the wit and capability of most government departments and benefit authorities. The tenant’s income then turns out to be lower than that needed to replace the removed benefits. In fact, in one of the ironies all too common at the benefit/low pay nexus, it is often being employed that results in Council tenants being evicted. Is the Minister proposing that the minimum wage should be flexible enough to include required housing costs? I thought not.

Sticks are also in short supply. Flint suggests the prospective tenant should sign up to  an enforceable contract to seek work, which would result in eviction if they breach. Of course this would not apply for those ‘clearly’ [sic] incapable of seeking work. If you are vaguely or perhaps mistily incapable of seeking work, tough.

So, we can assume she proposes to re-write both Part VI and Part VII routes to tenancies - via housing list/bidding scheme and homeless application. Oh and remove the statutory duty on local authorities to provide accommodation to the eligible homeless. And then ensure that the DWP and the local authorities are integrated enough to properly decide on when someone has breached the contract. And then face down the inevitable human rights challenges to setting such a condition on access to housing and on a continued tenancy (particularly where no such condition applies to private sector tenancies).

Is this going to happen? No. Unsurprisingly, Downing Street seems to be backing away from the idea at speed, with the Voltaire manoeuvre - ‘I might not adopt this as a firm policy but it is a good issue to have a debate about’. Rather worryingly, Grant Shapps the shadow housing minister, shows such a firm grip on his brief that he appears to actually believe that:

“Ministers and local councils have a statutory duty to house homeless families with children and so they can’t boot them out of their houses without then providing alternative accommodation”.

Somebody please tell the shadow minister about intentional homelessness quick.

That is the practicality out of the way. I think it is safe to assume that this idiot proposal isn’t going to get off the ground. But that isn’t satisfying enough. Let me be clear that this party apparatchik, who displays a classic new labour route to becoming an MP of NUS officer, policy wonk, equal ops officer and union researcher, has come up with a foul and loathsome idea, one that surely a literature graduate should realise has been tried and failed repeatedly since the early 19th Century, that being separating the good poor and the bad poor.

Social housing, like the rest of the welfare state, is based upon the principle of need, not merit.(Good heavens, I’m having to remind a labour minister of the basic principles of the welfare state). It is supposedly there for those who, for whatever reason, find themselves in need.

It may be a deceptively simple ethics, but its genesis was complex and founded on long experience that attempting to distinguish between meritorious need and undeserving need was complex, inevitably unfair and unjust, at the mercy of politics and the whim of those who themselves had no call on welfare provision, and just plain unworkable.

The obvious comparison for Flint’s brain spasm is with the calls for the obese not to get NHS treatment for related illnesses, under the guise of encouraging people not to be obese.

There is a kernel of truth in there, of course. There are areas of a dramatic concentration of poverty and deprivation. These same areas are usually suffering from a lack of services, support, training etc.etc.. Flint should be aware of the difficulty of changing this, and some of the steps required as she has just come from being a junior Employment minister. But rather than actually deal with that, let’s blame the tenants.

Flint, again classically new labour, mistakes cause and effect. Having been ’surprised’ to find that social housing, which is there for people with a low or no income, is occupied largely by people with a low or no income, she decides that clearly the problem is that these people have actually got access to housing.

Perhaps we should have a contract for ministers, to actively seek good policy ideas and not succumb to the temptation of Daily Mail ‘proposal’ farts. When they breach this contract, they have to leave their office. After all, it is the hard working decent people of this country who are paying for them to stay there. Why shouldn’t these ministers have to actually do some proper thinking rather than sitting around appearing on TV all day?

And I’ve just found Polly Toynbee agrees on all counts. This is a daft idea [mp3]. I’m not sure how delighted I am by that.

[Edit 6/02/08. William Flack picks this up and compares Flint to Edwina Curry. Miaow, but true.]

Human Rights for customers

Undertaken at the request of the DCA (as was), the MoJ has published the findings of its ‘Human Rights Insight Project’. The BBC did a story on it, and the publication can be found on the MoJ site here.

There are a number of things to cheer in the report, not least its finding that

“Vulnerable, frequent users are particularly exposed to service delivery that fails to respect their human rights”

But there are some depressing aspects. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, given that the Daily Mail is still considered to be a newspaper:

It is only when it comes to the current application of the Human Rights Act that negative views are in the ascendant, with a net total of 43% of the general public agreeing that too many people (mostly asylum seekers and other ‘foreigners) take advantage of the Human Rights Act.

I’m not sure how one ‘takes advantage’ of the HRA. And let’s be honest, even putting ‘take advantage’ in a survey question, if that is what was done, prejudges the answer - that the HRA can be abused, whether or not one considers that it is being so.

Remarkably, very few people surveyed actually make a connection between human rights and their experience of social services or NHS provision and bewilderingly

Some of the general public rated human rights and the HRA as not at all relevant to their dealings with workers in the NHS and social services, and yet agreed with the majority that being treated with dignity and respect was very important.

Maybe that is less surprising when one is told that

While nearly all of the population say they have heard of the Human Rights Act (89%), it should be borne in mind that one in five (20%) respondents also reported being aware of a fictional law.

Presumably the one about goats.

The report does recommend specific training on human rights for those in public bodies, particularly for decision makers, and further that:

The Ministry of Justice should develop a communications strategy for human rights that builds on, and reinforces, the public’s positive attitudes to human rights and their protection by law in this country, as identified by the Human Rights Insight Project, and addresses the need to correct public misunderstandings, including those arising from reporting of the impact of the Human Rights Act.

But a low grade depression is brought on by the new labour speak in which users of public services are consistently referred to as ‘customers’. A footnote attempts to justify this

The term ‘customer’ is unusual in relation to health and social services, whose customers are more usually referred to as patients or clients. The use of the term in this report opens the way, however, for the drawing of important conclusions with regard to ‘customer care’. The term ‘customer care’ will, it is believed, be widely understood as referring to the everyday, environmental and relational aspects of the staff/client interface in any public service. The difficulty in using the terms ‘patient care’ or ‘client care’ is that they may be understood to encompass some of the higher professional skills as well as the basic day-to-day interactions encompassed within ‘customer care’. ‘Customer care’ is therefore used in this report specifically to denote this important but sub-clinical level of interaction between staff and their patients or clients.

Oh great, the only way of conceiving of ‘everyday, environmental, relational aspects’ of interactions is as customer care. What impoverished hell is this?

Hey, you asked…

For some of us internet old timers, who were on usenet before the WWW existed and were hand coding websites in the mid 1990s, it is still a surprise how people treat search engines as something to put a fully fledged question into. January has been a bumper month for searches arriving at this site that involved what, when, who, how, why and where questions that had something to do with housing law, albeit all apparently coming from e.e. cummings.

In a karma appeasing reverse of my occasional sniping at strange search terms, I decided to be helpful. In order to avoid having to return as a cockroach yet again, here are Nearly Legal’s brief answers to your civil litigation and housing questions. Naturally, nothing of what follows should be taken as legal advice and no action should be taken without obtaining full legal advice.

defence and counterclaim struck out what happens now?

Depends on whether you are the claimant or defendant. I’d expect the Claimant to have applied for judgement, sought directions and the case to proceed to trial. The Defendant is stuffed, except on the issue of quantum.

how long before a possession order is unenforceable

After 6 years the claimant has to get the court’s permission to enforce, but assuming that the conditions still continue (e.g. rent arrears and costs not paid off), the order is potentially enforceable for another 6 years.

can landlord evict without a warrant

Depends - but if it is a tenancy and falls under the protection from eviction act (as most do), no.

should homelessness appeals move from county court to tribunal

Ohh, an abstract point of principal type question. My short answer is that, as issues of public law are often engaged, no.

how many months notice do i need to be evicted

The usual answer is the minimum notice in tenancy agreement or statutory minimum notice if longer - these vary depending on the current status of the tenancy. Then, before eviction, there is the issue of possession proceedings, plus hearing and possession order, plus expiry of any time limit in the possession order, plus time taken for landlord to apply for warrant of possession, plus time for availability of bailiffs for settting date of eviction in Notice of Eviction, which depends on how busy the court is. Depending, I’d say roughly 4-6 months, could be more, could be less. Of course, if there is already a possession order, it is just down to how busy the court/bailiffs are - maybe a few weeks or less.

what happens when a tolerated trespasser clears arrears and court cost

Nothing. That is the problem. No new tenancy and no ability to apply to revive the tenancy. Changes may be afoot. Watch this space.

how many times has the section 11 landlord and tenant act of 1985 been in the uk?

Once. But it has been used in claims a lot. I’m running something like 25 cases at present.

are contingency fees illegal?

Yes. Conditional fee Agreements (AKA No win No fee) are not contingency fees and are legal.

what differences does it make if my ex partner give up tenancy to my property i own

Eh?

can i evict an illegal subtenant

Assuming that this is a private tenancy, if the tenancy has been ended, the subtenant has no continued right of occupation and a possession claim against a trespasser can be brought. If the tenancy hasn’t been ended (by Notice to Quit or Possession order), but the tenancy is a assured periodic, the landlord can bring possession proceedngs against the illegal subtenant under Ground 12 Breach of tenancy. But get advice, pronto. If this isn’t a private tenancy, then any RSL or Council housing officer should know about this, really.

what is the impact of the disability discrimination act 1995 on possession claims brought under the accelerated procedure?

My view, in the absence of significant case law, is that Malcolm applies. See this post.

can you appeal a house possession claim

Yes, but for heaven’s sake get advice. You can’t just get the claim re-heard.

case law on joint to sole tenancies

The only legal mechanisms are i) on the death of one joint tenant for assured shorthold (private), secure (Council) tenancies and Assured (Housing Association) tenancies, (which - if it happened post 1980 - counts as a succession for secure tenants) or ii), if it is a relationship breakdown or children are involved, the Court may in some circumstances order the re-assignment of the tenancy under the Family Law Act 1996, Childrens Act 1989 or as part of a divorce - see this post. For cases try Gay v Sheeran & Anor [1999] EWCA Civ 1621 or Newlon Housing Trust v. Alsulaimen and Another [1998] UKHL 35; [1999]. Local Authorities and some Housing Associations have relationship breakdown policies, where a new sole tenancy may be created, but basically, this issue is very, very messy.

how to get an ex partner s name off of a tenancy

If they are a joint tenant, see above. if not, and you are the sole tenant, it doesn’t matter at all, the landlord should remove their name.

typical billable hours to defend landlord against mold

Ah, mold is a tough claimant. But assuming this is defending a disrepair claim, an indeterminate piece of string comes to mind. How far does the case go? Settlement? Trial? Disclosure issues? Interim applications? And so on and so forth. I’d expect multiples of tens of hours to be quite possible.

will i be evicted if my rent arrears have gone back to court

If you have breached the terms of a suspended or postponed possession order for rent arrears, you could well be. Get advice now.

what does only or principal home mean?

Basically, where you live all or most of the time. This doesn’t mean that you can’t be living elsewhere for some periods of time, but there must be clear indications of the intention to return. Occupation by a spouse will count as occupation by the tenant.

the preaction protocal has failed to get a reply

Then surely it is time to consider issuing the claim, assuming you have the evidence. Otherwise - pre-action disclosure application?

how to break a shorthold assured joint tenancy

As landlord or tenant? Has there been a significant breach of tenancy agreement by the other party? Or misrepresentation prior to signing the agreement? That may or may not help, depending. If not, you are probably stuck - this is a contract after all.

the appellants had been defendants to an application for possession of their flat. there had been several court hearings and opportunities made for them to present their counterclaim as regards the state of the financial account and in order to make a counterclaim themselves for damages.

Don’t stop there, I was just getting interested.

And lastly,

lpc is it worth it for mature

I’d have to say yes, for me it certainly was. but it isn’t going to be easy at all to get a traineeship. Do a lot of research and thinking.

There, that should be enough karmic balance for at least a few more weeks of sneering at small children and general misanthropy.

After wigs, cravats

Cravat horrorAnd we thought the sound and fury over whether bench, bar and solicitor-advocates wear or don’t wear wigs was bad. From the land of more relaxed court-wear comes a debate over whether a cravat (or an Ascot, depending) is appropriate for an advocate or rather ‘borders on contemptuous’. Shockingly, bowties are apparently thoroughly respectful.

Thanks to WAC for the link.