Challenges or “Tricks of the Trade”

Tricks of the Trade

The tricks of lawyers and judges, who themselves, of course, are lawyers, are many and varied, but have probably not changed much over the years; perhaps more so since technology changes.

The main tricks litigants in person (LIP) come across are:-

1.  From the lawyer of the opposing party:-
1.1                          Taking advantage of LIP’s and their vulnerability;
1.2                          Ignoring rules with regard to dealing with LIP’s;
1.3                          Withholding information material to the case to which the LIP is entitled;
1.4                          Misleading the courts by withholding case law, sections of Acts and rules;
1.5                          Lying;
1.6                          Being corrupt;
1.7                          Acting as sociopaths;
1.8                          Delivering/serving bundles and documentation either as you step into the court room or after the court hearing;
1.9                          Making contact with the judiciary and court staff clandestinely to run the LIP down, mostly with imagined information derogatory to the LIP, to put the LIP at disadvantage with information the LIP is in no position to deny and/or correct;
1.10                      Liaising with Listings to choose their own judge;
1.11                      Having crucial contacts on the ‘inside’ to control the outcome;
1.12                      Not co-operating with the LIP;
1.13                      Treating the LIP in a derogatory and belittling manner;

2. From the judiciary:-
2.1                      Provocation;
2.2                      Waylaying;
2.3                      Ignoring the law, case law et al;
2.4                      Rudeness and intimidation;
2.5                      Lying;
2.6                      Not independent or impartial;
2.7                      Conveniently forgetting why they are there and what their job is;
2.8                      Being corrupt;
2.9                      Acting as sociopaths.

17 Responses to Challenges or “Tricks of the Trade”

  1. Norma Ferrie says:

    Yes, that about sums it up for the public, having experienced all of the tricks above.

    My house was taken for no justifyable or legal reason, it was the result of a network of solicitors combining forces to perpetrate fraud and deception.

    The Law Society’s involvement in resolving this matter to a just and satifactory conclusion for the victim, the consumer, the member of the public, via an “investigation” into the actions of those involved, is misleading, as “investigation” in real terms stands for “challenge” the victim, there is not even the merest possibility of integrity involved in any of the systems and structors that the Law Society base their findings.

    Having been involved with the Law Society for the best part of five years, they found that I had had an adaequate service…..so forced to go to the Ombudsman.2009… where I expected that they would find in favour of the Law Society’s investigation. This turned out to be true.

    Despite evidence provided by my own investigation, which led me to convicted Solcitor John David Cort, sentenced on the 28th of May 2010 to 29 years for Murder and Fraud. Abused his position in 2008 in acting for a third party, in a unauthorised access to our mortgage account for the purpose of redeeming our mortgage for a third party, which was the concluding part of the fraud that began in 2005 with a former solicitor.

    I have since met with two CID officers on the 9th of August 2010 attached to the murder team that convicted John David Cort, who came from Leicester to Derby to meet me.

    They had no hesitation in concluding that we were, and are victims of crime since 2005. They also informed me that since JD Cort’s conviction it has opened up a network of corrupt solicitors involved in mortgage/property fraud/money laundering, and other scams, the investigation into this is massive.

    What does this say say about the Law Society and the legal Ombudsman’s approval of the Law Society’s handling in what we are deceived into believing an “impartial investigation”.

    The CID were somewhat surprised that I had not been given any information or options by the Law Society or the SRA in respect of the currant position regarding JD Cort. The CID did, however, provide me with information of a law firm in Matlock Derbys, appointed by the SRA to deal with the Compensation Fund. Some victims have already been compensated out of the various bank accounts held by JD Cort.

    I rang them, only to be told that they are only dealing with the ex-clients of JD Cort, and as I was not a client of JD Cort then I do not qualify for the compensation fund. Nonetheless I am a victim, so where do I stand in receiving compensation? I am at present dealing direct with the SRA.
    I have stated this is not a complaint. This is a report of Fraud, where I have provided documentary confirmation that Fraud has been committed, which led to the theft of my property, any attmept by the SRA to excuse or dismiss the offences commited by JD Cort will lead me to conclude as with the Law Society, a flagrant avoidance to apply the appropriate process and procedures applicable to the seriousness of the offences committed. This would also be a deliberate waste of my time, and a disservice to the victim, the consumer, the member of the public.

    I have asked what they are prepared to do to bring this matter to a just and satisfactory conclusion. I will await their response. But I have informed them that I will not be in a position to respond to their response whch I am told will be with me in two weeks, but I will be away, and I have informed them of this, so I hope they respect this time scale.

    Meanwhile I was told by the CID officers on the 9th of August 2010, as they are attached to the murder team, they cannot deal with my particular crime of Fraud and would therefore pass my details to the Fraud Unit in Yorkshire which has been specifically set up to deal with the ongoing actions and investigations into the network of corrupt solicitors.

    Kind regards to all
    Norma

  2. Pingback: Victims Unite! Empowering Victims of Financial Exploitation and Legal Oppression |

  3. Debra says:

    “Tricks of the Trade” from lawyers “defending” the litigant:-

    1. Advising an innocent litigant to plead guilty when they are not, yet others in the case are.
    2. Advising an innocent litigant to apologise even though they haven’t committed any crime.
    3. Advising an innocent litigant to avoid charges against a criminal, thus pardoning crimes.

    • Very sad, and very true, Debra!!!

      In my current world view, it distinctly seems that

      1. We are all Victims (except rich Criminals) – which is the title of a book by an Australian author

      2. it seems more likely for criminals to “win” than for the innocent…

      Hence we need to unite, don’t we!?…

  4. It’s very difficult to determine the rights and wrongs of this case, as we are naturally enough only reading one side of the story here. However, perhaps we need to remember that justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done and it has certainly not been seen to be done here.

    The more I read these tales of woe on this and other sites, the more I realise that once you become embroiled in the legal system in this country, you really do have to be a canny operator if you are to succeed, especially if you are trying to fight the system as well as defend yourself.

    The legal system in this country is really in a mess and seems weighted against the wronged rather than the wrongdoer. I have, in the past, taken debtors to court and received judgement against them, but what good has it done me? I have never received the money I was due and if I wish to chase the debtor, I have to spend more and more money to do so. The system is pathetic!

    • Pathetic, indeed, or as the book title: “Our Corrupt Legal System – where we are all victims, except rich criminals”…

      We, the litigants, are only “fodder” for the mill to keep grinding…

      With deep sighs, THANKS for your comments!

      • I’m not sure I like the idea of being ‘fodder’ but perhaps it is an inevitability???

        I found a link the other day to a OFT report about insolvency proceedings against Companies. It seems that the major creditors (almost always the banks) will appoint the receivers and agree their terms of remuneration with them. The banks are preferred creditors, so they will always get their money before anyone else – consequently, the charges made by the administrators is not of major concern to them. Interestingly enough, if I, as a small creditor, wished to challenge hourly rates of £400 (and even £150 for the office junior) I can apply to a court for a review. However, I must pay my own costs for this action, whereas (win or lose) the administrator receives their costs from the remaining assets of the company they are winding up.

        When I first read this I honestly thought I had mis-read ….. but no such luck!

  5. LIP being treated like dirt says:

    Hi there
    Do you have an email, I am in a LIP in a case at present with a terrible team against us and I have tried to report to the legal omgudsman and received a letter to say they cannot investigate or accept any complaint as I am a litigant in person and the company I am complaining about is not my solicitor. What a joke.
    I have read your list of tricks of the trade re LIP’s and they are doing literally all of them. I really want to take a human rights case after my case at the way we have been dealt with. Has anyone had any luck in bringing anything to bear on a dodgy legal team they face?

    • Welcome to the Club! Sorry to be cynical.

      It’s an art and test in perseverance and commitment to ‘hang in there’.

      Can you send me a summary to sabine at globalnet dot co dot uk?

    • victimsofthestatehypocrites says:

      The Ombudsman is a joke.
      They even refused to tell who we could appeal to and wouldn`t say how long we had to appeal. We had to write to them repeatedly.
      All they do is rubber-stamp anything any public official has written, while the Ombudsman dodges the Human Rights Acts and the law you point out to them.

  6. jay says:

    acting as lip now for about 4 years all of the above dirty tactics have been used against me by solicitors barristers and judges, its a very frustrating lesson to learn that a once great system is so open to this blatant abuse. still i have become a very vindictive person and lets say some peoples reputations are going to be damaged!

    • I think we must take it as the most unexpected ‘school of life’. If, eventually, you can even LAUGH, you’ve really made it!

      If, indeed, you can succeed in damaging some people’s reputations, CONGRATULATIONS!!!

      Exposure, exposure, exposure – that’s all we can do, methinks…

    • victimsofthestatehypocrites says:

      We are 7 years into the government-sanctioned legal joke.

  7. godblessme7777 says:

    thanks for your reply, i only found your site today so am not too familiar with who you are and what you do, your list above certainly grabbed my attention though as every point on the list aplies in my experience. any advice on how to tell the court to stick their cost order where the sun doesnt shine? as i dont really fancy paying for them to commit fraud. its like the bank robber being awarded the costs of his swag bag, mask and getaway car. it makes no sense! oh i nearly laughed then

    • victimsofthestatehypocrites says:

      We got billed thousands of pounds for appealing against the ombudsman fraudulent decisions. We appealed, and the court dropped the fee by a few thousand (for one legal hearing by their lawyer), but still expected us to pay the remaining thousands of pounds for the ombudsman crime? they committed.

      The UK is still whistling Dixie as we now live on the other side of the planet.
      They never bothered even writing to ask for any money as they know a higher court would be appealed to.

  8. Can you maybe send the order to sabine at globalnet.co.uk?

  9. Hi,
    All sounds very familiar to me as I have suffered similar experiences.I have lost my home and successful guest house due to a fake bankruptcy order. I had experienced a number of problems over the years with Peterborough city council ( PCC ), where they were quite clearly attempting to close my business down.I was becoming successful, so I decided to convert the lofts into 2 extra rooms As this was my home, I didn’t need planning permission, and therefore obtained all the building reg consents etc.The PCC decided to carry out an additional inspection , contrary to statute. They came to my home with a warrant of entry and 4 police officers.They found nothing wrong of course.I sat on this for 11 months and then I made my first mistake. I decided to issue a summons on the grounds that the warrant was a fake and that the PCC had no lawful right to obtain a warrant of entry under the 1984 Buiding Act . Within a few weeks I was raided again by the PCC with another warrant of entry, but this time with 3 police officers ( act of retalliation perhaps ).The rooms had been completed and were occupied by guests. Again they found nothing wrong. The PCC applied for a striking out motion in respect of my summons. It is often a cute trick used by lawyers and courts to get rid of claims they do not wish to deal with.The District Judge duly struck out my claim without even considering my claims. How dare I suggest a warrant would be forged.He awarded PCC £1500 in costs. I appealed the decision and an appeal date was set. However I was not able to attend due to illness. My request for an adjournment was refused and in my absence the claim was dismissed and the PCC were awarded a further £6000. My requests for reinstatement were refused.The PCC then proceeded to obtain a land charge, or so they said.Truth was , no land charge was ever registered with the land registry. A few months later my business was visited at 07.10 in the morning by a very large gentleman claiming to be a HCEO . He forced his way into my hallway by assaulting one of my female guests. He then proceeded to assault me, during which time the female guest called the police.When they arrived they allowed the gentleman to run off and I never saw him again.The police refused to do anything and claimed it was a civil matter. I was then subjected to what is known as a statutory demand, however whenever I arranged to meet these people they never turned up.In Feb 2013 Barclays bank offered me a £135,000 loan to buy another property.I decided not to accept the loan, but this convinced me that there were no CCJ’S or land charge on my property. In April 2013 I received what alleged to be an unsealed bankruptcy petition that had been altered from 82 to 83 of 2013.PCC were the only alleged creditor. I ignored the whole bankruptcy process on the grounds that it was void.I subsequently discovered that no deposit and application fee had been paid in respect of the bankruptcy petition. No payment no bankruptcy petiton- those are the rules. At the end of May 2013 , I received what alleged to be a bankruptcy order.The order was a custom made jobbie. The correct order on creditor’s petition is form 6.25 as per rule 6.33 of the Insolvency rules act 1986.It is mandatory to use form 6.25, any other form is unlawful.In August 2013 I was offered another loan by Barclays bank this time for £75,000. I again declined the offer.Well, I’m supposed to be bankrupt! I lost count of the number of times I told these people that their actions were unlawful and indeed criminal.I was an LIP , so I didn’t matter.Who was there to defend me – no one.In April 2014 I was evicted from my home and business. This was carried out by an individual who was not a county court bailiff and he had the help of 4 gentlemen who were normally employed as a vehicle breakdown crew from Gt. Yarmouth.These 4 gentlemen then proceeded to barricade my home with steel shutters. To keep me out perhaps.Anyway, shortly thereafter a security guard was employed with his attack guard dog to sit in his van outside my home. He was there for 6 weeks, during which time I was calling on my property to collect my mail. On one occasion the guard accused me of threatening him. I was subsequently arrested and charged with a public order offence. I represented myself and on 03/10/2014 I was acquitted of any wrong doing .I have apparently been charged £21,000 to be evicted and for the security to protect my property from non existent threats by me.I consider myself a lawful decent person and I have made a number of further civil claims to at least gain compensation for my losses.Now bear in mind that a genuine bankrupt person cannot make claims for compensation, how can this happen.Well , they play by their own rules. Oh, by the way I won’t be getting a penny back. My house was valued at £350,000 and it has been allegedly sold for £157,500, assuming a genuine sale of course!. I believe with loss of earnings I have lost £750,000 for a bankruptcy that does not lawfully exist.Please remember that I am an LIP so what do I know about the law. Only the Judges and lawyers know the law and it’s their private property- at least they believe so.This is the message you get in court and in correspondence.They ignore the rules, they ignore case law and they ignore the rights of the LIP. I believe we need websites like this so that the injustices and inequalities of our justice system can be exposed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s