Hounding No-win No-fee lawyers is an attack on the poor – OF COURSE!

Thanks to Diana Mitchell from CASIA, here is an interesting article about access to lawyers:

Thursday October 21st 2010 The Times

Hounding No-win No-fee lawyers is an attack on the poor:  Irwin Stelzer

Lord Young of Graftham and David Cameron want to rein in the activities of no-win, no-fee lawyers. Nothing to do  with spending cuts, more to do with, er, snobbery. Yes, some of these lawyers engage in shady practices. But some MPs fiddle their expenses, and we don’t eliminate – we control abuses.

What his Lordship and the PM are proposing would make it more difficult for the non-wealthy to obtain justice and compensation when injured. Lord Young, the former Trade and Industry minister, is right, of course, to take an axe to health and safety regulations that profit neither health nor safety, but produce litigation. More;power to him. But he is wrong to join the Prime Minister in attempting to curb the advertising of law firms that promote no-win, no-fee arrangements to take on the representation of people with personal injury claims. “Most of the lawyers I’ve spoken to are ashamed of the activities of these people,”said Lord Young. No doubt.

Large law firms are among the most prosperous businesses in Britain. Senior partners, who often deny that their profession is an (ugh) business, often charge £1,000 per hour. The two largest firms, Clifford Chance and Linkiaters, each employ more than 2,000 lawyers and have revenues of close to £1 billion and revenue per partner of approximately £450,000 and £540,000 respectively.

Nothing wrong with high incomes. But there is something wrong when the balance already favouring them and their clients is tipped even more to the disadvantage citizens whose only recourse is to no-win law firms who must advertise themselves to bring themselves to the attention of person clients.

These no-win, no-fee firms have little incentive to take on frivolous lawsuits. They spend their own money to do the necessary research, file the pleadings, prepare for settlement negotiations – and get nothing if they lose. Consider, too, that these law firms are generally small businesses, and that the attempt to prevent them from displaying their wares is an assault on entrepreneurial risk-takers who gamble that their skill in sorting out winning cases from sure losers will earn them a decent living. Like other small firms, they hire clerks and employees, rent commercial space and generate income to be spent on the high streets.

More important – much more important for the legitimacy of the democratic system – they provide access to the judicial system for people who would otherwise be denied it. As the Government has asked its critics before: “What’s fair about that?”

Irwin Stelzer is director of economic policy studies at the Hudson Institute

=============================================

Diana’s comment:  I do not agree whole heartedly with Mr Irwin Stelzer.  I remember when virtually a whole page of the Echo and perhaps more was filled with firms advertising for personal injury clients, that and nothing else so presumably  such cases gave them rich pickings.

Advertisements

About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is www.smartknowledge.space
This entry was posted in Government and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Hounding No-win No-fee lawyers is an attack on the poor – OF COURSE!

  1. Stanley Embling says:

    As noticed the MPs who swindle “Expenses” or “Allowances” of their Employer (namely The British Public) get investigated by the Police and prosecuted! Low and behold are then afforded Legal Aid Funding from the British Public to defend them…

    Yet notably on the other hand: Employers who by acts of fraud and theft, rob their employees of their rightful assets/property, Police will not investigate or bring charges against the Employer as they claim it’s an employment matter! Therefore:- As a victim of such fraud and theft from me by a “Corporate” employer/ their agents vicarious, I can vouch such facts…

    Therefore the above and my own account do help confirm just how corrupt and biased British Justice has now become!…. And shown more and more by The Police, The Judiciary, lawyers and Public Authorities Quangos. This is done deliberately to deprive most all impecunious victims (unless privileged as MPs) of getting their Democratic Rights, Fundamental Freedoms, access Common Justice, and not least Restitution!!..

    Stanley Embling…

  2. There are some who still think that there are honest and decent people around. I do wonder whether they are only in the ‘underclass’…

    Power corrupts. And since money is power, and we live in a system of Dishonest Money, the whole battle seems to be one of “which side are you on”: good or bad…

    Ultimately, it’s our conscience that will be our hardest judge!

    Meanwhile let’s not suffer too much from the oppressors!

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