View Full Version : Why crime doesn't pay
Do you remember the road traffic prosecution client I defended - successfully - the CPS withdrew the charges because I found serious holes in the prosecution case that they didn't want publicised in court.
When the CPS drop cases you can claim your costs (well not all, the government isn't that generous). It used to be that you sent your file to the Mags Court clerk. That system changed a few months back and now you send the file to the 'National Taxing Team' for the area - in this case, Manchester. So I did this immediately to avoid delay in payment.
The nice people at the NTT - they are genuinely helpful but severely overworked as the government has devised a system which as ever is underfunded, under-resourced and which simply doesn't work - have at last sent me an acknowledgement saying that they hope to have dealt with the case within the next three months. Oh great, so with a good wind and a lot of luck I might get paid at the end of March for work I did in September.
This is a national disgrace. It was the CPS that cocked it all up, the prosecution should never have been brought with the evidential weaknesses that it had. And yet I have to fund all this work in progress. My bill was about £1,000, and I know from previous experience that I will be lucky to get £500 from them, which means I'll have to chase my client for the rest.
This is one of the reasons why I don't do much crime.
Those of you who are employed - how would you like it if your employer said to you that they will pay you for this month next June? That is what this fantastic government expects me to accept.
Surely your client pays you and then THEY claim their costs back???.......
If they want YOU to persue the claim, then you take a further cut of the money he can reclaim!
I think you need to change your policy lol
Surely your client pays you and then THEY claim their costs back???.......
If they want YOU to persue the claim, then you take a further cut of the money he can reclaim!
I think you need to change your policy lol
G me duck, if only. Fine in principle, rather more difficult in practice:rolleyes:
454697819
18-12-08, 10:25 AM
Sorry to hear this...
If it helps at all you should be able to raise your invoice to me tomorrow.... and you will get paid instantly... coz im nice like that... :-)
Luckypants
18-12-08, 10:27 AM
Sorry Ed, I agree with G. Your client is responsible for his bill, he should pay you now and then wait for his costs from government. If he wants you to do the work to recover his costs, then he needs charging for that also. It's what I'd expect if I were your client.
Flamin_Squirrel
18-12-08, 10:27 AM
Not good.
Although it would seem from the standard of the CPS prosecution, they're over worked and under funded too. The government really is systematically destroying the justice system.
G me duck, if only. Fine in principle, rather more difficult in practice:rolleyes:
I appreciate how the no win no fee business works as such on personal injury claims.
But if a client wants you to defend them in a speeding offence (where the chances of winning are somewhat reduced), surely he pays you to do that at an agreed rate regardless.
If he wins and is then able to claim his costs back then on he goes, he does that himself.........however, if he want you to claim his cost back for him, then thats further work for you....which he should additionally pay for?
jumjum_0214
18-12-08, 10:29 AM
Ed,
Im not knocking you, I know solicitors are professional well respected people, but how do you defend criminals? Im not talking about traffic stuff here im talking about burglars, car theives etc etc.
I appreciate you dont do criminal work very often but I dont understand how solicitors can stand up for someone who has (in a lot of cases) obviously done wrong. I personally couldnt do it.
With regards to the funding side I understand your frustration and I would be unhappy about this too. As i said before im not knocking you and im not looking for an argument, I know this is off topic but i just thought I would add my 2p worth...
SoulKiss
18-12-08, 10:31 AM
C'mon Ed - Sun style Headline there.
Should read
"Crime does pay, but it bloody well takes its time and doesnt pay that well".
:)
Back on topic - yep that sux
Flamin_Squirrel
18-12-08, 10:57 AM
Ed,
Im not knocking you, I know solicitors are professional well respected people, but how do you defend criminals? Im not talking about traffic stuff here im talking about burglars, car theives etc etc.
I appreciate you dont do criminal work very often but I dont understand how solicitors can stand up for someone who has (in a lot of cases) obviously done wrong. I personally couldnt do it.
With regards to the funding side I understand your frustration and I would be unhappy about this too. As i said before im not knocking you and im not looking for an argument, I know this is off topic but i just thought I would add my 2p worth...
I'm guessing because, despite popular opinion, not everyone that ends up in the dock is guilty. :rolleyes:
jumjum_0214
18-12-08, 11:11 AM
I'm guessing because, despite popular opinion, not everyone that ends up in the dock is guilty. :rolleyes:
Im not saying innocent people shouldnt be defended. Im saying how can solicitors defend people that ARE clearly guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ArtyLady
18-12-08, 11:19 AM
I worked as a Criminal Law Secretary in a past life...the most stressful job I Ive ever done 8-[ Gawd knows how the Solicitors deal with it! S'pect to you Ed! ;)
Flamin_Squirrel
18-12-08, 11:21 AM
Im not saying innocent people shouldnt be defended. Im saying how can solicitors defend people that ARE clearly guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And until they agree to defend them and go through the evidence, how can they even start to form an opinion? :rolleyes:
Ed,
Im not knocking you, I know solicitors are professional well respected people, but how do you defend criminals? Im not talking about traffic stuff here im talking about burglars, car theives etc etc.
I appreciate you dont do criminal work very often but I dont understand how solicitors can stand up for someone who has (in a lot of cases) obviously done wrong. I personally couldnt do it.
Because that's how our justice system works. It doesn't matter if the accused is a so obviously guilty as to warrant a trial a formality, they are still allowed, and deserve, the best defence available to them. It's to try and keep our laws and law officers in line. So that they know that whatever they do may be brought up in court, so hopefully they will follow procedures.
It is easy to get frustrated when people "go free" over technicalities (note: this is a general point, I'm not picking on anything in particular), but it's those technicalities that are our legal system. OK, missing out on a conviction because "Form 3B, section 2 was completed in blue ink, rather than the specified black", may seem petty, but in a world of greys rather than clear cut black and white there is no difference between that and evidence "appearing" rather than being documented.
MiniMatt
18-12-08, 11:22 AM
Im not saying innocent people shouldnt be defended. Im saying how can solicitors defend people that ARE clearly guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Solicitors, or the News of the World, or the Daily Mail don't get to decide who is guilty and who isn't, that's the job of the judge/jury/magistrates.
We can be extremely thankful that solicitors are able to put to one side the question of whether "he looks at a bit guilty" and uphold the principles of innocent until proven otherwise. Solicitors don't defend criminals, they defend accused. They have a duty to their client and to the court but thank god they don't have a duty to tabloid headline writers :D
But I sympathise entirely Ed, the law firm I worked for dropped all legal aid criminal work whilst I was there because it was far more profitable to work for hedge fund managers, investment bankers and stockbrokers. The crim team at that firm were excellent, the most human, likeable and principled people you could ever meet. The corporate team on the other hand, devastatingly intelligent people but you couldn't really trust them to sit on a toilet the right way round... :D
SoulKiss
18-12-08, 11:26 AM
Im not saying innocent people shouldnt be defended. Im saying how can solicitors defend people that ARE clearly guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mortgages on big houses and big German cars dont pay for themselves......
The fact is that the Law states that everyone has the right to legal representation, and so there is a market for it, and, if you have a lot to lose - like many years of your life in prison, then paying a lot of money to not lose that is no real loss.
jumjum_0214
18-12-08, 11:31 AM
I think you will find we "The taxpayer" pay for "The accused" representation in court.
I think you will find we "The taxpayer" pay for "The accused" representation in court.
Only if they can't afford to pay for themselves.
timwilky
18-12-08, 12:24 PM
Ed,
Im not knocking you, I know solicitors are professional well respected people, but how do you defend criminals? Im not talking about traffic stuff here im talking about burglars, car theives etc etc.
I appreciate you dont do criminal work very often but I dont understand how solicitors can stand up for someone who has (in a lot of cases) obviously done wrong. I personally couldnt do it.
With regards to the funding side I understand your frustration and I would be unhappy about this too. As i said before im not knocking you and im not looking for an argument, I know this is off topic but i just thought I would add my 2p worth...
Oh dear god, it is attitudes like this that gets idiot in certain parts of the lord chancellors department suggesting you do not need jury trials.
Innocent or guilty, you are entitled to your day in court and to appoint representation. If your barrister knows you are guilty, he cannot lie, he however has to plead any mitigation, and to defend any misuse of law etc. If you lie to him and tell him you are innocent, it his his duty to represent you and try to defend you from the charges.
Irrespective of guilt, he does not have to prove you are innocent of the charges, simply place doubt that the prosecution have proved your guilt.
We do not have a perfect legal system, but it is better than the alternative of no representation, proof of innocence required etc. Enough innocent people have gone to the gallows despite presumptions of innocence to ever make me think we have a perfect system
Gazza77
18-12-08, 12:32 PM
Do you remember the road traffic prosecution client I defended - successfully - the CPS withdrew the charges because I found serious holes in the prosecution case that they didn't want publicised in court.
When the CPS drop cases you can claim your costs (well not all, the government isn't that generous). It used to be that you sent your file to the Mags Court clerk. That system changed a few months back and now you send the file to the 'National Taxing Team' for the area - in this case, Manchester. So I did this immediately to avoid delay in payment.
The nice people at the NTT - they are genuinely helpful but severely overworked as the government has devised a system which as ever is underfunded, under-resourced and which simply doesn't work - have at last sent me an acknowledgement saying that they hope to have dealt with the case within the next three months. Oh great, so with a good wind and a lot of luck I might get paid at the end of March for work I did in September.
This is a national disgrace. It was the CPS that cocked it all up, the prosecution should never have been brought with the evidential weaknesses that it had. And yet I have to fund all this work in progress. My bill was about £1,000, and I know from previous experience that I will be lucky to get £500 from them, which means I'll have to chase my client for the rest.
This is one of the reasons why I don't do much crime.
Those of you who are employed - how would you like it if your employer said to you that they will pay you for this month next June? That is what this fantastic government expects me to accept.
Remind them that government policy is that SMEs should be paid within 10 days of invoice in order to ease cashflow issues.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/16/20081210/ttc-sme-late-payments-deal-to-be-struck-6315470.html
punyXpress
18-12-08, 01:12 PM
This is one of the reasons why I don't do much crime.
Did you REALLY mean to say that!
Commiserate regarding H.M.Gov's stealth tax - at least you won't be paying a huge amount of interest. That's if finance were available
Crash course in solicitor rules...
1. I can form my own opinions on guilt or otherwise but I can't let those opinions cloud professional judgement and my duty to explore all the evidence and any defence available.
2. If a client says 'I did it but I want you to get me off' then I can't act. So I never ask a client 'did you do it' as that would put me in an awkward situation.
3. In a killing case, a client might well say 'I did it' but that doesn't mean that they are guilty of murder. It could be manslaughter, or dininished responsibilty, for example.
4. A plea of 'not guilty' doesn't mean 'I didn't do it' - it means 'I put the prosecution to proof that I did do it'. They aren't the same! So even if in my own mind I'm absolutely certain that the client did do it, then defending them following a plea of not guilty is entirely reconcileable.
My bill was about £1,000
You got him off with just two hours work? ;)
No seriously, it does suck that it takes that long for you to get (half) the money and I agree with G that there should be a system where you get paid by the chap then he has to reclaim the costs if not guilty. Seems odd. Do all solicitors work that way?
How about if he was found guilty and had to pay you and other costs but didn't have the money? Do you have to offer for him to give you repayments over x years? :confused:
Genuinely interested :)
You got him off with just two hours work? ;)
No seriously, it does suck that it takes that long for you to get (half) the money and I agree with G that there should be a system where you get paid by the chap then he has to reclaim the costs if not guilty. Seems odd. Do all solicitors work that way?
He's a former co-worker and I know him well, so I didn't ask for money on account. Perhaps I should have done:rolleyes:
How about if he was found guilty and had to pay you and other costs but didn't have the money? Do you have to offer for him to give you repayments over x years? :confused:
Genuinely interested :)
Yes, I'd have to. I have a number of clients who are doing this.
He's a former co-worker
Ah ok, so you'd usually get paid up-front for something like this?
Fair play for letting people pay you back over time - I assumed people would have to pay immediately or you'd 'send the boys round' :-D
Anyway, back on topic, why would you only get half the money that you've asked for (and are presumably entitled to) from the courts? Seems a bit unfair.
Cheers,
Matt
Anyway, back on topic, why would you only get half the money that you've asked for (and are presumably entitled to) from the courts? Seems a bit unfair.
Cheers,
Matt
Cos they apply legal aid rates, £64/hr. Try running an office on that:rolleyes:
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.