Nice hourly rate |
Nice hourly rate |
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 15:17
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
I won´t mention the defendants name (but it rhymes with Dommy Tobinson) but a recent FOUR day trial ran up a bill of 1.5 MILLION pounds for the ´injured parties´ legal costs, surely there is a limit to the amount of money the ´winning´ side can claim off the ´losing´ side, I know that the infamous Robert Maxwell used the threat of bankrupting anyone that dared print anything about his dodgy financial dealings to get away with all manner of shenanigans. I thought that judges had a say in just how much can be claimed back to prevent wealthy people from abusing the court system to silence ´opponents´ these days.
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 15:17
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 21:46
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
you still haven't shown where I said you "can't comment on it"
|
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:01
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
´´I’m not sure where the word “investigation” comes from´´ and then you tell us ´´Any investigation would normally be a disbursement´´etc. So there is investigation and it is paid for mmmm. If it’s a disbursement for an investigation, it’s not been done by the lawyers (otherwise it’d be part of the legal fees). That’s why I gave an example of a private investigator. This post has been edited by southpaw82: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:01 -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:20
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
´´I’m not sure where the word “investigation” comes from´´ and then you tell us ´´Any investigation would normally be a disbursement´´etc. So there is investigation and it is paid for mmmm. If it’s a disbursement for an investigation, it’s not been done by the lawyers (otherwise it’d be part of the legal fees). That’s why I gave an example of a private investigator. So who gives the go ahead for any investigation? Who initially pays for the investigation? Who is billed for the investigation at the close of the trial? |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:25
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
So who gives the go ahead for any investigation? Who initially pays for the investigation? Who is billed for the investigation at the close of the trial? The client. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:29
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,196 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The claimant does.
The point is the court decided the injured party was entitled to the compensation, had the well known thug just paid it there would have been no legal fees. The claimant decided it was worth spending the money (at his risk) for the potential of winning his case, at which point he can then claim the costs and the judge decided if they were justified. So 1. Thug life could have just admitted he was in the wrong and paid a much smaller amount when first approached 2. Once the claim was started he would have still had a smaller exposure had he settled 3. But numbskull (as he surely is) decided to fight it all the way, at which point he inevitably risks much higher costs, HE decided to take that risk, wrong choice. Play stupid games win stupid prizes. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:31
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
|
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:43
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
So who gives the go ahead for any investigation? Who initially pays for the investigation? Who is billed for the investigation at the close of the trial? The client. And then the client passes on their costs of any investigations to the defendant (if they lose) when the trial ends, obviously when I used the term ´´investigation´´ I wasn´t just talking about the cost of having Philip Marlowe hiding in shadows with his collar turned up shadowing Dommy for days on end. If we was to list every single expense a trip to court will generate starting with the woman that takes the first phone call right up to the barrister stood in his wig in court we would be here all night. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:46
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
And then the client passes on their costs of any investigations to the defendant (if they lose) when the trial ends, obviously when I used the term ´´investigation´´ I wasn´t just talking about the cost of having Philip Marlowe hiding in shadows with his collar turned up shadowing Dommy for days on end. If we was to list every single expense a trip to court will generate starting with the woman that takes the first phone call right up to the barrister stood in his wig in court we would be here all night. I thought we were talking about an investigation, which is why I queried where that had come from. That’s the trouble with relying on press reports. Now, if you want to talk about how a libel action can cost £500,000 that’s a different matter. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:48
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
You basically said that if someone doesn´t actually see an event as it happens then they can´t comment on it, sort of fks up the point of history teaching then. no I didn't why are you making things up? you still haven't shown where I said you "can't comment on it" You was alluding that if someone doesn´t actually witness an event they are by default not to be believed when informing third parties about it. Let it lie Micky,,,let it lie. no I didn't you've made that up as well. Read again. what i said was.. QUOTE some events ie Normandy are witnessed by multitudes of people some aren't. quite often the ones that aren't quite often the ones that aren't get relayed badly and the story changes. somewhat different to your observation!
This post has been edited by mickR: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:56 |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 22:55
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Most people who are (allegedly) libelled do not have the money to sue, regardless of the merits of the case, and it is widely held that going to law is a gamble regardless of how strong (or otherwise) the case is. When suing an individual, winning is often little more than an exercise in vanity/PR if the defendant doesn't have the money to pay.
I know a practising lawyer who was blatantly libelled but understood that it would be far too costly/risky to sue. But an immigrant schoolboy has £1.5M to spend on lawyers? -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 23:05
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
You basically said that if someone doesn´t actually see an event as it happens then they can´t comment on it, sort of fks up the point of history teaching then. no I didn't why are you making things up? you still haven't shown where I said you "can't comment on it" You was alluding that if someone doesn´t actually witness an event they are by default not to be believed when informing third parties about it. Let it lie Micky,,,let it lie. no I didn't you've made that up as well. Read again. what i said was.. QUOTE quite often the ones that aren't get relayed badly and the story changes. somewhat different to your observationShush,,,shush Micky no one is listening to you, go to sleep. Mickey,,´´Look into my eyes, look into the eyes, the eyes, the eyes, not around the eyes, don't look around the eyes, look into my eyes... annnnnd you're under, now Mickey from now on you will not engage with KLX250S as he is a superior ´poster´ on Pepipoo,,,,,,,,,,, 3, 2, 1, you're back in the room´´. Most people who are (allegedly) libelled do not have the money to sue, regardless of the merits of the case, and it is widely held that going to law is a gamble regardless of how strong (or otherwise) the case is. When suing an individual, winning is often little more than an exercise in vanity/PR if the defendant doesn't have the money to pay. I know a practising lawyer who was blatantly libelled but understood that it would be far too costly/risky to sue. But an immigrant schoolboy has £1.5M to spend on lawyers? ´´But an immigrant schoolboy has £1.5M to spend on lawyers?´´, no he doesn´t, and nor does Dommy, Dommy has just walked away with his head held high, Dommy will not be giving him one red cent of his cash, Dommy has come out of this way on top lol Be smart like Dommy not dumb like the immigrants backers that are seeing diddly squat of any dosh they threw at this obvious ´political´ cluster fk of a ´trial´ . |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 23:05
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
I know a practising lawyer who was blatantly libelled but understood that it would be far too costly/risky to sue. But an immigrant schoolboy has £1.5M to spend on lawyers? CFA/DBA (if they’re available for libel)? -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2022 - 23:27
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
CFA/DBA (if they’re available for libel)? AIUI - CFAs for libel have not been available since 6th April 2019 - although that applies to the date the CFA was entered into, not the judgment date. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 02:43
Post
#34
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
The problem was presumably in part due to the fact that Yaxley-Lennon wasn't represented, and by all accounts didn't engage constructively pre-trial.
In my albeit limited experience legal fees always sky rocket if the other party does not engage properly. They are going to charge for each letter even if they have to send it five times rather than one. Which is fair enough, I don't work for free and neither will they. |
|
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 08:24
Post
#35
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
The problem was presumably in part due to the fact that Yaxley-Lennon wasn't represented, and by all accounts didn't engage constructively pre-trial. In my albeit limited experience legal fees always sky rocket if the other party does not engage properly. They are going to charge for each letter even if they have to send it five times rather than one. Which is fair enough, I don't work for free and neither will they. The beauty of all these costs that added up to 1.5 million is that all the people how shelled out to fund thic balls up will not be seeing one red cent of Dommys dosh especially the immigrant lol. 100,000 squid for a 15 year old because someone had said he had hit another pupil Just for a quick comparison ''Eye injury payouts UK Relatively minor eye injuries where there is a permanent impact on vision, such as sensitivity to bright lights or double vision, can see compensation between £8,550 and £19,690. Serious eye injuries where there is a degree of lost vision in one eye can lead to compensation from £22,230 up to £36,960''. This post has been edited by klx250s: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 08:25 |
|
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 21:21
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,784 Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Member No.: 18,956 |
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Another ****** thread. This post has been edited by captain swoop: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 21:22 |
|
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2022 - 21:25
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,040 Joined: 18 Apr 2019 Member No.: 103,483 |
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:11 |