A solicitor not telling the truth. |
A solicitor not telling the truth. |
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 11:35
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,013 Joined: 17 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,735 |
Hi all,
In November 2015, the Broads authority (the Quango that look after the Broads) decided to adopt the name Broads National Park for marketing purposes only. Since then, the BA have been told they must only use it for marketing purposes only. The CEO has also stated in court that he would not be pushing for full national park status. The BA have been told by various bodies and DEFRA to not mislead the public. In the past few days, I received a reply to an email from their solicitor. In the signature it states "Broads Authority, looking after the Broads National Park". This is in clear contradiction to what they have been told and also a lie, the area is not a National Park. Now I would assume that a solicitor should tell the truth at all times, even if that is against his paymasters. Am I correct? If so, what can be done about the lying? |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 11:35
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 11:59
Post
#2
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
It seems to me that it's akin to company trading names; as long as they declare the actual legal entity (which they have) and it couldn't be confused with some other entity with the same name or a protected name, then where's the foul?
-------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 12:17
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Broads National Park appears in many places.......http://www.visitthebroads.co.uk/
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 12:21
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Is the OP for real? Defaming a solicitor is rarely a good idea.
This post has been edited by southpaw82: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 12:22 -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 12:51
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,214 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Is the OP for real? Defaming a solicitor is rarely a good idea. Surely solicitors are the best people to defame as they are more likely to have a realistic idea of what is involved in suing for defamation. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 15:37
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 11,094 Joined: 24 Aug 2007 From: Home alone Member No.: 13,324 |
QUOTE Surely solicitors are the best people to defame as they are more likely to have a realistic idea of what is involved in suing for defamation. Can't argue with that. Suppose the same goes for almost all of the legal profession too. Hence Mr SRS's pop at judges who disagree with his "Statements of Truth". |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 15:56
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,013 Joined: 17 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,735 |
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 16:12
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Is the OP for real? Defaming a solicitor is rarely a good idea. Yes I'm for real. Are you telling me that it's a good idea for a solicitor to not tell the truth? I’m not convinced he’s not telling the truth though. However, feel free to write to him and complain. I’m sure he’ll take a view. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 16:37
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Is the OP for real? Defaming a solicitor is rarely a good idea. Yes I'm for real. Are you telling me that it's a good idea for a solicitor to not tell the truth? Just so i understand... What is you're whining about? The phrase in the solicitor's signature? -------------------- |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 17:06
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
I'm a little confused, easily done so please correct me if I am wrong.
But the Broads Authority seem to think that the Broads are a National Park. http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/ The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 includes the Broads as akin to a National Park in some respects. The National Parks themselves call it a National Park https://nationalparks.uk/quick-guide-to-the...-national-parks |
|
|
Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 18:48
Post
#11
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
Not to mention that it seems this issue has already been subject to a Judicial Review, and wasn't found to have legs there.
-------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:03
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,963 Joined: 19 Dec 2006 From: Near Calais Member No.: 9,683 |
Is the OP for real? Defaming a solicitor is rarely a good idea. Yes I'm for real. Are you telling me that it's a good idea for a solicitor to not tell the truth? I’m not convinced he’s not telling the truth though. However, feel free to write to him and complain. I’m sure he’ll take a view. This post has been edited by roythebus: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:03 |
|
|
Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 18:59
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,013 Joined: 17 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,735 |
I'm a little confused, easily done so please correct me if I am wrong. But the Broads Authority seem to think that the Broads are a National Park. http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/ The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 includes the Broads as akin to a National Park in some respects. The National Parks themselves call it a National Park https://nationalparks.uk/quick-guide-to-the...-national-parks The Broads are a member of the National Park family but not a National Park. National Parks have 2 purposes, conservation and recreation, the Broads has 3. The aforementioned 2 and navigation. It is this third purpose that stops it from being able to apply the Sandford Principle and therefore not become a national park. Not to mention that it seems this issue has already been subject to a Judicial Review, and wasn't found to have legs there. Ah yes, THAT court case in which the BA were taken to court as they made it clear they would NOT be seeking to become a National Park. This was after they said they would adopt the name for marketing purposes only. Those marketing purposes have now spread to everything else and marketing isn't actually in the BA's remit. |
|
|
Thu, 14 Feb 2019 - 09:38
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Not arguing the finer points of law or remits but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck ??
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Feb 2019 - 16:16
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,215 Joined: 1 Jul 2012 From: Roaming the South Member No.: 55,802 |
Not arguing the finer points of law or remits but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck ?? Might be a parrot in disguise -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 14 Feb 2019 - 16:17
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 972 Joined: 9 Oct 2016 Member No.: 87,665 |
Isn't an email signature tag line effectively a 'marketing tool'? In which case, the use of the term is allowed as per the ruling?
So, I'm guessing you have some beef with the BA, hence you receiving emails from their solicitor and the tone of your post here - I have to say, if you were hoping to find a chink in their armour and the best you could come up with was the email signature, then things are looking bad. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:46 |