Solicitors from heaven or hell?

Is this the right way to deal with complaints against solictors or just a case of solicitors from hell (unless they pay my fee!)

Rick Kordowski, who set up his website, five years ago, did so after claiming to have lost £750,000 after being negligently advised on a planning dispute. He claims to have received £500 compensation, despite, in his words losing "......... everything … house, job, money, the whole shooting match." through the Law Society's complaints handling process as a result of professional negligence.

He does not vet the claims that appear on his site saying that he did try checking once but "Everyone denied the allegations and so I don't do it any more."

As well as there is also a solicitorsfromheaven area on his site and the firms listed here are allegedly "good, decent, fighting, professional, passionate lawyers".  According to Kordowski ten of these firms have paid £299 for a lifetime listing which apparently includes a ban from being listed on the solicitorsfromhell site.

It does appear that firms can have their names removed from the solicitorsfromhell site, if they pay £299! Surely this defeats the whole object of having a web site which is meant to name and shame, if you can pay to have your name removed? By paying this fee do you suddenly become a "good, decent, fighting, professional, passionate lawyers". Although, to be fair, you would probably have to pay two fees to be able to claim that!

One defamation lawyer was listed on solicitorsfromhell, not by his own client but by the other side's.  Most people would consider this to be a recommendation and you would certainly not expect the opposition to be saying what a decent chap your solictor was!

There are procedures to follow if you have got a complaint regarding a solicitor and until sites such as this seem to be more credible perhaps we should stick with the traditional process.

There are changes ahead and the 6 October 2011 will see more competition under the LSA by allowing non-law businesses  to move further into legal services. So with more competition will we be able to make a more informed choice or will we still hope for the best and believe that because we are dealing with professional people they will have all the right answers.

Will we have compare the or yet more solictors from hell sites?



Related Items

The items below list this Article as being related in some way.


There are no related tags.

Amazon's recommended Books

RSS Feeds


Recent Posts

The latest posts from the blog archives.

Caparo three part test – revisited

In Robinson the Supreme Court laid to rest the proposition that there is a Caparo test which applies to all claims in the modern law of negligence.

Statutory interpretation - penal legislation is construed strictly

The Supreme Court reminded everyone per Lord Reed and Lord Hughes that 'Penal legislation is construed strictly, particularly where the penalty involves deprivation of liberty'.

Court of appeal gives judgment acknowledging unmarried woman's rights

The claim related to bereavement payments under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 as amended.

European union law – in the case of conflict between national law and european law

Walker (Appellant) v Innospec Limited and others (Respondents) [2017] UKSC 47 On appeal from [2015] EWCA Civ 1000

Vicarious liability is alive and well

This decision extends the doctrine of vicarious liability in respect of foster carers for the fist time and it represents another example of the potential for the expansion of this form of liability.

Supreme court busy - make sure you are geared up for your course

The Supreme Court has been especially busy lately.

Gina miller v secretary of state for exiting the eu 2016 as an example of the importance of judicial independence

Law students are now required to take note of how the independence and work of the judiciary has been reformed

Policing and crime bill and provisions for bail after arrest but before charge

The clear intention is that decisions on pre-charge bail should come under scrutiny.