no win no fee employment solicitors

[ECCOnoob]

I prefer to call them, "If they are not guaranteed a win you get no representation," solicitors. If they will only respresent you if they know you're going to win your case, do you actually need them to represent you?

 

Well why dont you trott off and pay privately then if you are so **** sure about your case.

 

After all, you would be entitled to get all the costs paid back at the end of the case so what's the problem eh?. Go on.... off you go.

 

Oopsie, what was that? You took your sack of crap case to trial and lost. Oh dear, what a shame.. What was that? oops the Judge has put a costs order against you... and you now have to pay your own and the other party costs? What a kerfuffle.

 

GET REAL

 

Thanks to the Government cuts to legal aid. Nobody has got that sort of money to risk. Its offering a No Win-No Fee that is keeping access to justice available for the masses.

 

A professionally qualified and skilled Advisor will risk assess your claim. They will proceed to take the risk of acting for you. They will take the risk and costs burden of taking a case to trial. If you win, you pay a small percentage of your award (or in the case of some firms....nothing at all). If you lose, you walk away with no penalty, no costs order and no harm done. Its your lawyers who will take the hit and have to write off their costs.

 

Of course they are going to be perfectly entitled to tell you if you have crap claim. They are not going to take a hit without good reasons. But maybe if you try to get something into that knuckle head of yours, you might realise that if 2-3 Solicitors tell you have a crap claim...... well, you just might actually have a crap claim and no prospects.

 

Just becuase they tell you something you dont want to hear does not mean that their advice is not right. Its no good sitting their going la la la la la la. It will make no difference. Particularly if you tried that in front of a Judge.

 

Beleive me if the notorious DJs Mort / Babbington / Stevens or Mcwllaine said it to you you would certainly walk away with your tail between your legs.

[Madam X]

Ironmonger Curtis

 

Thanks. I will call them. Spoke to one lot, and they said they would not take it as they felt I did not have MORE than a fair chance of winning! Well, they seem to want to take your case only if you have 100% chance of winning it! As someone said on the forum, do you need them at all if you know 100% that you will win it?!

[ECCOnoob]

Thanks. I will call them. Spoke to one lot, and they said they would not take it as they felt I did not have MORE than a fair chance of winning! Well, they seem to want to take your case only if you have 100% chance of winning it! As someone said on the forum, do you need them at all if you know 100% that you will win it?!

 

"More than a fair chance" is not the same as "100%" is it? That's just your own rant.

 

Prospects of success are usually deemed around 51% at a bare minimum but usually 60% plus to be deemed worthy of acting on a no win no fee.

 

A firm is putting themselves in a position where they may have to write off their entire costs on a claim so why the hell shouldn't they be allowed to do a bit of risk assessing?

 

Sounds to me you are just another one of the many who just cannot accept that you potentially have a crap claim.

 

A solicitor is not there to tell you what you want to hear. They are there to advise you good OR bad.

[Madam X]

"More than a fair chance" is not the same as "100%" is it? That's just your own rant.

 

Prospects of success are usually deemed around 51% at a bare minimum but usually 60% plus to be deemed worthy of acting on a no win no fee.

 

A firm is putting themselves in a position where they may have to write off their entire costs on a claim so why the hell shouldn't they be allowed to do a bit of risk assessing?

 

Sounds to me you are just another one of the many who just cannot accept that you potentially have a crap claim.

 

A solicitor is not there to tell you what you want to hear. They are there to advise you good OR bad.

 

There is n guarantee as to what may happen in any Court. So the outxome can't be predicted with certainty. Also, I know first hand of situations where someone was told different things by different solicitors about prospects of their case. IIt all depends on who the solicitors are which is why I asked if anyone knew of some good solicitors.

[Rupert_Baehr]

So profit gets in the way of justice then?

 

If you're really so concerned about 'justice' why aren't you prepared to pay the solicitor by the hour?

 

You expect the solicitor to work for nothing - but you're not prepared to take the risk yourself?

[Madam X]

If you're really so concerned about 'justice' why aren't you prepared to pay the solicitor by the hour?

 

You expect the solicitor to work for nothing - but you're not prepared to take the risk yourself?

 

Wise guy, has it ever occured to you that the reason one might need solcitor is constructive dismissal? No job = no money. Besides, damages one might get might be lower than legal expenses. And, sometimes when you pay solicitors they prolong stuf so you end up payung more than you should. No win- no fee work on percentage of your compensation and try to minimize their costs and maximize the winning.

[ECCOnoob]

Wise guy, has it ever occured to you that the reason one might need solcitor is constructive dismissal? No job = no money. Besides, damages one might get might be lower than legal expenses. And, sometimes when you pay solicitors they prolong stuf so you end up payung more than you should. No win- no fee work on percentage of your compensation and try to minimize their costs and maximize the winning.

 

They prolong stuff do they? Really, really do they? Would you like to prove that. This is civil law. Its all followed under a stictly timed protocol with a Tribunal setting the directions. Non compliance of such can lead to severe penalty or a case being struck out.

 

Of course damages are going to be lower than legal expenses. Legal expenses costs thousands of pounds. I have said this earlier.

 

Has it ever occurred to you that in the opinion of a solicitor you have unfortunatley not been a victim of constructive dismissal? Its works both ways.

 

As others have said if one solicitor wont take it on then go and seek some second or third opinions. You are quite right to say that someone's opinion of a case and an assessment of a risk when choosing to potentially act for free is going to be variable.

 

BUT dont start having a go just because a solicitor chooses not to take on case. That does not make them a BAD solicitor. They are just a much more cautious one who in their opinion has genuine concerns about the strength of your case and/or evidence.

 

Also, if you have had half a dozen rejections I would start to face facts and accept that despite what you think. You simply dont have a credible claim. Upsetting as that may be, that's the Advice you have been given.

 

That's what solicitors are there to do. I have said it again and again. They are not there to tell you what you want to hear. Good or bad news - they must be prepared to advise you correctly. That's what makes a genuinely good solicitor.

[Madam X]

They prolong stuff do they? Really, really do they? Would you like to prove that. This is civil law. Its all followed under a stictly timed protocol with a Tribunal setting the directions. Non compliance of such can lead to severe penalty or a case being struck out.

 

Of course damages are going to be lower than legal expenses. Legal expenses costs thousands of pounds. I have said this earlier.

 

Has it ever occurred to you that in the opinion of a solicitor you have unfortunatley not been a victim of constructive dismissal? Its works both ways.

 

As others have said if one solicitor wont take it on then go and seek some second or third opinions. You are quite right to say that someone's opinion of a case and an assessment of a risk when choosing to potentially act for free is going to be variable.

 

BUT dont start having a go just because a solicitor chooses not to take on case. That does not make them a BAD solicitor. They are just a much more cautious one who in their opinion has genuine concerns about the strength of your case and/or evidence.

 

Also, if you have had half a dozen rejections I would start to face facts and accept that despite what you think. You simply dont have a credible claim. Upsetting as that may be, that's the Advice you have been given.

 

That's what solicitors are there to do. I have said it again and again. They are not there to tell you what you want to hear. Good or bad news - they must be prepared to advise you correctly. That's what makes a genuinely good solicitor.

 

Well, you sound like a solicitor judging by the way you have been defensing them. I know, fiest hand, how solicitors drag their feet when you are paying them as I have a cuvil dispute regarding the land we ownd. And it has been going on for 1.5 with no solutionin sight. But, I have no intention of going into that now. Just used it as an example of dragging their feet.

In the end, why have 'no win- no fee' option at all then?

As for me, I can say that I am fairly up to speed with my case (having taught employment law for 10 years). That's why I asked for GOOD employment solucitors.

[truman]

As for me, I can say that I am fairly up to speed with my case (having taught employment law for 10 years). That's why I asked for GOOD employment solucitors.

 

Maybe you should represent yourself?

[Madam X]

Maybe you should represent yourself?

 

I could if my personal circumstances were not as they are- something I am not preoared to share here. But, I am sure that you are aware that even lawyers take other lawyers to represent them- nothing unusual.