I need a lawyer, recommendations please.

[SixPackBack]

Very interesting. I will ask the person concerned whether I can share some of the details of the case with you and see how far the parallels go. He is still in the process of trying to get info from the courts about what has happened.

When he found out about the conviction (because a debt collector contacted him about an "overdue fine") he applied to the court for a re-hearing. They said he cannot get a re-hearing because of the amount of time that has passed since the conviction that he didn't know about. It really is an incredibly frustrating situation.

Standard modus operandi convicting in absentia is a win-win situation for the Police. They kinda need a helping hand as neither the police nor the courts could organise a hand job at flora's.

Think I'm bitter?..........consider why a middle aged 'clean skin' with a previous solid respect for the police and courts considers them in pretty much the same fashion as organised gangs. Do not trust them.

[Madness]

But the person concerned has recently discovered that he has been convicted of an offense, without ever having been told that he was charged!

I'd of thought that a Court could only impose a Conviction in the Defendant's absence when there is evidence of a Summons being served; i.e hand-delivered.

You sure it's not just an Infringement that your friend has learnt of?.

[klingon]

I'd of thought that a Court could only impose a Conviction in the Defendant's absence when there is evidence of a Summons being served; i.e hand-delivered.

You sure it's not just an Infringement that your friend has learnt of?.

Unfortunately it's more serious than just speeding or whatever. I probably shouldn't have even started discussing it on here, because he's a member and hasn't discussed it here himself. I don't want to be the blabbermouth.

On the other hand, in some ways experiences like this need to be blabbed about because then you find out how many other sensible, law-abiding, innocent people are being falsely accused and denied due process!

[Skyryder]

Very interesting. I will ask the person concerned whether I can share some of the details of the case with you and see how far the parallels go. He is still in the process of trying to get info from the courts about what has happened.

When he found out about the conviction (because a debt collector contacted him about an "overdue fine") he applied to the court for a re-hearing. They said he cannot get a re-hearing because of the amount of time that has passed since the conviction that he didn't know about. It really is an incredibly frustrating situation.

Many many years back I received a notice from the court that I had been fined for a speeding ticket. To cut a long story short due to a change in adresses I never recieved a 'summons' telling me of the date of the hearing so i could defend the charge.

Bottomline to this is that the fine was cancelled due to my not being informed of the court date so i could defend the charge.

Now I don't know if this is still valid today I know you have twenty eight days I think to notify if you want to defend the charge but if you do and do not receive notification of a date then you may have grounds to have the fine waved.

Skyryder

[SixPackBack]

Along with police/court corruption and incompetence, finding a lawyer who is going to see you as anything other than a cash cow and push whatever advice best suits their back pocket is next to impossible.

[Madness]

Along with police/court corruption and incompetence, finding a lawyer who is going to see you as anything other than a cash cow and push whatever advice best suits their back pocket is next to impossible.

Right... I'm off to Foodtown to buy some lube.

[Max Preload]

When he found out about the conviction (because a debt collector contacted him about an "overdue fine") he applied to the court for a re-hearing. They said he cannot get a re-hearing because of the amount of time that has passed since the conviction that he didn't know about. It really is an incredibly frustrating situation.

Did he receive the advice that the rehearing would not be granted in writing and the reason stated therein, because I see no such time limit provisions for the granting of rehearings. Rehearings can be granted by a District Court Judge or Justice or Registrar or Community Magistrate.

[MaxB]

Unfortunately it's more serious than just speeding or whatever. I probably shouldn't have even started discussing it on here, because he's a member and hasn't discussed it here himself. I don't want to be the blabbermouth.

On the other hand, in some ways experiences like this need to be blabbed about because then you find out how many other sensible, law-abiding, innocent people are being falsely accused and denied due process!

Your friend (and Madness) need the services of a lawyer you can trust. Easier said than done but they are out there.

[Madness]

So far we have had the name of one Lawyer PM'd for consideration. For this I am very thankful, although somewhat dissappointed at the lack of names being put forward.

Can anyone else assist with reccomending a good Traffic Lawyer in Orchland?.

No offense to The Stranger, I'd love to have some options is all.

[Winston001]

Your friend (and Madness) need the services of a lawyer you can trust. Easier said than done bah blah.....

What absolute bollocks. The one thing - indeed the fundamental thing a lawyer gives is trust. If that wasn't true no lawyer would ever have a client.


What you really mean by trust is someone who will accept everything you say, only tell you what you want to hear, pretend the law is wrong - and charge you $50 for 6 months work. :Tui:

[SixPackBack]

What absolute bollocks. The one thing - indeed the fundamental thing a lawyer gives is trust. If that wasn't true no lawyer would ever have a client.


What you really mean by trust is someone who will accept everything you say, only tell you what you want to hear, pretend the law is wrong - and charge you $50 for 6 months work. :Tui:

Lawyers are masters at manipulating clients [through ignorance] into either defending the indefensible or taking clients on another road of action that requires the maximum expenditure, guilt or innocence are a side show to cash creation!

Anyone who believes the vast majority of lawyers are motivated by anything other than money is naive in the extreme or very foolish indeed.

[vifferman]

Can anyone else assist with reccomending a good Traffic Lawyer in Orchland?.

What about that annoying bint on the radio, who's always advertising lawyering for people who are up for loss of licence due to drink-drive, speeding etc.? (Sorry - can't remember her name; I always switch off mentally when she starts rabbiting on, as her voice is so annoying... wait.... the annoying ads must've worked: (removed by request). She's on teh Interdweeb.)

[HenryDorsetCase]

Anyone who believes the vast majority of lawyers are motivated by anything other than money is naive in the extreme or very foolish indeed.

Twat.

Yes I am a lawyer. Yes I am motivated by money. I am running a BUSINESS here. I need to be in a position to pay Uncle Helen (sorry, Uncle Johnny) pay my staff, pay my landlord, pay all my creditors and then finally, maybe, just maybe, pay myself at the end of the month.

So to that extent you are absolutely fucking right I am motivated by money.

Note: I dont do court work, so have no axe to grind there.

Having said that, clients come to us looking for an outcome or a result: we assess what is achievable for that client, then ask the question: "How will you pay?". What we are selling, basically, is our knowledge, and that ability to achieve YOUR result.

If you want something outlandish, impossible, or even fiendishly improbable, we will try and achieve it for you (within reason and our ROPC) but to blame the lawyer for trying to do what the client wants is fucking naive at best, and "so stupid you should go get a licence to walk and chew gum at the same time" at worst.

Pull your head in.

[The Stranger:Me]

What absolute bollocks. The one thing - indeed the fundamental thing a lawyer gives is trust. If that wasn't true no lawyer would ever have a client.


What you really mean by trust is someone who will accept everything you say, only tell you what you want to hear, pretend the law is wrong - and charge you $50 for 6 months work. :Tui:

My experience with lawyers - and that is way too much thanks to commercial construction disputes mostly.

Instruct them!
Listen to their input, treat them as advisors, but if you go there hoping they have all the answers be prepared for a huge disapointment and a large bill.

Work out the angles yourself!
Again, listen to their advice, consider their advice, but make your own decisions. They will advise if you are barking up the wrong tree.

Do the leg work yourself - if you don't, it wont get done.
With my dangerous charge I went up and took photos, measured distances measured the widths of the bridges and gave the lawyer a full brief of the entire trip. With my house case, I researched similar cases, got onto an english professor to provide clarification, confirmed construction costs got a valuer to measure and value the house. I had worked out their case and the other guys case and all the angles and replies to these before even approaching the lawyer.

Why? Pure and simple - it's your arse and it's your money. They don't go home at nights stressing about you or your money, they got other shit on their minds.

As noted they tend to give trust. But alas this is an illusion. I can't recall anyone ever saying their lawyer (or accountant for that matter) is useless - until after they loose the case and/or their money then they get all bitter and twisted. But the signs were there from the start. Open your eyes.

One key determining factor for me - can they keep up with me and my thinking? If not - I don't want to know them.

[SixPackBack]

Twat.

Fantastic rebuttal, hope you show your customers a little more respect.

Yes I am a lawyer. Yes I am motivated by money. I am running a BUSINESS here. I need to be in a position to pay Uncle Helen (sorry, Uncle Johnny) pay my staff, pay my landlord, pay all my creditors and then finally, maybe, just maybe, pay myself at the end of the month.

My heart bleeds custard, especially with Lawyers receiving the minimum wage an all!

So to that extent you are absolutely fucking right I am motivated by money.

Your a Lawyer tell us something we don't know.

Note: I dont do court work, so have no axe to grind there.

Having said that, clients come to us looking for an outcome or a result: we assess what is achievable for that client, then ask the question: "How will you pay?". What we are selling, basically, is our knowledge, and that ability to achieve YOUR result.

As previously stated many lawyers look for a way to achieve the desired outcome while fleecing the maximum amount of cash.

If you want something outlandish, impossible, or even fiendishly improbable, we will try and achieve it for you (within reason and our ROPC) but to blame the lawyer for trying to do what the client wants is fucking naive at best, and "so stupid you should go get a licence to walk and chew gum at the same time" at worst.

Pull your head in.

As a professional Lawyer I would have thought a constructive argument would have been free from abuse and snide remarks.......speaks volumes about you-your services will not be needed!

Perhaps you should at some stage be invloved in purchasing the services of a lawyer specialising in trafic and see how satisfied you are with the result.