Categories:North West

Halliwells’ ex-managing partner: ‘I gave my life to that practice’

  • Print
  • Comments (342)

Readers' comments (342)

  • It is true, sadly for those who put their money in. What really got to me was that with a board comprised largely of corporate partners (with Ian as a compensatory litigation bozo), not one of them had the sense to apply the standards they advised their clients were necessary when looking at financial promotion/investment decisions.
    Ian could therefore happily tell the Full Members one set of figures about cashflow and working capital whilst making completely different statements to the Fixed Share Members and potential Full Members, apparently completely oblivious to the legal implications of what he was doing.
    No written accounts of any sense were produced - you were encouraged (should you have had the audacity to question what you were being told as a mere junior partner gimp) to speak to the FD who tried to make Ian's two set of statements match-up.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Its an utter disgrace to say the least. Sadly a sign of the times and the profession (whatever that means).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • There probably -hopefully-will be litigation. The problem for the fixed share partners is that RBS is probably going to clear out the coffers of the defendants leaving nothing for them if they were successful in a misrep claim. Something needs to happen to make partners think twice about behaving this way again. Where is the SRA? Too busy to bother with commercial law firms?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ian Austin features in the latest edition of Private Eye (20 August 2010) in his capacity as chair of the "University" of Salford's audit committee. It seems that they have been instructing Halliwells to threaten to sue students for libel.

    Allegedly.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you look at the former Board they are a rich group of people and I doubt they would be wiped out by claims running to a couple of million.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Lord Gnome

    Not allegedly I'm afraid, given I was one of the students threatened!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So there are 100 FSM's who put money in and they claim they were misled. So 100 people have a misrep claim. If each of those people put in £500 there is a substantial fighting fund.
    Obtain some after the event insurance and instruct a litigator on a discounted CFA to bring proceedings against those who allegedly misrepresented the position.
    whilst it seems unlikely that creditor pressure will clean out the Board members how satisfying would it be to see those who behaved in this way bankrupt?
    Worth £500? I would think so.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So are you seriously suggesting that the managing partner of a top 40 law firm knowingly displayed one set of figures to one group of partners and an entirely different set of figures to another group of partners? If this is the case then there is a clear integrity issue and a report should be sent to the SRA. Excuse the pun but something does not add up here. There is a duty of good faith between partners and a solicitor is simply not permitted to behave in this way. Either this is a case of sour grapes and unjustified allegations or there is an extremely serious conduct issue to be investigated. Very disturbing

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @'S'

    How else would so many people have been taken for a ride so unwittingly? These are intelligent people. The simplest explanation is misrepresentation. Remember Occam's razor

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Far be it from me to interfere on private grief, but if people are to make these people bankrupt, please refer their trustee in bankruptcy to S342A of the insolvency act (recovery of excessive pension contributions)
    PS: what goes around comes around, but it might get there a little quicker with litigation

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page |

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (342)