Law Soc loses patience with Solicitors from Hell website By Margaret Taylor 16 August 2011 14:44 17 December 2015 14:37 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Rick Kordowski 16 August 2011 at 16:32 I am glad to report lawyers making ‘amends’ with the poster of a complaint is on the increase. Rick Kordowski Reply Link Spenser Poultney 16 August 2011 at 18:10 So… “The irrecoverable cost of such litigation is prohibitive for many firms and lawyers.” I have a listing on Rick’s site about a firm who would be incapable of having it removed through litigation – NOT because the cost is “prohibitative” – but because what I say about them is TRUE and the firm KNOWS that I can prove every word. This firm on numerous occasions signed false declarations on bills which is tantamount to criminal fraud … the SRA refuses to act even at the request of my MP – it seems the Law Society is intent on protecting these criminals further by preventing me from telling the TRUTH which is undeniably in the public interest. This action against Mr. Kordowski is surely the action of a group of absolute cowards. I wonder how long this (true) comment will be allowed to survive on this web site? Reply Link Anonymous 16 August 2011 at 19:02 I read that the Legal Ombudsman, set up to consider complaints against solicitors, had operating costs of £8.3million in the first 6 months of its short existence and rejected 90% of complaints. Why not set aside, out of the grant to the Legal Ombudsman, a sum of say £1 million per annum to pay for the appointment of legal professionals to help administer Rick Kordowski’s Solicitors from Hell website? A small staff will be of enormous benefit to this much needed independent service which will then be seen by the legal profession as a serious forum for complaints. The Law Society is, under the competiton laws, obliged to allow any number of solicitors to set up in practice. So it should not object to the formation of a competing complaints procedure which clearly has the support of the public. With a minimum amount of funding Solicitors from Hell can adapt and progress to the benefit of its users. Reply Link Danny Beach 17 August 2011 at 00:16 Rick Kordowski can only improve the legal system, the Law Society have failed. Reply Link Anonymous 17 August 2011 at 07:21 Whilst I agree that there must be a more open and accountable way to ‘complain’ about sub-standard service, I take offence to the tone of the site. It seems to suggest that no lawyer is trustworthy.. This just feeds into the suspicion against the profession. Are we but better paid traffic wardens in the public’s eyes? (I hasten to add that I have nothing against traffic wardens!) Reply Link J 17 August 2011 at 09:08 Dear Mr Kordowski, Give it up. Regards, The Entire World Reply Link Anonymous 17 August 2011 at 09:49 I have seen articles published on this sight about nothing other than a solicitor being rude, seeing a solicitor in a club at 1am and even their dress sense! Please explain why these details are relevant to how a solicitor performs in practice? Furthermore, if the only objective of this website is to improve the quality within the legal profession, why does Mr K accept hundreds of pounds in return for removing posts about solicitors and firms? Yes, solicitors should be held accountable. but this site is not the correct forum for doing so. The law society needs to step up and provide a just platform for voices to be heard. Reply Link Anonymous 17 August 2011 at 10:07 “Rick Kordowski can only improve the legal system, the Law Society have failed.” fully agree – well done and keep up the good work! Reply Link Anonymous 17 August 2011 at 10:31 @7:21am: “I take offence to the tone of the site. It seems to suggest that no lawyer is trustworthy.. This just feeds into the suspicion against the profession. ” And the profession’s representative body attemtping to shutter the site just makes the whole profession look open, accountable and willing to take criticism and challenges doesn’t it? Maybe the Law Society will open an alternative site – “Solicitors From Heaven” – where the public can leave glowing testimonials… Reply Link Anna Malish 17 August 2011 at 10:39 I’ve had a look and there must be near on 1000 posts. I agree with Spenser Poultney. They cannot all be false. Feels like a typical corporate cover up to me! Reply Link Anonymous 17 August 2011 at 14:33 On a quick read of the site, I could not see anyone complaining about anything that gave me serious cause for concern. Whilst freedom of speech must prevail, I think this site is a waste of space and a breeding ground for law suits in a world that is already far too litigious. Reply Link Bruce Wilkins 17 August 2011 at 14:54 Why is the Law Society truly concerned? Rick already does their work for them by banning certain individuals who might be a threat to lawyers, and possibly Rick himself who likes to think of himself as a hero of the people and of course the sole champion of “free speech”. Reply Link Scep Tick 17 August 2011 at 16:33 “I have a listing on Rick’s site about a firm who would be incapable of having it removed through litigation – NOT because the cost is “prohibitative” – but because what I say about them is TRUE and the firm KNOWS that I can prove every word.” Except it appears that if they bung Mr Kordowski a few bob he will remove it. Reply Link Rick Kordowski 18 August 2011 at 11:16 The Law Society totally ’rejected’ my suggestion to work together to expose wrongdoing, where it exists, for the sake of the decent solicitors in the profession. If you are a decent lawyer, please sign my petition. Rick Kordowski Reply Link Bruce Wilkins 18 August 2011 at 12:30 Well of course they reject Kordowski’s offer, since some work hand in glove with Rick to prevent certain facts about lawyers emerging. The comment “Except it appears that if they bung Mr Kordowski a few bob he will remove it” is correct. But Rick goes even further, it appears he gets a bung for preventing listings in the first place, thereby denying individuals the “right to be heard” at all. Perhaps Rick would care to comment on that. But then Rick didn’t reply to my previous comment, just issued a standard legal evasion. Reply Link Nathan Motton 18 August 2011 at 14:02 Below is a comment from the CEO of Patient Opinion, Paul Hodgkin The attempt by the Law Society to stifle public criticism of allegedly shoddy lawyers (Solicitors lay down the law on web claims, August 16, 2011) is entirely inappropriate. The legal profession, like any other, needs to be held accountable for its practices and ignoring criticisms won’t make them go away. The volume of postings that have appeared on solicitorsfromhell.co.uk shows a clear demand for a public forum to vent frustrations and share service experiences. But rather than taking legal action to quash consumers’ conversations, perhaps the Law Society could better spend its time creating a more balanced online space where both positive and negative reviews can be shared. The healthcare sector provides a working model for using negative feedback to bring about positive change. Websites like Patient Opinion allow NHS patients to share their experiences with the relevant trusts, often leading to genuine service improvements. Hospitals across the country are becoming more accountable, helped further by the government’s recent proposal to make all patient feedback public. The public sector is, by nature, open to greater scrutiny than the private sector, but the latter shouldn’t ignore the positive lessons of engaging with customer complaints. Review websites always run the risk of hosting unfair or defamatory comments and they should not be given an automatic carte blanche, but the courts should ultimately seek to protect the role of public scrutiny across all professions. Paul Hodgkin, CEO, Patient Opinion Reply Link Anonymous 18 August 2011 at 19:55 In a letter of claim sent to Kordowski the firm states: “You’ve forced a number of firms and lawyers to resort to costly litigation in order to protect their reputations. The irrecoverable cost of such litigation is prohibitive for many firms and lawyers”. With regards to the above comments by the Law Society I would like to state that many individuals who have suffered financially because of the actions of a Solicitor have been “forced to resort to costly litigation (professional negligence claims for e.g.) in order to” have the Solicitor address the issues. The “cost of such litigation is prohibitive for many “individuals and therefore at the present time there is little or no redress for individuals who have very real grievances against Solicitors. The Pre- action Protocol for Professional Negligence – in my experience – is little more than a further opportunity for the negligent Solicitor to defend his actions. Mr Kordowski, appears to me, to be a man who has dared to highlight certain failings within the legal system. I am sure that the majority of visitors to his site are discerning enough not to ‘black list’ any Solicitor that they feel has ‘undeservedly’ been mentioned. It is my opinion (through years of experience) that the Legal Profession have lived in Ivory Towers for too long and need a ‘wake up call’. There needs to be a completely independent body/site where real grievances against Solicitors can be aired in a transparent way. I don’t personally feel that any ‘heavy handed’ action by the Law Society/Solicitors towards Mr Kordowki would achieve anything. There are many Mr/Mrs Kordowski’s out there who feel that there needs to be change within the outdated legal system and transparency within that system. Reply Link john olding 18 August 2011 at 22:01 I have read the comments to this thread and I can personally answer some of them. Firstly the legal ombudsman is simple a waste of time as was the predecessor who was literally sacked. It wasn’t called that but, a rose by any other name…… The law soc isn’t interested in setting up a site where people can air their views of how bad their friends and collogues the solicitors has been and who has robbed, caused them to lose their case or has been so negligent that they should be struck off. In fact from this side it looks as if they attempt to stifle any criticism of their friends and colleagues. No matter how bad they are. The solicitor’s complaints or whatever they are calling themselves this week isn’t interested and again only pays lip service and awards from both are simply not worth the effort of the complainant. They refuse to publish the way they decide how much negligence is worth. Nor can you complain about them. NO other public service has that; we all have to have a complaints system, except the ombudsman service, all of them. I personally rejected their insulting offer and intend to sue the errant and negligent solicitors for the return of the stolen money and the negligence of another firm both of whom do not do the legal professionals any service. I am also amazed at that the number of complaints. The thousands that they rejected for whatever crass reason is beyond belief. The cost per complaint is astounding and is mentioned by others else were. If I worked in a profession that had that many complaints I would be so embarrassed I would retrain as a plumber. I have also been instrumental in having at least two solicitors removed and that at least may protect someone else Rick provides just what we the public need and I will be happy to support him in any way, even financially if necessary. Even the Law Society Gazette won’t allow criticism and will take down the most serious complaints. Therefore stifling debate. Well done to the Web for bringing these awful people under the spotlight. Reply Link Stratega, London 19 August 2011 at 09:16 I made up the name of a law firm & posted a fictitious complaint on the Solicitors From Hell website. It’s been on for a year. There’s no merit to a website that fails to take even basic steps to establish the merit of the allegations. Reply Link Anonymous 19 August 2011 at 09:59 Still charging £299 for someone to remove their details from your website, Mr. Kordowski? Reply Link Anonymous 22 August 2011 at 23:06 Clearly the legal profession is in denial. With record number of complaints in recent years coupled with the fact the majority of the public have no trust or confidence in solicitors, is a compelling evidence against the profession which must be addressed immediately. The self regulation of the profession is failing and the Government may be forced to act as in the case with the toothless PCC. If the profession cleans up its own house there would be no need for such forums as SFH. Let free speech prevail. Reply Link Mike Adams 1 September 2011 at 16:44 If the legal profession has nothing to hide, why are so many comments about this website, that are obviously from legal practitioners written anonymously. If you have nothing to hide, leave your name, you cowards. Reply Link Anonymous 7 September 2011 at 08:53 Rick Kordowski’s website and others like it are the only redress ordinary peaple have agaist bent lawyers and judges as the law society, the OJC, and most other bodies of this nature appear to me to dismiss the publics legitemate comlaints on a regular basis. Can the thousands of complaints on Rick Kordowski’s website all be made up or false?on the balance of Probabilities doubt it . Reply Link Anonymous 17 October 2011 at 17:37 I have seen the webpage and I must say that the content is pretty disgusting. I work in a solicitors office which has had to make redundancies! As a result one of the secretary’s have posted an untrue listing about a lawyers because she was chosen for redundancy and he had the unfortunate job of telling her. Korwdoski deserves everything he gets! Reply Link Andrew Gill 21 November 2011 at 20:41 Ricks website is not on its own, check out dorsetpolice.net and check out the links. If there was no truth in these allegations of bad service and corrruption and stitch ups, why are the law society so bothered? As the old saying goes” there aint no smoke without fire. How about firing a few bent solicitors and do the citizens of our once great country a favour? Why doesnt the Law society put it’s own house in order by creating a complaints system that is not manned by people with a vested interest? Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.