Raleys appeals SDT decisions on miners case

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Readers' comments (8)

  • These lawyers were found to have broken the rules. They were told to pay £10k for having done so. If they had not been fined they would have no been no recourse against them- possibly the only other action would be to suspend or have them struck off.
    Appealing the fine on the basis that the lawyers did not get to keep any of the money is plainly ridiculous. They should pay up and the SDT should win its case.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree with Anonymous at 4.13pm, but I wonder if any other of the firms fined by the SDT will follow Raley's lead. I suspect a few of them will be watching this quite closely!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Right, so they don't dispute their misconduct but they do dispute having to repay money? erm......good luck with that.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you read the report correctly, you will note that its not the FINE that they are appealling, nor the ruling of misconduct which gave rise to the fine, but the ruling that they have to re-pay the monies deducted from the damages received ( i.e the money that these miners agreed to pay to the NUM in the event they were sucessfully awarded compensation. ) As I understand it, this money was paid to the NUM. I am no way defending their conduct, but the facts should be set straight before criticism ensues.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I can see the courts bending over backwards to throw out their appeal. Stupid does as stupid is.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Hang on a minute in return for a referral they agreed to pay the NUM a fee and they persuaded the miners, whom they were supposed to represent to agree to the payment ... errr... my advice, let it go, you just drawing more attention to your obliterated reputation. By the way get rid of the "we accept Visa or Mastercard" sign on your webite very unbecoming.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • the referral fees deducted from the miners settlement monies and paid to the NUM would have been done so with written consent from the client - if the client wishes to have this money returned to them then this should come from the NUM and not the lawyers, there are a lot of heads of miners unions that profited from these deductions who are now living very nicely in their spanish villas!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Reading the comments: they ripped-off miners in association with NUM, by providing a no-win no-fee level of service and on commission. Now they're offering to pay back their partners in the rip-off, so that's alright then?
    No.
    What puzzles me is how the legal and lawmaking people of the world loose their sense of right and wrong in this. People are ripped-off by trades unions and referral agents every day, worst of all in complex employment cases like bullying and constructive dismissal where a union lawyer can be worse than useless. But some people don't seem to understand that there are victims in this scam.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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 (8)