Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Law Society Disciplinary Tribunal

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    987
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Law Society Disciplinary Tribunal

    In December 2006 the LS DT found Thomas Byrne guilty of misconduct in that he, among other things,
    (1) allowed a deficit of 1.7m on his client account
    (2) "allowed personal transactions of the solicitor himself to be drawn on the client bank account, where no cleared funds were held on his behalf."

    Details on p 53-4 of March 2007 Law Gazette

    Any time I ever discussed the mechanics of client accounts with solicitors they displayed massive levels of paranoia about their accuracy.

    Can anybody think of any reason why a person found guilty of the above should be allowed to continue practising?
    "Your vision is right, my vision is wrong, I'm sorry for smudging the air with my song"

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin NSide and Belfast 15
    Posts
    1,250
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    It's fraud and they should not only be disbarred from practising but prosecuted for criminal activity.
    Please sign the petition to establish a national day of celebration in honour of the vision of the United Irishmen!
    United Irishmen Day Petition
    Skinflicks blog
    Rep abuse illustrated

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    963
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Ethics and solicitors is fascinating.

    This is their Enron moment.

    Enron has actually made the lives of accountants (that didn't loose their jobs) better.

    We now have the moral and legal authority to tell dodgy clients to F* off.

    From talking to solicitors it appears that they feel that it is acceptable to bend rules to keep clients where as an accountant is obliged to ditch such clients.

    I think the Law Society has let solicitors down by not enforcing the rues more rigidly.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    987
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Re: Law Society Disciplinary Tribunal

    Last sentence should have read:

    Can anybody think of any reason why a person found guilty of the above should have been allowed to continue practising?

    I'm hoping for an explanation of the Law Society's thinking.
    "Your vision is right, my vision is wrong, I'm sorry for smudging the air with my song"

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member FutureTaoiseach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dept. of FutureTaoiseach
    Posts
    7,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    An independent regulator of the legal-profession is the only way to avoid this in the future. But with so many TDs being lawyers themselves, don't hold your breath.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,719
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The indepedent Financial Services Regulatory Authority didn't do a whole lot to halt whatever practises caused the banks to give out the money in an irresponsible manner so the idea that an independent regulator is the definintive method of sorting out the legal profession is a bit of a false argument.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    95
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnfás
    The indepedent Financial Services Regulatory Authority didn't do a whole lot to halt whatever practises caused the banks to give out the money in an irresponsible manner so the idea that an independent regulator is the definintive method of sorting out the legal profession is a bit of a false argument.
    It is still better than self - regulation.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    As a solicitor I was quite stunned by this. Solicitors are paranoid about their client accounts because of the grief you get for any deficit (no matter how small). So if the bank screws up and takes bank charges from the wrong account we yell at them for doing so. I was once carpeted as a trainee solicitor for suggesting that i could lodge a cheque and draw on it on the same day - a lesson i won't forget in a hurry.

    Bottom line is that the client's account is other people's money. You take other people's money and it's theft. I don't understand how you can take 1.6m (even if you pay it back) and still be allowed to practice.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member trekkypj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Kilkenny, Ireland
    Posts
    233
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Heh...

    I'm a law student... seriously considering switching to doing the Kings Inns and becoming a barrister... that way I'll be broke but honest lol

    This is absurd stuff altogether.
    "The fact that some posters here are better informed than a lot of our political reps, on economic matters, scares the bejesus out of them." limericklady

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,719
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trekkypj
    Heh...

    I'm a law student... seriously considering switching to doing the Kings Inns and becoming a barrister... that way I'll be broke but honest lol

    This is absurd stuff altogether.
    Barristers - honest? You must be mad

    Sure wasn't a Barrister convicted 6 months ago of robbing the damages awarded to his client - a disabled child?

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •