Up for an Update? Padden v Bevan Ashford rides again!

Diligent readers of the blog will remember me commenting on Padden v. Bevan Ashford Solicitors. You can quickly refresh your memory on the case revolving around the free half hour here:

The end of the half hour free interview?

You’ll never guess what’s back in the courts – 

Padden v. Bevan Ashford

That is correct, the re-trial of Padden v Bevan Ashford has taken place, and back to the Court of Appeal again! 

My gripe with the first Court of Appeal decision was that I considered that it just didn’t have regard to the realities of giving  a half hour free advice.  The course the Appeal Court said should have been followed just doesn’t reflect the realities of day to day life in the High Street.  Reading between the lines of the HHJ Vosper’s decision, which was under appeal, I have a feeling he had at least some sympathy with that view.  He couldn’t go behind the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal, that the newly qualified solicitor (now known to be a Ms. Shinner) had been deficient in her first meeting with Mrs. Padden, but at paragraph 16 we get a different flavour of that first meeting.

The judge notes that the claimant was “evidently distressed and in a rush to be back home as soon as possible”. So quite how much attention Mrs. Padden was giving to what Ms. Shinner had to tell her is doubtful.  Despite this, Ms Shinner took pity and decided to help. A human lawyer!  One who wanted to help a person in distress – not quite conforming to popular stereotype, one might say, but more common than is generally realised.

“Ms Shinner advised the claimant that she was not doing the right thing, and advised her not to sign any documents. Ms Shinner must have based that advice on her appreciation that paying off Mrs Partridge might not stop a criminal prosecution.” So the judge, upon looking with care at what happened at that first meeting realises that Ms. Shinner’s advice was focussed more closely on the key issue than perhaps the Court of Appeal first time round had realised.  If only Mrs. Padden had chosen to follow that advice!  Both she and her solicitors would have been so much better off.

The judge also said, “I find that Ms Shinner told the claimant that she was taking a huge or a big risk, and the risk to which Ms Shinner was referring was the risk that Mr Padden would face criminal charges despite the claimant's giving away her interest in the assets.” I guess this is as close to saying that she wasn’t so very negligent as a judge could reasonably get, given the earlier decision, and I commend this analysis.

Now what happened after Ms. Shinner ended her involvement was rather more of a problem, unfortunately.  A colleague wrote to confirm that “I am satisfied that this signatory understands the nature of this Deed and its meaning and effect and to the best of my knowledge has freely consented to it without undue influence or duress or in reliance upon misrepresentation.” (emphasis added).  It’s the italicised section which really seems problematic.  What’s more, he doesn’t seem to have made a note of that meeting, so he couldn’t remember what happened at it.  This was a very serious certification to have made and the lack of a record of that advice was critical.  The whole episode shows that routine certifications should not be readily available.  A solicitor has to spend serious time finding out what the whole transaction is about.  A serious charge should be made as there are serious consequences for the solicitor who gets it wrong – over £67,000 worth of consequences, actually!  Oh and the other thing?  Free advice?  So many of us now will just say no. 

Blog Disclaimer: Nothing in www.austinkempfamilylaw.blogspot.com blog should be construed as legal advice. If you require legal advice upon any family law related matter then you should instruct a solicitor. Any links to other blogs or web sites are provided for convenience only and Austin Kemp Solicitors cannot accept any responsibility for the contents of such linked blogs/sites.

Now an award winning divorce lawyer!

I've often noted, with a cynical sneer, those businesses who insist on calling themselves award winning.  Lawyers, of course, are not immune to this form of vanity publishing.  They hold their own private awards dinners at which they honour each other in sometimes abstruse and downright arcane categories.  The Oscars for legal geeks, but without tributes to make up artists!  I suppose that if I were awarded something by my industry peers, I'd suddenly lose my cynicism and take pride in the fact that members of my own profession held me in conspicuously high regard - but that hasn't happened yet.  Shame.

However, this weekend I was honoured by the people who count far more than your professional peers - the sort of people who actually use the professional services of divorce lawyers.  So if you look at the following link, you should find me fairly easily - I'm the one called jonathancj, obviously.

 Wikivorce awards

What's Wikivorce all about?

Wikivorce came about when its founder went online to look for information to help him with his own divorce and found himself having to put together fragments of information from a variety of sources.  He decided that it would have been far more helpful if they had all been in one place and set himself the task of constructing that resource.  Quite quickly it moved from being just an encyclopedia of information to a community of people talking about what they had learned from their own relationship failures and passing on useful information.  The great benefit of this is that it has moved to being more of a tailored advice service, albeit informal in nature, rather than leaving it to individuals to try to apply generic information to their own specific circumstances.  It does not hold itself out as giving legal advice but most of the members of the site have themselves experienced separation and can help with the emotional side of the separation as well as the practical side.

And why is it important?

At the awards dinner, the site founder highlighted the effects of the withdrawal of legal aid from family law.  More and more people will be trying to negotiate quite a complex web of law and procedure without the aid of a specialist who is familiar with how it all fits together.  Where on earth can they turn?  How can they learn what to expect at a first hearing?  Is mediation really a good idea?  What is a hearing really like?  Who can they ask these questions when they simply cannot afford to pay a solicitor to advise?

For so many questions, the internet is the first port of call now.  You're thinking about a major purchase?  Google product reviews.  You have a technical question on any particular topic?  Google it.  Search for help with divorce and the first page of the results will bring up Wikivorce and you have access to a community of people happy to help and with first hand experience.  No, it can't substitute for the direct help of your own solicitor.  For the best level of help, you need someone like me.  But if that's just not an affordable option, Wikivorce will stand in the gap.  It remains the case that the helpful people online will often advise other users that they really need to get a solicitor - there's a limit to what they can do to help - but there's no doubt at all that people using the site will be much better prepared for the procedure than those who try to go it alone.

Blog Disclaimer: Nothing in www.austinkempfamilylaw.blogspot.com blog should be construed as legal advice. If you require legal advice upon any family law related matter then you should instruct a solicitor. Any links to other blogs or web sites are provided for convenience only and Austin Kemp Solicitors cannot accept any responsibility for the contents of such linked blogs/sites.