Swindles against the elderly & vulnerable on the rise as campaigners seek reforms

More From A Diary of Injustice in Scotland which reports this time on the rising amout of frauds against the elderly and vulnerable by professionals and others ...

Lack of protection for 'too trusting' elderly & incapacitated against those who take the most must be corrected in law

Aside from the seemingly endless ranks of crooked professionals who take advantage of the elderly, ill and incapacitated when there is a hint of controlling their money, those who can be or appear to be closest to a person, can pose the most risk to that individual they are protesting to care for - as many stories in the national press have revealed over the years.

Endless examples exist of the likes of lawyers, carers, doctors, accountants, etc, who seemingly take it upon themselves in what would appear a noble gesture, to look after someone not only doing so as the professional they are, but also as a friend.

My own mum, sadly, was a victim of such a scam, where a relative, and the executor of my late father's estate, who both hated me intensely, decided to claim everything for themselves, and followed the well trodden routes those people who engage in these scams do.

I wrote about what happened to my own mum here : A picture is worth a thousand words - Images of fraud reveal corruption & deceit by lawyers & accountants in the Scottish Borders

The documents which accompany the above article are a fairly straightforward presentation of how people go about taking their victims money, little by little, then the lot, from the poor informed person they protest to be 'looking after' or seeing to their interests ... all the while only doing it for the money of course, spreading no end of poison, hurt and lies against people who may pose a threat to their little scheme to take the money, and sparing no effort to split families, relatives, friends, even communities, to cover their tracks at every turn until of course, they are found out and exposed.

Firstly, it begins as a few suggestions, perhaps attempts to disgrace close members of the victims family so they are kept out of the picture, making sure no one gets to find out what is going on, then the work of the con artist begins, of taking control over a victims money, their entire estate, taking the 'power of attorney' (which effectively is giving your life away when you agree to it), and the poor victim being coerced into handing over enormous 'gifts' such as property, huge sums of cash, bank transfers, and 'loans' (never to be repaid of course), and investments which obviously no one would hand over unless they had been bullied or coerced into doing so.

Heres a fairly typical example reported in the media of someone preying on an informed victim : Iain Catto, a former solicitor and senior Scottish Conservative, still with many connections within the Tory party, who robbed his disabled client, whom Catto called a 'friend'.

Iain Catto, offered to look after the finances of Francis Fleming, 59, after he became partially paralysed following a savage assault.

Catto, who was sacked from his job as a solicitor for gross misconduct, was found by the court which sentenced him to jail, to be regularly taking money from Mr Fleming.

Jail term for former councillor

A former Conservative councillor who stole £70,000 from a disabled client who depended upon him as a close friend has been jailed for 27 months.

Disgraced Iain Catto, 41, offered to look after the finances of Francis Fleming, 59, after he became partially paralysed following a savage assault.

Catto, who was sacked from his job as a solicitor for gross misconduct, was regularly taking money from Mr Fleming.

Catto pleaded guilty at Edinburgh Sheriff Court to the theft.

You callously took funds from Mr Fleming to support yourself when you knew that he depended on that money and you
Sheriff Kathrine Mackie

He was stealing sums of £11,000 and £9,000 at a time between December 2002 and 2004 from the criminal injuries pay-out his client had received.

He even sold some of his victim's shares to get more cash.

Sheriff Kathrine Mackie told him: "You callously took funds from Mr Fleming to support yourself when you knew that he depended on that money and you. It was a gross breach of trust."

Mr Fleming's son Frank MacLennan, 42, hit out at the sentence outside the court.

He said: "That is not long enough for what he did to my father. He should have been given at least three or four years."

Bank statements

Edinburgh Sheriff Court had heard that Catto, a member of Lothian Regional Council from 1990 to 1994, frequently asked Mr Fleming to sign blank cheques pretending to look after his finances and had bank statements sent to his home address.

Mr Fleming, who was left partially paralysed and impaired following an attempt on his life in 1968, trusted the solicitor so completely he even gave him a key to his Craigentinny Road home in Edinburgh.

Meanwhile, Catto was buying himself airline and train tickets for the UK and abroad, hotel rooms, restaurant meals, computer software, £300 worth of goods from Oddbins and expensive haircuts.

'Bled father dry'

Catto carried on with the scam until he was found out by Mr MacLennan, who moved from Inverness to Edinburgh to look after his father in July, 2004.

Mr MacLennan said outside of court: "He bled my father dry. We had been planning to move to Spain but now that idea is gone. He lied to my dad and me from the start.

"Although he has repaid the money he cashed in shares that were earning my dad an income. I discovered the stealing when I saw my dad writing blank cheques and looked into it.

"I feel very angry and my dad is devastated and hurt. He considered him to be a very close friend and depended upon him."

I wrote about the Iain Catto story here : Don't trust your lawyer or accountant when they say they have your best interests at heart ...

Mr Catto of course, always protested he had the best interests of his poor client & 'friend', Francis Fleming, at heart - this being a common protestation of those who loot and plunder the vulnerable.

Another not too distant example of this kind of 'feasting off the elderly, infirmed & vulnerable, came with a Daily Record exposure of a Priest, who took control over a frail widow's affairs.

Father Azad apparently flew back to his native Pakistan, reported the Daily Record in the following article, when the Police were called in to investigate the affair ...

FLYAWAY PRIEST AND WIDOW’S £1 MILLION

Jan 24 2007 Exclusive by Karen Bale

Catherine, 85, lets him control her fortune

A FRAIL widow with dementia signed over control of her £1million fortune to her priest.

Catherine MacNeil, 85, gave a £120,000 house to Father Mustaq Azad, and he took control of the affairs of her disabled son.

Fr Azad flew to his native Pakistan after police were called in to investigate the affair. His superiors in the Catholic Church had told him repeatedly to give up his involvement in Catherine’s finances.

Catherine’s angry niece, Morag O’Halloran, 45, of Irvine, Ayrshire, said last night: “This has been an absolute disgrace. A priest is in a position of trust.

“Anybody knows an 85-year-old with dementia is not in the frame of mind to make huge decisions, like handing over her home and rights to a man she hardly knows.

“My aunt signed her life over to him. And until the authorities got involved, he had control of her finances, around £1million.”

Catherine, of Campbeltown, Argyll, was a regular worshipper at Fr Azad’s church, St Kieran’s, in the town.

She spent much of her spare time there, helping at bake sales and organising events.

Catherine met Fr Azad three years ago, when he took over the parish after arriving in Scotland as a missionary from Pakistan.

The pair became friends and he began to visit her frequently at home.

Catherine had a massive stroke in February 2004 and dementia set in soon after.

Morag said: “It was tragic. She has never been the same.

“She had always been fiercely independent. She had been a district nurse and she dedicated her life to looking after her son.”

Social services began helping to look after Catherine and her son Ian, 49, who has a rare genetic disorder which causes learning difficulties.

Then, in March 2005, Catherine gave Fr Azad power of attorney to handle her financial affairs. Seven months later, the priest took on the same responsibility for Ian.

Fr Azad did not tell Morag about his role in her aunt and cousin’s lives.

Catherine gifted the priest her second home, a £120,000 cottage on the Hebridean island of Barra. And six weeks later, according to Morag, he put the house up for sale.

Morag said: “It has remained on the market for more than a year because the people of Barra are aware of the situation. Nobody wants to hand over cash for the house.”

Catherine is now back in hospital after suffering a second stroke. And Morag claimed that Ian, who needs constant care, was left to “fend for himself” as his mum’s condition worsened.

She said: “We discovered he’d been left without his medication for 10 days and had been cooking himself fish fingers every night in the deep fat fryer.

“He was terribly frightened and in an awful state. He phoned and told me his house was going to be taken away and that he would be homeless.

“Then we found a letter from the council saying Ian was on a list for housing.

“Catherine has enough savings for her and Ian to live comfortably for the rest of their lives. There’s no mortgage on the house in Campbeltown and no reason for Ian to be given council housing.

“We’ve now taken Ian to live with us. We will fight tooth and nail to protect him and his interests.”

In October 2006, social workers told Catherine’s family she needed to be moved to a nursing home.

Morag wanted to place her in a home in Saltcoats, a few miles from Irvine, so she and Ian could visit her.

But as she tried to make the arrangements, she found out that Fr Azad had power of attorney.

Morag said: “We were absolutely shocked. Fr Azad never mentioned it. He had kept us in the dark. We couldn’t believe my aunt would have given him control of her life. She hardly really knew him.

“We spoke to Ian, who said he had found cheque books that belonged to his mum with Fr Azad’s name on.

“He had been suspicious and hidden them, although he was too frightened to say anything.”

Fr Azad refused Morag’s request to move Catherine to Saltcoats.

He also failed to hand over the old lady’s financial records and legal documents to social services. In a bid to force the priest to co-operate, social workers called in police.

A police investigation began. And at a meeting on December 29, Fr Azad offered to resign his power of attorney over Catherine’s affairs.

The Bishop of Argyll, Ian Murray, also intervened, demanding that Fr Azad hand over responsibility to Catherine’s family.

Fr Azad was traced in Pakistan, where he is on leave, on Monday of this week. He agreed to hand over his power of attorney for Catherine, and Mora g immediately began moves to have the old lady placed in Saltcoats.

Morag said: “It is unbelievable that social services were forced to call the police to make a priest help an old woman.

“It is beyond belief. Who knows what he was thinking? She is a very wealthy woman and he knows it.”

She added: “Catherine will be given 24-hour care and is in safe hands. In the hospital she has fallen so many times and doesn’t have the care she needs. They don’t have the staff and they need the bed back.

“We are delighted Catherine will now be in a home where she can see Ian every day. She was pining for him.”

Catherine’s family now plan to force the priest to hand over his power of attorney for Ian.

Morag said: “Ian has a lawyer to fight his case for him.”

A spokesman for the Catholic Church said last night: “We do not condone Fr Azad’s actions. He was told repeatedly that he should give up and hand over the power of attorney.”

A church source added: “Fr Azad was advised from the start not to accept the power of attorney or ownership of the house.

“He was told repeatedly to hand the post back. The Bishop last told him at the beginning of January and expected it to be done immediately.

“It’s a very remote parish and nobody was aware of everything that was going on.”

Robert Hynd, a lawyer acting for Catherine’s relatives, said: “We have finally received documents from Fr Azad and he has agreed to hand over the power of attorney to Catherine’s family and allow her to be moved to a nursing home.”

James McEwan, of the law firm representing Fr Azad, said: “Mrs MacNeil gave the house in Barra to him as a gift. I know she took financial advice.

“She asked Fr Azad to take on power of attorney in case he required assistance to speak on her behalf. He has now handed back power of attorney.”

Police said: “Inquiries were carried out but this is not a criminal matter.” Argyll and Bute Council refused to comment.

‘This has been an absolute disgrace. A priest is in a position of trust. My aunt signed her life over

No word yet on further developments, but the same pattern of control, and huge unexplainable gifts being given by the poor victim to those who seek to control all their money for themselves, exists in all of these cases.

Its not just lawyers, accountants and priests who can do this ... as an ex policeman in England proves here : Detective ‘helped himself to widow’s assets’ and who was recently reported by BBC News as being jailed on a related matter here : Detective jailed over card fraud

The same common threads again ... best intentions of course, but all the while, its all about the money and nothing else ..... money, and believe me they are not too fussy about how they take their money off their victim .. and when the money dries up, the poor penniless victim and their family are cast aside, perhaps to line up a new target ...

So, it seems there is little protection for the elderly, infirmed & vulnerable when it comes to long lost relatives or professionals turning up on the scene when there is a hint of getting some money ... surely its time to correct that, and ensure there is a power to detect and intervene in such a situation long before the con artist gets most of the poor victims money, and ultimately gets away with it too while the victim is left penniless, and the family split through the poison of those seeking to take all the money for themselves.

Here, the final example. reported last weekend in the Sunday Mail, of a nurse who certainly got her monies worth from the person she was looking after ... in mysterious ways it seems ... This must surely stop, and new ways must be found to prevent what is turning into a common type of sting these days ...

Nurse Plunders £300K From Dying Patient

Mar 16 2008 By Marion Scott

Exposed: Nurse Who Plundered £300,000 From Doc On Death Bed

A NURSE systematically plundered £300,000 from the life savings of the dying doctor she was supposed to be caring for.

Isobel White was hired from a private agency to look after reclusive GP William Derek Wilson, who was suffering from a chronic brainwasting disease.

Bachelor Dr Wilson, 76, amassed a fortune with his frugal lifestyle.

He wore clothes he'd had for decades, still had his parents' furniture and spent just £14-a-week on shopping, surviving on a diet of ready-made shepherd's pie.

White, who earned £36,000 a year as a live-in nurse, was employed by Positive Nursing Agency to provide 24-hour care for the confused OAP.

She quickly transformed his lifestyle ...and her own.

She booked a £8000 Mediterranean cruise for them both.

She also bought a house with a £100,000 loan from Dr Wilson then persuaded him to change his will and sign over his £250,000 flat to her.

Court papers even accuse her of forging the doctor's signature on a £28,000 cheque payable to her.

White was quizzed by the police days after the doctor died of progressive supranuclear palsy - the same condition that killed actor Dudley Moore.

A theft prosecution was dropped but White was sued after lawyers for Dr Wilson's estate said she used "undue influence" to "induce" him to give her cheques "at a time when he had neither the mental nor physical capacity to do so".

She could not repay the missing money - now almost £400,000 with interest and legal fees - and was bankrupted.

Two flats she owned - including the doctor's old home in Pollokshields, Glasgow - were repossessed.

Now she faces being evicted from the £350,000 home she shares with her 79-year-old mum in nearby Newlands.

Last night White, 53, claimed she had planned to pay Dr Wilson back and said she "tried to breathe new life into him".

She added: "Dr Wilson was a reclusive, withdrawn man who didn't take care of himself.

"His clothes were decades old and his furniture had been owned by his parents. It was clear he had no real enjoyment in his life.

"I started taking him on outings, encouraged him to buy a new wardrobe and start enjoying life. We became friends.

"I encouraged him to take holidays and accompanied him so he was looked after properly.

"He paid for a 19-day cruise on the Oriana but took ill and had to be flown home."

White claims she began quizzing the doctor about his will because she was concerned about what to do if he died.

She said: "His first will left almost everything to a cousin he'd told me he didn't like. When I pointed that out, he called the lawyers and changed it.

"He asked me what I wanted, so I told him I would really like his flat, so he agreed."

The second will - written in September 2000 - left the flat to White and £400,000 to his friend, accountant Douglas Anderson.

After the doctor was taken to hospital it emerged White had received large sums including a £100,000 "loan", £60,000 stock transfer and cheques.

She said: "I fully intended paying him back from the sale of two flats - one belonging to me, the other to my mother who was moving in with me.

"But before I could get those properties on the market, Dr Wilson went into hospital."

He died in Mearnskirk Hospital on May 31, 2002.

A fraud investigation was launched into transactions totalling almost £300,000 but White was told in September 2006 there would be no proceedings against her. She said: "I will go to my grave swearing I didn't take money from Dr Wilson.

"Those cheques were to pay household expenses such as a special hoist to lift him and an orthopaedic bed."

White continues to work as a nurse because she is not under the jurisdiction of the Nursing & Midwidery Council.

An NMC spokesman said: "Our code of conduct states nurses must refuse gifts, favour or hospitality that might be interpreted as an attempt to gain preferential treatment."

Bank papers show 23 cheques totalling more than £4000 paid to White

I took him on outings, encouraged him to enjoy life..we became friends'

SCCRC accused of closing ranks with lawyers in 'refusal' to investigate appeals over 'defective representation'

Something to hide as always for Scotland's legal establishment sees the curious revelations of "Defective Representation" being by far the most common ground for appeals against convictions, conversely though, seeing the lowest number of referrals for appeal ...

Some who have been before the SCCRC and those who study its operation now allege the Commission is unwilling to go against members of the legal profession who stand accused by their clients of "Defective Representation", and that the SCCRC itself is not sufficiently independent enough from the legal establishment to make proper rulings on such cases.

Well, given many within the SCCRC come from legal backgrounds themselves, and in the light of widespread public perception the Scots legal establishment almost always closes ranks to protect each other, there do appear to be sufficient grounds based on the released statistics and campaigns by those who have or are appealing to the SCCRC on such matters for a full independent inquiry into how the SCCRC has handled all cases, particularly those relating to "Defective Representation".

Rumour also has it the name a particular lawyer, identified in some cases currently before the SCCRC does crop up in several cases of "Defective Representation" .. the Commission being fully aware of this, but not sufficiently transparent or impartial enough to hold a proper investigation into matters ....

Quite clearly their most common ground is Defective Representation but their lowest number for referrals

Table 5 Main ground of review lodged by applicants (applications received from 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2007)

Main Ground of Review :
Number of Cases, % OF Total

Defective Representation 161 (18.1%)

Excessive Sentence 130 (14.6%)

Credibility or Reliability of Evidence 92 (10.4%)

New Evidence 83 (9.4%)

Unfair Trial 78 (8.9%)

Misdirection by Trial Judge 37 (4.2%)

Police Misconduct/Wrong Procedure 27 (3.0%)

Perjury 24 (2.7%)

Lack of Corroboration 19 (2.1%)

Human Rights Issue 18 (2.0%)

Other 180 (20.3%)

Now, from their Annual Report of 2006-2007 it is apparent they had only referred 2 cases from its inception in 1999.This means in 8 years they had only referred 2 cases for the ground they receive most complaints about.

A shocking statistic and proof something is wrong within the ranks of SCCRC indeed it points to a reluctance to investigate fully this issue.
From Annual Report

Table 6 Main grounds of referral in conviction cases (for cases referred from 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2007) see here : http://www.sccrc.org.uk/viewfile.aspx?id=295

Ground of Referral
Number of Cases. % of Total :

New evidence 16 (41%)

Change in the law 3 (8%)

Defective representation 2 (2.5%)

Reasonable doubt as to the applicant’s guilt 2 (5%)

Multiple referral grounds 7 (18%)

The remaining 23% of referral grounds comprised: change of witness testimony, disclosure of evidence, insufficiency of evidence, jury impropriety, misdirection by a trial judge, procedural irregularity and unfair trial.

Access to Justice discrimination : Benefit Claimant wins £450,000 in damages action while working

While the Scots legal profession boasts there is access to justice for all, most know that boast to be wholly untrue, particularly when a case is not in the legal profession's interest to pursue ....

So, picture this .. a benefit claimant who is out working for cash in hand payments, gets hurt while 'working on the fly' then is able to hire legal agents and win a huge damages payment ... all while he was claiming benefits ....

Compare that to a client trying to hire a solicitor to take a negligence claim against another lawyer ... impossible ...

The Herald reports :

£450,000 for benefit claimant hurt while working

BRIAN DONNELLY March 08 2008

A benefit claimant has been awarded £450,000 damages after being injured in a fall while working for cash-in-hand payments.

Thomas Ruddy, 56, suffered serious head injuries when he plunged from a scaffold at a warehouse in Glasgow while cutting sprinkler pipes.

Mr Ruddy raised an action suing businessman Monte Marco and M & H Enterprises, which owned the premises and of which Mr Marco was a director.

A judge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh yesterday granted decree for payment of £450,000 to Mr Ruddy against Mr Marco.

Lord Carloway ruled that Mr Ruddy was an employee working under a contract of service at the time of the accident.

Mr Ruddy, of Haughburn Road, Pollok, Glasgow, is now unfit to work because of the injuries he suffered.

Lord Carloway said: "The impression created was that Mr Ruddy was a person whose primary and regular income derived from state benefits but who would work casually from time to time as a painter, decorator or odd-job man to supplement his benefit.

"He would have been concerned to conceal his casual engagements from the Benefits Agency and would therefore not have worked for anything other than cash," said the judge.

"He would not have wanted his name to appear on any documentation; be it work records, job schedules, invoices or receipts," said Lord Carloway.

The judge said it was not possible to classify him as self-employed in business for his own account.

He added: "Whether he was employed in a legal sense on a particular job would depend on the facts and circumstances of that job."

The warehouse at Shawbridge Street, Glasgow, was damaged by fire after vandals struck in 2002.

Mr Ruddy spoke to Mr Marco, of Burnside Road, Glasgow, in the autumn of that year and was asked to carry out work at the premises, including cleaning and painting. Mr Marco paid him in cash every Friday afternoon and would call into the warehouse to check on his work.

It was also arranged that Mr Ruddy should remove sprinkler pipes. A saw to cut metal was obtained and scaffolding was required. However, on October 5, 2002, Mr Ruddy fell from the scaffolding.

Lord Carloway said the victim's injuries were such that he could remember nothing of his own work record, the accident or his relationship with Mr Marco.

Mr Ruddy, a fitter to trade, had been made redundant by a bakery firm. His wife, Catherine, told the court her husband did odd jobs for Mr Marco, paid for in cash, while he continued to claim state benefits.

Mr Marco said the work at the warehouse was for Mr Ruddy to paint the walls and wash the floor for £40 a day. He said Mr Ruddy asked if he could cut down the sprinkler pipes and sell them as scrap.

But Lord Carloway said his evidence was not credible on this point. The judge said the only conclusion from the whole evidence was that Mr Ruddy was engaged to carry out a clean-up and decorate, including cutting down the pipes and beams, prior to lease or sale of the premises.

The judge said, looking at all the circumstances in the case, he had decided that Mr Ruddy was employed by Mr Marco.

He said the case against the businessman to take reasonable care to provide a safe place of work and equipment was made out given the state of the scaffold tower from which Mr Ruddy fell.

"He was working at a height of 3.7metres on a half boarded out scaffold with no front or rear guard rails to stop him falling off. There was a high likelihood of a fall from the scaffolding use," said the judge.

A spokesman for the Department of Work and Pensions said: "We cannot comment on individual cases. DWP takes benefit fraud very seriously and, where proven, will take tough action against benefit thieves."

Business urged to tell the truth online but Scots lawyers dare not do the same

Almost like teaching Granny to suck eggs, as some would say, but good advice as always for businesses is to tell the truth online otherwise you can expect trouble later on ...

However, Scots legal firms and lawyers dare not take their own advice because if the complaints histories and scandals of solicitors were to be on public display, no customers would ever dare come through the doors !

Just think how many clients would want to hire you if they found out you had been sued for negligence 14 times !

The Scotsman reports :

Let customers know the truth online or you can expect trouble

By JENNIFER MCMULLAN

THE internet has become so familiar that it is hard to think of life without it. A website is a very versatile tool, no matter what your trade or profession. Having said that, it's important your site stays in line with the law.

Anyone who uses the internet regularly will know there are plenty of bogus web adverts and websites – and users are often being misled by even genuine traders. As a result, there has been much controversy in recent years surrounding the way in which airlines in particular advertise prices. Consumers are tempted by "unbeatable" or "unmissable" deals. To provide an example, an airline ticket might be advertised for 1p, but after taxes, fuel fees and other charges, the actual price is likely to be around £50.

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has taken action against numerous airlines for advertising in such a way. Ryanair, having missed an OFT deadline to remove misleading prices from its site, shut down the site for three days in an attempt to meet OFT standards. This will have proved very expensive for them.

To address these offenders, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) carries out spot-checks on random commercial websites and handles specific complaints. If "irregularities" are uncovered, the ASA can ask the OFT to carry out a thorough investigation and take whatever action is necessary. The law is being changed to make it favour the consumer even more.

This isn't just for airlines! To stay in line with the law, it is important for your business to operate an accurate, unambiguous site. Consumer protection is on the rise and businesses must adequately protect themselves from legal action. It is also good business. It is simpler to quote actual prices inclusive of all extras than to mislead the consumer and face the legal consequences.

This is the time to eradicate any misleading statements or unfair contract terms lurking on your site. One thing which is very important when dealing with customers is sellers ensuring the ordering process requires the customers to acknowledge reading and agreeing to the seller's terms and conditions. Best practice is to ensure terms and conditions are included as a distinct 'gateway' in the sales process which can't be avoided and which requires the customer to do something (such as clicking an "agree" button) before proceeding to place an order.

You should make sure you:

*advertise in clear and unambiguous terms;

*display key information;

*ensure you do not have additional services available which are set to "yes" by default – this is a trap for the consumer and can be regarded as unfair;

*have adequate disclaimers in place where appropriate;

*have terms and conditions clearly displayed and easily accessible;

*correct any possible irregularities on your website as soon as you become aware of them.

Jennifer McMullan is a trainee solicitor at CCW.

Fiscal who 'lost' vital files also mislead client over ill health claim in case now time barred

It is reported a well known Fiscal is the subject of a serious complaint after costing a client at least £150,000 by misleading him.

Adrian Fraser is being investigated by the Law Society of Scotland over his handling of an ill health claim by a pensioner who claims Fraser mislead him, lost or destroyed vital files and time barred his claim.

Almost a common complaint these days against solicitors in Scotland, who are now creeping into the statistics of providing the worst legal service to corporate and private clients in all of Europe ...

The Sunday Mail reports :

'Lying' Fiscal Ruined My Life

Mar 9 2008 By Steve Dinneen

Exclusive Oap's £150k Claim

A TOP fiscal has been accused of costing a client s150,000 by misleading him.

Adrian Fraser - who prosecuted shamed peer Mike Watson - is under investigation over his handling of the ill-health claim.

He was hired as a solicitor by Alexander Davidson in 1995 to represent his compensation battle with ex-employer Scottish Power.

Alexander, 72, of Falkirk, had been told by a court-appointed advocate he could received £150,000 after exposure to hazardous substances.

But he claims Fraser did not file his Legal Aid application in time and "deliberately misled" him to cover his tracks. He is also accused of losing or binning vital files.

Alexander's case eventually became timebarred and he had to settle for just £3000.

He said: "Fraser has torn my life apart."

The LawSociety of Scotland ruled his actions "could amount to professional misconduct" and referred the case to the Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal but a report has still not been filed. They also ordered Fraser to pay Alexander £1000.

Philip Yelland, Law Society of Scotland director of regulation, said: "Complaints against Adrian Fraser are being investigated."

Fraser became a fiscal in Edinburgh in 2004. His cases include that of former Labour MSP Watson, who was jailed in 2005 for fire-raising.

Lockerbie bombing case defence team lose bid to gain secret documents

More obstructions being placed in the path of the Lockerbie bombing defence team who are trying to secure the release of secret documents believed to be key to help clearing Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi of his conviction relating to the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988.

The Scots justice system is certainly being made a continuing full in the Lockerbie case .. and we are left wondering why the documents haven't leaked to the Internet in this day & age ...

The Herald reports :

Megrahi defence team loses bid to access secret document

LUCY ADAMS, Chief Reporter March 08 2008

The defence team for the Libyan jailed for the Lockerbie bombing yesterday suffered a set-back in its attempts to get access to a top-secret document.

The document, which originated in an unknown foreign country, is thought to contain vital information about the timer which detonated the bomb that killed 270 people in 1988.

At the previous hearing, the UK Government said the document could not be disclosed for reasons of national security, leading the defence team to accuse it of "interference" in the appeal.

Margaret Scott QC, senior counsel for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the Libyan currently serving 27 years in Greenock prison for the bombing, objected to the Advocate General for Scotland - the law officer who represents the UK Government in Scottish affairs - playing a part in the debate.

She accused the government of meddling - an allegation hotly disputed by Lord Davidson, the Advocate General, and by Elish Angiolini QC, the Lord Advocate and head of prosecutions in Scotland.

However, yesterday the appeal judges ruled against her. Their decision opens the way for several days of future debate about whether letting lawyers see the document would have any security implications.

The Libyan's defence team say it needs to see the document in order for Megrahi to have a fair appeal.

Earlier this year, the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh was told that Ms Angiolini would be prepared to disclose the document but that has also been disputed.

The document itself was uncovered during the three-year investigation of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission which resulted in the case being referred back to the courts for a new appeal last summer.

The commission concluded the failure during the original trial to disclose this document, which is thought to contain information about the electronic timer used to detonate the bomb, could constitute a miscarriage of justice.

Although the Crown allowed the commission to see the material they have refused to disclose it to the defence.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband claims the document should remain confidential.

Now Lord Davidson will be allowed to put the case for "public interest immunity", on his behalf, at a future hearing - for which no date has yet been set. The hearing of Megrahi's actual appeal is still months away.

Megrahi, who was jailed in 2001, was not in court yesterday - but the appeal judges have been told he would like to attend future appeal hearings.

Lord Cullen, formerly of the Dunblane Inquiry, to chair FAI probe

Lord Cullen, the famous Judge who chaired the Dunblane Inquiry, which left more questions than answers, has been selected by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, to chair the probe announced into Scotland's system of Fatal Accident Inquiries ...

We are left wondering whether it was Kenny MacAskill who selected Lord Cullen, or the legal establishment itself ....

The Herald reports :

Fatal accident inquiries probe welcomed by campaigners

DAVID LEASK March 08 2008

Scotland's system of fatal accident inquiries is heading for its first overhaul in three decades.

Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill yesterday announced a review of the hearings, delighting campaigners who have fought for years for them to be beefed up.

Mr MacAskill appointed one of the country's most respected legal minds, Lord Cullen, to look at ways of making the rarely held inquiries "fit for purpose". The retired Lord Justice General, who led investigations into the Dunblane shootings and Piper Alpha, is expected to take around a year to do so.

The minister said: "Although we believe the system has served Scotland well in the main, concerns have been raised in recent years.

"The Scottish Government has listened to these concerns and that is why we want to see a more fundamental examination of the fatal accident inquiry system."

Campaigners - led by MSPs and the Enable Scotland, a charity which supports disabled people in the community - have long argued that FAIs can take too long to organise and that any recommendations they generate are not binding.

At present all sudden, accidental, unexpected or unexplained deaths are investigated by procurators-fiscal, but only a small number, around 60 a year, are scrutinised in detail by a sheriff in an FAI.

Enable raised concerns over FAIs after it discovered recommendations on the care of disabled people in hospital were not followed after a hearing into the death of one of its clients.

The charity's chief executive, Norman Dunning, last night said: "We are absolutely delighted that the Scottish Government has decided to review the FAI system. As it stands, the system neither supports bereaved families, nor benefits the public good.

"The findings of FAIs are often not properly enforced because of a lack of central monitoring. The current system means that inquiries can go on for many years, which is distressing for families.

"We hope that the review will lead to a system where bereaved families genuinely feel that lessons are learned and acted upon in a transparent way."

The review is also expected to look at whether FAIs should be held in the deaths of Scots abroad. Several MPs and MSPs have raised concerns the deaths of Scottish servicemen killed in Iraq and Afghanistan are investigated by overworked coroners in the south of England.

Angus Robertson, the SNP's Westminster-based defence spokesman, argued the deaths of 14 personnel from RAF Kinloss in a Nimrod crash in Kandahar, Afghanistan, showed the need for reforms.

Mr Robertson said: "My own concerns stem particularly from the delays in inquiries into service personnel fatalities, of up to five years."

Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth last night appeared sympathetic. He said: "The current system of FAIs in Scotland is preventing us from providing families with what they want: timely inquiries held near where they live."

Banks pay out record £550m in overdraft charges disputes

Now the Banks are being forced to pay back hundreds of millions of pounds in unnecessary charges to clients, focus may turn to a few other industries famed for charging the client through the nose ...

The Scotsman reports :

Big banks pay out £550m in row over overdraft charges

By Nicky Burridge

THE major high street banks have so far paid out more than £550 million in refunds to customers who complained about unauthorised overdraft charges, it emerged yesterday.

The pay-outs, which total £559 million, were revealed in the annual results of the majority of the banks that are involved in the English High Court test case over the issue of whether the charges are fair.

But the actual total will be higher as both Abbey and the Nationwide Building Society declined to disclose how much they had refunded.

The HBOS group has faced the biggest pay-out to customers who complained the charges were unfair, refunding a total of £122 million.

Royal Bank of Scotland Group, which includes NatWest, has paid out some £119 million to date, while Barclays has paid out £116 million and HSBC has refunded a total of £115 million.

Lloyds TSB had refunded £76 million to customers before the test case began and Clydesdale and Yorkshire Bank said claims and costs, as well as provisions for future administrative costs relating to the issue, totalled £11 million.

The big five are reckoned by the British Bankers' Association to hold about 70 per cent of the UK's current accounts.

The banks are currently awaiting the judgment from the test case which could pave the way for a ruling on how much they can charge people who go into unauthorised overdraft or breach their agreed limit.

The case was bought jointly by the seven banks and Nationwide and the Office of Fair Trading to settle the issue after customers began to reclaim millions of pounds through the courts.

The recent case concerns whether unauthorised overdraft charges come under the scope of the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. If the judge rules that this is the case, the court will decide at a separate hearing later this year whether the charges are unfair, and give guidance on what a fair fee should be.

The banks, who argued that consumer contract rules do not apply to the charges and that, even if they do, the fees are not unfair, have been given permission to put any new or ongoing refund claims on hold until the outcome of the test case is known.

HSBC said yesterday that in the worst-case scenario total refunds could reach £303 million if it loses the court case.

The other banks involved declined to predict the total liability they would face if they lost the case, but if, like HSBC, total pay-outs would be more than double what they have refunded so far, banks could collectively face a bill of more than £1.1 billion from the issue.

Banks are thought to make between £2 billion and £3.5 billion a year in fees charged when customers go into unauthorised overdraft.

These fees can be as high as £39, but campaigners claim that the actual cost to banks is as little as £2.50.

Commercial lawyers have warned that, if the charges are scrapped or drastically reduced, it will mean an end to free banking and all customers will have to pay a monthly current account fee.

PILING UP THE CREDIT CARDS

NEARLY one in eight Britons has at least four credit cards.

About 3 per cent have five cards and 4 per cent have more than five, according to research for MoneyExpert.com.

But just over half of people have only one or two credit cards, and 22 per cent do not have any.

The survey also showed that 28 per cent of the population have applied for a new card in the past year.

MP John Thurso calls for review of Wick Harbour death investigation

A Westminster Member of Parliament, John Thurso MP has called for a fresh investigation into the death of Kevin McLeod at Wick Harbour in February 1997.

The family of Kevin McLeod have had little success with Northern Constabulary over their calls for a proper investigation into Kevin's death over ten years ago, but independent reports have found a culture of failure with Northern Constabulary's initial investigation, which many believe must now be resolved with an independent investigation by another Police force.

The Scotsman reports :

MP calls for fresh review of evidence in case of body in harbour

By JOHN ROSS

THE Lord Advocate is being urged to authorise an independent review of evidence in a ten-year-old case involving a man found dead in a harbour.

The body of Kevin McLeod, 24, was found after a night out in Wick in February 1997. His family believe he was murdered, but Northern Constabulary maintain the death was accidental.

Ian Latimer, the force's chief constable, has ruled out a fresh review, but John Thurso, the Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross MP, has asked Elish Angiolini to consider the merits of another examination of evidence.

He said: "I have asked the Lord Advocate to look at an independent review of the evidence gathered in order to bring closure to the matter."

Two inquiries by Northern Constabulary were held which said Mr McLeod's death was accidental. A later fatal accident inquiry recorded an open verdict.

In 2002 an independent review was carried out by Andrew Cameron, the Chief Constable of Central Scotland Police, who looked into the family's complaints about the handling of the investigation.

In the same year Mr Latimer sought to draw a line under the investigation, saying there was "nowhere else to go".

A report in November by Jim Martin, Scotland's Police Complaints Commissioner, who was asked to examine the investigation, accused Northern Constabulary of "institutional arrogance" and ordered Mr Latimer to apologise to the McLeod family, who have consistently complained about the way the case was dealt with.

Mr Martin called on Mr Latimer to improve relations with family members and recommended the Northern Joint Police Board should meet them to apologise for the way the force handled their complaints.

He also criticised the McLeod family, who sent 277 letters and visited officers at their homes, for the tone of some of the complaints.

When Mr McLeod's body was found it was initially thought he had drowned, but a doctor later discovered serious abdominal injuries. A police investigation concluded that the injuries came from him falling on a bollard.

The family claims that Mr McLeod's clothes were destroyed before being forensically tested, the harbour was not cordoned off and searched for evidence, potential witnesses were not pursued and there were inadequate door-to-door inquiries.

The commissioner said Mr Latimer acknowledged that elements of the initial investigation were handled poorly and had instigated reviews of procedures.

Mr Thurso, who chaired a meeting between the chief constable and the McLeod family in December, added: "One outcome of an independent review might be that someone looks at it and says the evidence is inconclusive but it has been properly investigated. Another possibility is a recommendation to the Crown that there are further investigations to be undertaken.

"I have suggested it would be good for all concerned that a review takes place. I would expect the Lord Advocate to take some time to deliberate and consult before responding."

A Northern Constabulary spokeswoman said: "We understand that John Thurso has written to the Lord Advocate directly on this issue. We await the outcome of that with interest.

"Any correspondence with Kevin McLeod's family has and will remain confidential."

The letters between the family of Kevin McLeod who died at Wick Harbour in 1997 and the Chief Constable of Northern Constabulary Ian Latimer follow, showing the intense hardship by officialdom in Scotland, placed upon a grieving family in their fight to obtain justice for their loss.

Rather than forcing a family through a continuing period of suffering and anguish, where it seems a murder has taken place rather than just a death, the right thing to do would be to hold a new inquiry ....

Firstly, the letter from the Mcleod family to Chief Constable Ian Latimer of Northern Constabulary :

5 January 2008.
Dear Mr. Latimer,

Death of Kevin McLeod.

May I on behalf of our family pass on good wishes to you and your force for 2008.

We hope that this will be the year when we can all put the past behind us and move on confident that all the lessons associated with Kevin’s death have been learned and that procedures have been put in place to ensure it never happens again.

We were extremely grateful to you for meeting us in December and delivering an unreserved apology for the manner in which you and some of your officers had treated us following Kevin’s tragic death in 1997.

Everyone at the meeting expressed the wish that we all move forward as soon as possible.

As stated we believe that this will not be possible until a Totally Independent ‘Cold Case Review’ of the police investigation into Kevin’s death is undertaken.

Our initial complaints were initiated because of a complete lack of faith in every aspect of Northern Constabulary’s investigation and their handling of our subsequent complaints. These reservations have been overwhelmingly endorsed in the Fatal Accident Inquiry Findings, the Andrew Cameron Report and the PCCS Report.

We are now in the position that the only aspect of Kevin’s death that has not been independently reviewed is the actual police investigation.

We do not consider the Crown Office review of the information supplied by your investigating officers to be independent or constitute the necessary objective re-assessment of the investigation.

More than anything, having spent the last eleven years fighting for justice for Kevin, we want to move on. We see such an enquiry as an essential pre-requisite to this goal and urge you to take that final step and initiate the Independent ‘Cold Case Review’.

You can be assured that my family and I will co-operate fully with the review.

Yours Sincerely,
Mr Hugh McLeod.

The reply to the Mcleod family from Chief Constable Ian Latimer :

30 January 2008

Dear Mr and Mrs Mcleod,

As promised I now take the opportunity to respond to the outstanding issue from our very constructive meeting on the 19 December 2007 in Wick.

I have taken some little time to reflect on the questions which you posed to consult where appropriate and to obtain necessary advice which includes relevant dialogue with the Crown.

I am seeking to be as helpful as possible having taken the opportunity to meet with you and to unreservedly apologise to you for the failings in the initial investigation and in the initial handling of your complaints.

The subsequent investigations into the death of your son have been subject to a level of independent scrutiny which is largely without precedent in Scotland. The Crown have independently considered all submissions by the Force with these Reports being considered by not only the Area Procurator Fiscal for the Highlands and Islands but also by senior advocates within the Crown office.

Whilst I am constrained by the statutory relationship to the Constabulary has with the Crown regarding the responses that I can give to your questions, I am willing to explore how a further structured meeting in the presence of, I would suggest, Lord Thurso, could be arranged to enable me to provide answers to the questions which you still have. The confidentiality of any information shared at such a meeting should be paramount and your acceptance of this would be a pre-requisite.

For the same reasons attendance would have to be restricted to the immediate family and an independant observer of the stature of Lord Thurso whose presence I am sure you will agree was extremely helpful at our earlier meeting.

As the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland in his Report confirms, the independent view of the Crown is that there are no outstanding issues or questions which remain to be investigated into the death of your son. Any new information which you might have should be shared with either the Constabulary or the Crown. I can assue you that any new information shared directly with the Constabulary would be brought to the attention of the Crown and direction sought regarding any consideration of subsequent investigation.

Whilst the case remains subject to periodic internal review and is, in that sense, still open, I see no opportunity or reasoning to support a more wide-ranging review given that the actions and investigations undertaken by the Constabulary have been subject to independent consideration by the Crown on a number of previous occasions.

I am aware that at your meeting with the Convener Mr Norman Macleod, the Vice-Convenor Mr Ian Ross and the Clerk to the Northern Joint Police Board Ms Roslyn Pieroni earlier this month you raised a number of questions which you described to them as remaining unanswered. I have at the request of the Convener provided a confidential briefing to assist them in any response that they would wish to make.

The questions posed by you with regard to the investigation into the death of your son Kevin are largely those you raised in 2001 and formed the basis of the subsequent investigation which was reported to the Crown and concluded to their satisfaction in early 2002. There are no outstanding issues from the questions you raise that have not been properly investigated and concluded.

I hope you will respond positively to my proposal for a further meeting and if you do wish to progress this, our agreed point of contact, Inspector Julian Innes, will contact you.

Yours Sincerely
Ian J Latimer QPM MA
Chief Constable:

Edinburgh lawyer hires Private Eye in battle with neighbour

Not unusual for lawyers to turn to Private Investigator in problems they occasionally face - take for instance, a well known Borders lawyer who hired a Private Investigator to steal the medical records of a disgruntled client in a bid to prevent a negligence case coming to court, the PI was also tasked with 'planting' drugs into the clients car and tipping off the Police. The scheme went wrong when the PI entered the wrong car ...

The Scotsman reports on another well known lawyer, this time in Edinburgh, who turned to a Private Investigator for assistance, successfully in this case it seems ...

Private eye clinches case after New Town neighbours go to war

By JOHN ROBERTSON AND BRIAN FERGUSON

ALL is fair in love and war, even in the genteel world of Edinburgh's New Town, it seems, where unseemly spats among neighbours are definitely not de rigueur.

So when lawyer Siggi Bennett and his neighbour in fashionable Royal Circus fell out spectacularly over late-night parties, Mr Bennett had no qualms about calling in the cavalry or, in this instance, a private investigator.

Businessman Michael Gordon had disputed he was flouting planning regulations by using his luxury, three-storey townhouse at No 1 more as a venue for celebrity parties than as a home. But when a private investigator posed as a potential customer who wanted

to hire the house for a party at £750 a day, he made a great deal of its attractions.

Now the sales pitch has come back to haunt Mr Gordon, as Mr Bennett, of No 3, used it to win the latest round in a long-running and expensive legal battle.

Mr Bennett, an advocate and nephew of the late television presenter, broadcaster and journalist Magnus Magnusson, declined to comment.

But Mr Gordon, who admitted the verdict was "no surprise", has vowed to mount another appeal, and claims he is being victimised by his neighbour.

He told The Scotsman: "We are running a high-quality guesthouse for the more discerning customer. It's available for hire for parties, but there are a whole list of strict conditions including a ban on loud music.

"It's been unfairly labelled as a party house and we've been victimised by one neighbour, but we're looking forward to another inquiry."

Among those who have attended parties at No 1 over the years are author JK Rowling, TV presenter Kirsty Wark, actress Samantha Morton and comedian David Walliams.

City of Edinburgh Council served a notice three years ago on Mr Gordon and his wife, Susan, stating that, without planning permission, they had changed the use of the property from dwelling house to entertainment venue, and such use should stop. The Gordons contested the claim, and a public inquiry was held at an estimated cost of £100,000. The reporter, David Russell, accepted evidence from Mr Gordon that there had been only four occasions when the premises was used as an entertainment venue separate from its use as a house, two of which occurred during the 2003 Edinburgh International Festival.

However, the reporter's decision was challenged by Mr Bennett at the Court of Session, and the three judges, Lords Kingarth, Eassie and Marnoch, overturned the verdict yesterday.

Lord Kingarth referred to a transcript of a conversation on 11 December, 2003, between Mr Gordon and an agent hired by Mr Bennett who had posed as someone seeking to organise a party.

"We have read this transcript with some care and it is clear that a number of significant inferences could readily be drawn," said Lord Kingarth.

"The most obvious is that (Mr and Mrs Gordon] no longer used the property as their home. It was available for hire as an entertainment venue."

EXPERTS SAY CHANCES LOW

PLANNING experts believe Mr Gordon is unlikely to win his case, in the wake of the ruling.

David Bell, director of Jones Lang LaSalle, said: "The decision endorses the council's position and its decision that there is no lawful use of the property for entertainment purposes.

"It does happen occasionally that the Court of Session takes issue with a reporter's decision, but it is rare. If there is a further appeal, it is likely the reporter will take full note of the views expressed by the court. Therefore, the prospects of securing lawful use of the property as an entertainment venue look low."

Letters reveal SNP donor gets Ministerial intervention as SNP show their preference of business over people

Business in Scotland might now boil down to who you know in Government as letters reveal an SNP donor's planning application receives Ministerial intervention.

Now we know why the Justice Secretary is following Douglas Mill like some weeping puppy ?

The Herald reports :

Aviemore letters show unease at ministers’ intervention

DOUGLAS FRASER, Scottish Political Editor February 29 2008

The environment watchdog pressed by several ministers to speed up a planning application from a major SNP donor thought it was being put on "dodgy ground" by political interference.

Private correspondence in the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) shows top-level concerns that it could be seen to "buckle" if developers go to politicians and make enough fuss.

Other correspondence shows Alex Salmond was warned by his officials that to call in the Aviemore Mountain Resort planning application would be "inappropriate, if not unhelpful".

The Sepa chief executive, Campbell Gemmell, wrote to Jane Hope, chief executive of the Cairngorm National Park, the planning authority, express- ing his concerns.

"Application of political pressure is unacceptable and, if it is allowed to be shown to be a successful model, will be repeated," he wrote.

Mrs Hope replied: "We all harbour concerns about the appropriateness of the pressures applied."

Environment Minister Mike Russell claimed the documents, released under the Freedom of Information Act, showed ministers were doing their job in ensuring the planning process ran properly.

He denied ministerial interest in the resort was linked to its ownership by Donald MacDonald, who gave £30,000 to the SNP for last year's campaign.

However, Labour's Jackie Baillie said the revelations showed "inappropriate pressure" had been put on planning authorities and the environment watchdog.

Lawyers condemned as leeching from miners compensation scheme

Taking ten years to receive compensation isn't all that unusual in the legal world when claims cases are subject to long and unnecessary delays ....

However, the miners compensation scheme certainly did see lawyers make a meal of things for themselves ..

The Herald reports :

10-year wait for ex-miners as lawyers earn £1.3bn

DANIEL BENTLEY

Former miners have been forced to wait more than 10 years for government compensation for pit-related illnesses, a powerful committee of MPs said yesterday.

Some even died while their claims were being processed because ministers underestimated the size and complexity of the project, the Public Accounts Committee found.

Solicitors have earned more than £1.3bn in fees for handling the claims, with one firm alone collecting nearly £124m.

Average administration costs amounted to more than the claim itself in more than two-thirds of the cases.

In a highly-critical report the committee said the government had expected about 218,000 claims for lung disease and vibration white finger, with payouts totalling £614m.

There have now been about 762,000 claims which it is thought will cost about £4.1bn once they are all settled, as well as another £2.3bn in administration.

But tens of thousands of ex-miners are still waiting for an offer. Last September there were about 128,500 claims still awaiting settlement.

Some miners had waited more than 11 years between their medical assessment and receiving an offer.

Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, accused the Department of Business and Enterprise of having "seriously mismanaged" the schemes in their early stages.

"Its attempt to implement the schemes swiftly, combined with its underestimation of how many claims would be made and how complex some would be, resulted in many claimants having to wait a very long time for the compensation they were owed," Mr Leigh said.

"Some of these were elderly and ill and in no position to wait for years for compensation - in some cases 10 years or more. Some claimants even died while waiting. The taxpayer has also taken a big hit, with the cost of just administering the schemes expected to total nearly £2.3bn."

The restitution packages were arranged after British Coal was found to have been negligent in the cases of ex-workers who had developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from dust and vibration white finger from equipment in the pits.

But the government failed to get its own actuarial assessment of the likely number of claims and liabilities under the Coal Health Compensation Scheme, instead relying on British Coal's forecasts.

Ministers did not initially realise that deceased miners' claims would be payable to their widows and families.

The cross-party committee also criticised the government's dealings with solicitors, accusing it of "weak" negotiations on their fees which led to higher administration costs.

Of the £2.3bn administration expenses, solicitors' bills accounted for £1.3bn.

The average cost of processing each claim was £3100, more than what two-thirds of miners received in compensation.

Just 10 law firms collected between them £635.8m in fees. The highest earner was Thompsons, which received £123.6m.

The government is chasing up to £100m in repayments from solicitors after a court ruling that certain cases should have incurred a smaller fee.

Some solicitors also effectively double-charged for their services by taking a cut from their clients' compensation packages on top of their government-paid fees.

The Legal Complaints Service believes lawyers owe millions of pounds to tens of thousands of miners.

It is currently contacting every miner covered by the scheme urging them to check whether they had money wrongly deducted.

Mr Leigh said: "There are lessons aplenty here for other parts of government planning and implementing new compensation schemes.

"Far too much money went into the solicitors' pockets."

MacAskill defeated in Scottish Parliament on prisoner tagging plans

Sometimes the Parliament can give Government a bloody nose over its plans, and this time, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's plans for tagging prisoners see defeat.

Perhaps Mr MacAskill should consider tagging himself so we all know where he is lurking ?

The Scotsman reports :

Defeat for MacAskill over plans for tagging of prisoners

LABOUR and the Tories united at Holyrood yesterday to inflict an embarrassing defeat on Kenny MacAskill, the justice secretary, and his plans to extend electronic tagging of prisoners, writes Hamish Macdonell.

Mr MacAskill later accused the two parties of "playing politics" and said their behaviour was "appalling".

However, Labour and the Tories warned Mr MacAskill that, in this era of minority government, ministers had to listen to the views of parties outside the government.

At Holyrood's justice committee yesterday, Mr MacAskill argued for a rise in the length of time prisoners could spend on the home detention curfew scheme – electronic tagging – from four and a half months to six months.

He told MSPs there was a growing problem with prison overcrowding and an extension to the tagging rules would ease that burden.

Labour and the Conservatives offered to agree to the extension, but only if a so-called "sunset clause" was inserted. This would have seen the order end when a new prison at Addiewell was completed, allowing parliament to revisit the issue.

Mr MacAskill refused, so the four Labour and Tory MSPs on the committee voted against the order. The vote was tied, with Tories and Labour opposed and the four SNP and Liberal Democrat MSPs in favour. Bill Aitken, a Tory MSP and committee convener, had the casting vote and opposed the order.

Mr MacAskill will bring the order back to the full chamber next week and hopes to get it past the full parliament with the help of the Lib Dems and the Greens.

Figures released yesterday show there are about 330 prisoners on home detention curfew.

Yesterday's plans would have seen that rise by between 50 and 120.

English Law Society faces battle with QCs - couldn't happen in Scotland ?

Unusually the Law Society south of the border is facing a legal battle to publish parts of its code it had originally given consent to be published, then withdrew ...

The Times reports :

QCs battle against the Law Society

Frances Gibb, Legal Editor of The Times

The delicious spectacle of dog eat dog — two QCs pitched against the Law Society in the courts — looks as if it will settle, thus avoid an embarrassing dispute.

In the legal action Andrew Hopper and Gregory Treverton-Jones last month issued proceedings in the High Court against the solicitors’ professional body.

Mr Hopper, who is also a solicitor and was the first solicitor-advocate outside the City of London, and Mr Treverton-Jones are both — among other things — specialists in professional regulation, defending solicitors against complaints about their conduct. The pair have written The Solicitors Handbook, a guide to the detailed rules solicitors now have to comply with. As part of the book they wanted to reproduce the full text of the solicitors’ code of conduct that came into force last July.

And here is where the dispute arises. The QCs sought permission from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which is responsible for rules of conduct in the profession, regulation and training. An SRA official told the men’s publishers, LexisNexis Butterworths, that they could go ahead.

Then, having written the book, the authors were informed by the Law Society that they did not have permission after all and could use only extracts of the code.

As Andrew Hopper put it: “We appeared to be caught in a power struggle between the SRA, which supports us and wants the book published in the interests of good regulation, and the commercial people at the Law Society, who see it as competition for their own publications.”

It is ironic, he added, that the handbook was written “from the defence perspective, to help solicitors to understand the rules of their regulator and how everything works. The prosecuting authority wants it published — but the ‘trade union’ wants to suppress it.”

There is nothing like a wrangle between lawyers. At least they have the best advice at their disposal. The pair brought in Herbert Smith, the City law firm, acting “no win, no fee”, together with a prominent member of the Bar on the same basis. Proceedings were served.

This week they applied for summary judgment in the High Court, asking for an order that the Law Society, which owns the copyright, permit them to reprint the code of conduct, a crucial element of the book.

But today it looks as if behind-the-scenes negotiations may produce a settlement beneficial to both sides. The QCs declined to comment “having regard to discussions taking place between the parties”. A spokesman said: “It is understood that it is likely that the dispute will shortly be resolved amicably in a manner that will enable the handbook to be published in the near future.”

Des Hudson, chief executive of the Law Society, said: “We are working to try to find a mechanism to settle this matter amicably.” Meanwhile, though, the pair have not withdrawn proceedings and the society is still defending them.

It maintains that the SRA had no authority to give a licence for the code to be published. Mr Hudson said: “What we have said all along is that clearly there is a significant difference as to what happened here and the legal implications. But if we can find a way to resolve it, we shall do.”

Some say that the case exposes the fundamental tension between the two limbs of the Law Society now that it has split its regulatory functions from its representative ones. The latter, of course, needs to be mindful of maximising its income — such as from commercial activities — when in the not too distant future solicitors will be able to choose whether or not to subscribe to support it.

Mr Hudson strongly disagrees. But he does concede that “the Law Society and the SRA are at different points in this process of change and the Law Society is facing different financial circumstances, post-Clementi. They have a different set of issues facing them and it is not surprising, therefore, that financial matters are not as high up the agenda as they are at the Law Society.”

Scottish Tories draft in an ex-MI6 spy as Chairman with dodgy CV

When the going gets tough, and the tories turn desperate ? an ex spy is brought in as Chairman .. although problems with his 'professorship' do seem to be taking centre stage in the headlines recently ..

The Herald reports :

New top Tory in row over CV

Former spy 'not entitled to call himself a professor'
By Paul Hutcheon

THE NEW chairman of the Scottish Tories has become embroiled in a row over his CV after false claims were made about his academic credentials.

Andrew Fulton, a former MI6 spy who was appointed by the Conservatives on Friday, was hailed as a "visiting professor" at Glasgow University's school of law.

But a spokesman for the university rebutted the claims, saying: "Mr Fulton is not associated with the University of Glasgow's law school and is not entitled to call himself a professor." Fulton, 64, took up the post as the Scottish Tories' top official last week and received endorsements from Conservative leaders David Cameron and Annabel Goldie.

The biography supplied to the media claimed he had read law at Glasgow University and was "now visiting professor at his alma mater's school of law".

But Fulton, who was a government diplomat for 30 years, was only briefly a visiting professor at the university between 1999 and 2000. He worked in the university's law school at the Lockerbie Trial Briefing Unit until he was dropped from his post when he was unmasked as an ex-spook.

Visiting professors lose their title after leaving a university, but the academic status symbol has somehow followed Fulton in his business career.

A spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives said: "The formal appointment at Glasgow University was for four years, but in 2000 the visiting professorship dwindled around the time of the Lockerbie stuff. The use of him as an active visiting professor diminished." Fulton did not call himself "Professor", he added."It's not something he himself uses." However, on the website of Proudfoot Consulting, a firm which lists him as an adviser, Fulton's biography refers to him as a "visiting professor at his alma mater's school of law". He is also referred to as "Professor Andrew Fulton" on the website of edoMidas, a company that has him as its non-executive chairman, and as "Prof RA Fulton" on the site of the Scottish North American Business Council, which he chairs.

An SNP spokesman said: "Being economical with the truth as a double agent may have been good training for Mr Fulton to become Scottish Tory chairman.

However, it's embarrassing that his cover should have been blown within five minutes of taking up the post. The Tories will be shaken and stirred to learn they can't trust Mr Fulton." In 2000, a Sunday Herald investigation revealed Fulton, the former MI6 station head in Washington, was appointed a visiting professor to the law school to give impartial advice to the world's media during the Lockerbie trial in The Hague. Fulton was suspected of infiltrating the unit to deflect criticism away from Western intelligence over the bombing of PanAm 103 in 1988.

On Friday, Fulton was praised by David Cameron, who said he would give experience and stature to the Scottish Conservatives in the build-up to a general election. He said: "I know Andrew will make a huge contribution to preparing our party for that challenge. I am delighted he has accepted the invitation to be chairman of the party in Scotland." Annabel Goldie MSP, the Scottish Conservative leader, added: "Scottish politics is at a pivotal stage and the appointment of Andrew as our chairman in Scotland demonstrates what a serious player the Scottish Conservatives are. Andrew is a substantial and respected figure and I look forward immensely to working with him in our continuing and exciting progress.

Fulton himself said: "We need to emphasise to people that voting Conservative is equally important in Scotland as in the rest of the UK. When I was growing up the Conservative presence in Scotland was strong. I see no reason why we cannot aspire to building towards that again.

Fallow decades are over, says new Scots Tory chairman

DAMIEN HENDERSON March 01 2008

A former MI6 spy appointed as Scottish Tory chairman yesterday insisted the party could recover from two decades of "fallow" results at the next General Election.

Andrew Fulton, who has spent more than 30 years in senior positions in the secret service, claimed the Conservatives had an opportunity to catch the SNP on the hop at Westminster and exploit the current disarray of Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

After his appointment was announced yesterday, he said: "It's very exciting to be taking over. We are within two years, at the most, of a UK General Election. Annabel Goldie has made an excellent start in the Scottish Parliament and she has done that issue by issue, making the Conservatives once again count in Scotland. Looking on to the UK level, I'm a great believer in David Cameron's message, I think he's got a great story to tell.

"After 20 years of fallow results, I hope with the SNP not concentrating on Westminster, Labour in disarray and the LibDems struggling a bit, we have a great opportunity to increase the number of Conservative MPs."

His post has been dogged by controversy and cross-border tension for the past year since David Mundell, Scotland's only Tory MP, lambasted the abilities of the previous incumbent, Peter Duncan, in an internal party memo. The appointment of the chairman is ultimately sanctioned by the UK leader, but Mr Fulton said this had been with the "consent and approval" of the executive of the Scottish Conservatives.

The former agent, who was born in Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, also brings his own baggage to the post: his unmasking as an MI6 operative led to him stepping down in 2000 as an adviser to Glasgow University's briefing unit which advised the media about the Lockerbie bombing trial amid speculation - which he strongly denied - that he had a competing agenda.

Last year he became the first acknowledged former spy to join a listed British company when he was appointed as an adviser to the Armor Group, which provides security services to national governments.