If you are Acquitted of ANY court case you won't get your COSTS recovered

[Mike Benis]

What it thinks it's about is irrelevant. It's blanket legislation and will apply to everyone who is subject to unfair decisions, incompetence and so on by government, making them less likely to claim or claim successfully because they can't afford top notch defence.

For example my mother fell and broke her knee because of inadequate pavement maintenance (it was totally messed up - we're not talking about a little crack here). The Council's legal team - very definitely not legal aid bods - did absolutely everything to suggest my mother was at fault. Anyone other than a robust top-notch solicitor wouldn't have stood a chance and neither would she.

And that's not to get on to the very contentious subject of Legal Aid.

In short, it's just bullying and intimidation and cost cutting at the expense of justice as past generations fought for it.

[Baff]

Originally Posted by Squiz

You've now discredited the petition, we didn't want you to sign it FFS!

Now you've gone & done it. I'm gonna stop laughing at your posts in future, innit?

[spinlondon]

Originally Posted by Mike Benis

What it thinks it's about is irrelevant. It's blanket legislation and will apply to everyone who is subject to unfair decisions, incompetence and so on by government, making them less likely to claim or claim successfully because they can't afford top notch defence.

For example my mother fell and broke her knee because of inadequate pavement maintenance (it was totally messed up - we're not talking about a little crack here). The Council's legal team - very definitely not legal aid bods - did absolutely everything to suggest my mother was at fault. Anyone other than a robust top-notch solicitor wouldn't have stood a chance and neither would she.

And that's not to get on to the very contentious subject of Legal Aid.

In short, it's just bullying and intimidation and cost cutting at the expense of justice as past generations fought for it.

The legislation would not apply to your mother, it would apply to the Local Authority, as they would be the defendants.
In which case, if they won, they would not be able to recover the full costs from your mother, just the Legal Aid rate.

[petedrz]

one more

[Mike Benis]

Originally Posted by spinlondon

The legislation would not apply to your mother, it would apply to the Local Authority, as they would be the defendants.
In which case, if they won, they would not be able to recover the full costs from your mother, just the Legal Aid rate.

Quite correct, there. I took us off track. teach me to type faster than I can think.

Fact remains, though, that if the legal action taken against whoever becomes a defendant is found incorrect in a court of law, then the Councils or Government bodies would do better to modify their practice than to simply carry on unchanged and attempt to limit their liability for unfair or illegal action with legislation such as that proposed.

Let's not kid ourselves that this proposed change to the legal protection offered all of us will stop the wealthy getting in high-charging solicitors to try and stop them from getting disqualified from driving, for example. On the other hand, it may well stop poor people sucessfully appealing against unfair arrests, evictions, ASBOS and the rest.... not to mention unreliable speed cameras, or over-zealous traffic wardens on commission in areas where this has been outsourced etc.

[Squiz]

Originally Posted by Baff

Now you've gone & done it. I'm gonna stop laughing at your posts in future, innit?

You were only laughing to be impolite anyway!

[spinlondon]

Originally Posted by Mike Benis

Quite correct, there. I took us off track. teach me to type faster than I can think.

Fact remains, though, that if the legal action taken against whoever becomes a defendant is found incorrect in a court of law, then the Councils or Government bodies would do better to modify their practice than to simply carry on unchanged and attempt to limit their liability for unfair or illegal action with legislation such as that proposed.

Let's not kid ourselves that this proposed change to the legal protection offered all of us will stop the wealthy getting in high-charging solicitors to try and stop them from getting disqualified from driving, for example. On the other hand, it may well stop poor people sucessfully appealing against unfair arrests, evictions, ASBOS and the rest.... not to mention unreliable speed cameras, or over-zealous traffic wardens on commission in areas where this has been outsourced etc.

Not disagreeing with you, in fact every new law that comes out seems to be aimed at removing our right to not suffer a penalty without a trial by our peers.
This one would mean, if you don't contest it you get fined, if you do contest it, it's going to cost wether you win or lose. Probably cheaper to just take it on the chin and pay the fine, at the reduced cost.

[little_dave]

Typical Labour Stasi! Signed

[Kiwi]

Originally Posted by Mike Benis

Quite correct, there. I took us off track. teach me to type faster than I can think.

Fact remains, though, that if the legal action taken against whoever becomes a defendant is found incorrect in a court of law, then the Councils or Government bodies would do better to modify their practice than to simply carry on unchanged and attempt to limit their liability for unfair or illegal action with legislation such as that proposed.

Let's not kid ourselves that this proposed change to the legal protection offered all of us will stop the wealthy getting in high-charging solicitors to try and stop them from getting disqualified from driving, for example. On the other hand, it may well stop poor people sucessfully appealing against unfair arrests, evictions, ASBOS and the rest.... not to mention unreliable speed cameras, or over-zealous traffic wardens on commission in areas where this has been outsourced etc.

and just to throw a spanner in the works, who pays for all these expensive lawyers if the the council has to pay for very expensive lawyers; the tax payers, this isn't right either, council tax is far too high and anything that potentially reduces council tax is potentially a good thing

It seems incompitent council officials can have secure jobs and can make rediculous decisions that cost everybody money and yet they personally remain immune from the outcome - this needs to change

[Battersea]

Originally Posted by spinlondon

This one would mean, if you don't contest it you get fined, if you do contest it, it's going to cost wether you win or lose. Probably cheaper to just take it on the chin and pay the fine, at the reduced cost.

And that is exactly why this measure needs fighting, imo.