Warning - do not use wolstenholmes solicitors

Brahan_seer_3

mjmal51 wrote: »

Couple of new articles pulled from Google
"Solicitor shot after quitting failed law firm

Ex-Wolstenholmes lawyer targeted at his home by pair of balaclava-clad gunmen

A former solicitor who worked at Cheadle-based law firm Wolstenholmes was shot in the leg at his Salford home within months of leaving the firm to set up his own practice, Crain's has discovered.
Gavin Wall, who worked at the firm between February and July last year, left to start Swinton-based Home Solicitors in August — a two-partner practice which he co-founded with Darren Rich.
It is not known whether the shooting was related to Wolstenholmes and Wall declined to comment on the matter.
Greater Manchester Police confirmed to Crain's that a man was shot in the leg at Wall's home address on October 23 last year.
“The victim heard banging at his door and when he opened it, two men wearing balaclavas were outside,” the police said. “One was carrying a handgun and shot the victim before they both ran off.”
A GMP spokesman said that two men were subsequently arrested in connection with the incident, but there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges. It is not pursuing any other lines of enquiry, but has appealed for anyone with any information relating to the incident to report it.
Wall's new firm specialises in the same area — bulk conveyancing — as Wolstenholmes did prior to its closure by the Solicitors' Regulation Authority (SRA) on December 23. Five partners from Wolstenholmes were suspended by the SRA following its intervention for “suspected dishonesty and breaches of the Solicitors Accounts and Practice Rules”.
Wall has adopted many of the same web-driven tactics to generate leads as Wolstenholmes and even recruited several former colleagues to help him build the business.
Despite this, he argues that comments on various consumer web forums linking his firm to Wolstenholmes were both untrue and damaging. He argues that no former member of Wolstenholmes' management is involved with Home Solicitors. Moreover, he was never involved in the partnership at Wolstenholmes and is not facing any action from the SRA.
“We have suffered as a result of this,” he argued. “We've had people saying that they won't deal with us because we're linked to Wolstenholmes.”
He argues that he has taken steps to ensure that things are run differently to his former employers. Before leaving to set up his own practice, he said he warned Wolstenholmes' former management that they were taking on more cases than they could handle.
He says that he has spent a lot of money ensuring that his new business didn't make the same mistake.
“We were spending £60,000 on a case management system, but it was crap so we bought another,” he said.
He said that Home Solicitors had yet to make a profit because the bulk of the cash generated so far had been allocated to increasing resources. It now employs 34 people and is currently recruiting more staff. He added: “We're not in profit at all yet. In fact, I turned off our online marketing a couple of months ago for fear we were generating a backlog.
“We're also in the middle of a Lexcel accreditation and have the Law Society looking at all of our systems.”
Commercial leases
Wall said he is now planning to roll out a similar bulk, web-driven offer for commercial leases through a site known as Lease Expert. He argues that the city's professional firms charge an average of £750 on standard leases for single properties such as shops, for which he is proposing to charge £249 plus VAT. “I'm going to offer it for that price because I know I can deliver it,” he said.
Meanwhile, Crain's has discovered that provisional steps were being taken as early as last summer to bring new funding into Wolstenholmes, which is believed to have had liabilities of at least £2.5m prior to its closure.
Companies House records show that a company called Wolstenholmes 1818 Ltd was registered in May 2009, but changed its name to Addison Read Solicitors Ltd a month later. The business was registered at the same address as Wolstenholmes' Birmingham office. Imran Hussain, who was managing partner at Wolstenholmes at the time of the intervention, is listed as the company's sole director.
Hussain was contacted but did not reply to a request for comment. However, last month he told Crain's that he had been threatened following Wolstenholmes' collapse.
“My life has been ruined by this,” he said. “I've reported to the police threats of violence against me and I've also had to leave my flat, which was vandalised.”

AND

"Another week and another story regarding Cheadle-based law firm Wolstenholmes, which was shut by the Solicitors' Regulation Authority in December, causing chaos for the thousands of clients of the firm whose house purchases were caught up in the crossfire.

The intervention by the SRA was the largest (in terms of the number of partners involved) that the regulator has undertaken in years, so it is perhaps understandable that it is taking time to sift through the wreckage before deciding what action, if any, needs to be taken against the five former partners. However, the longer the investigation goes on, the more difficult it will be to piece together what happened and who was ultimately to blame for its collapse.

Moreover, once the firm's administrator repays the £3m owed to the SRA, it is doubtful whether there will be enough assets left to pay its secured creditor Lloyds Bank, let alone embark on any costly enquiry into its affairs. Yet lessons must be learned. If a proper investigation is not carried out, former clients will feel short-changed and the potential for abuse of the system elsewhere will be heightened.

This item deserves to be repeated so here it is again. My comments:-

1. This is becoming more like a cross between a Mario Puzo/ John Grisham novel
2. Bulk conveyancing - whilst Mr Wall may have learnt something from the mistakes of Wolstenholmes he appears to be repeating some of them. Case management sytems are fine but you need the staff to be able to service the clients. He states that he is not in profit at all yet and even had to turn off his online marketing for fear of creating a backlog - and presumably more dissatisfied clients. If he charged properly and emplyed more experienced staff then perhaps he could be in profit. Cheap is not the answer. Service is the answer and that is something many are willing to pay for at a time when they are entering into what for many is the most important transaction which they will undertake. Many of Wolstenholmes former clients would probably run a mile from bulk conveyancing firms in the future
3. Lexel accreditation is a good thing. It is the Law Society's quality mark. It introduces discipline, but to a large extent is still a tick box exercise and does not measure the quality of service/advice given
4. Commercial leases. God help us. What service can you supply for £249 plus VAT? If I were entering into business for the first time and taking on new leasehold premises I would want an experienced commercial lawyer (who won't come cheap) - someone who knows the difference between a reparing obligation "to keep in repair" and "to put and keep in repair" and who will not merely turn round the paperwork quickly for a fast buck. I would want my solicitor to earn his fee and fight my corner, even if I have to pay for the privilege and I would want to know that my matter was being dealt with or at the very least overseen by an experienced commercial solicitor and not merely a "bum on a seat" who has been employed on the cheap.

Betty123

Catwoman8950 wrote: »

I sincerely hope this doesn't all get swept under the carpet.

I fear that this is exactly what is going to happen. Therefore, I hope that the people that have been involved in the mess are brought to task and are not able to practice again , instead driving around in posh cars and more important their lives have not changed. I am aware of many good and honest people, who's lives have been ruined by the fact that Wolstenholmes owe them very large amounts of money that they will never see again. Therefore please I urge everyone who has been mentally! or finanicially affected by Wolstenholmes to protest to SRA LSC to ensure that all involved at Wolstenholmes are made accountable for their actions. personally and financially.

Brahan_seer_3

"If a proper invesitgation is not carried out former clients will feel shortchanged and the potential for abuse of the system elsewhere will be heightened"

And quite right too. Although I am all for less government and would vote for anyone who promised it I do feel that whoever gets to power after the next election should have a review of Tesco Law high on the agenda. It cannot be right for example for non-lawyers to either own or have some kind of beneficial interst in solicitors' firms as I suspect may have been the case at Wolstenholmes. I sincerely hope that lessens can be learned from the Wolstenholmes debacle.

Are there any MPs following this thread who would be willing to take up the cudgels?

mjmal51

Brahan_seer wrote: »

Are there any MPs following this thread who would be willing to take up the cudgels?

I very much doubt it as they have other things on their agenda. I did send a link of this thread to Mark Hunter, Lib Dem for Cheadle (home of WH), back in Dec before intervention. He did raise the issue with Jack Straw in Jan and I have had communications with him since but suspect he might have been satisfied with the SRA's replies to him.
As you say there is a much deeper issue here which needs investigating to stop it happening all over again.

Horrified_Solicitor

This bears repeating:

Ex-Wolstenholmes lawyer targeted at his home by pair of balaclava-clad gunmen

A former solicitor who worked at Cheadle-based law firm Wolstenholmes was shot in the leg at his Salford home within months of leaving the firm to set up his own practice, Crain's has discovered.
Gavin Wall, who worked at the firm between February and July last year, left to start Swinton-based Home Solicitors in August — a two-partner practice which he co-founded with Darren Rich.
It is not known whether the shooting was related to Wolstenholmes and Wall declined to comment on the matter.
Greater Manchester Police confirmed to Crain's that a man was shot in the leg at Wall's home address on October 23 last year.
“The victim heard banging at his door and when he opened it, two men wearing balaclavas were outside,” the police said. “One was carrying a handgun and shot the victim before they both ran off.”
A GMP spokesman said that two men were subsequently arrested in connection with the incident, but there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges. It is not pursuing any other lines of enquiry, but has appealed for anyone with any information relating to the incident to report it.

Hmm..........does this mean that the poor victim was able to supply the police with the names of the sort of people who might be out to shoot him?

RRPhantom

Brahan_seer wrote: »

4. Commercial leases. God help us. What service can you supply for £249 plus VAT? If I were entering into business for the first time and taking on new leasehold premises I would want an experienced commercial lawyer (who won't come cheap) - someone who knows the difference between a reparing obligation "to keep in repair" and "to put and keep in repair" and who will not merely turn round the paperwork quickly for a fast buck. I would want my solicitor to earn his fee and fight my corner, even if I have to pay for the privilege and I would want to know that my matter was being dealt with or at the very least overseen by an experienced commercial solicitor and not merely a "bum on a seat" who has been employed on the cheap.

Spot on.

Don't choose your lawyer on price, choose on recommendation.

RRPhantom

distresses wrote: »

Also interested in pursuing a claim with the LCS for the stress, and inconvenience etc.
Have sent a report through to the LCS, got an email acknowledgement from them but with forms to complete for the SRA. Looking at these forms there is nothing we can really complete on these, but did want to pursue a claim for all the hassle we have had since August of last year.

Any ideas anyone?

K

Genius.

What, so there's no tickbox on the form for "stress"?

Or even "hassle"?


It's bang out of order, that.

In this compensation culture in which it is in which we live in, you think you'd be able to sue for MILLIONS!

I've got an idea - write to Patricia Hewitt.

Brahan_seer_3

Horrified_Solicitor wrote: »

This bears repeating:

Ex-Wolstenholmes lawyer targeted at his home by pair of balaclava-clad gunmen

A former solicitor who worked at Cheadle-based law firm Wolstenholmes was shot in the leg at his Salford home within months of leaving the firm to set up his own practice, Crain's has discovered.
Gavin Wall, who worked at the firm between February and July last year, left to start Swinton-based Home Solicitors in August — a two-partner practice which he co-founded with Darren Rich.
It is not known whether the shooting was related to Wolstenholmes and Wall declined to comment on the matter.
Greater Manchester Police confirmed to Crain's that a man was shot in the leg at Wall's home address on October 23 last year.
“The victim heard banging at his door and when he opened it, two men wearing balaclavas were outside,” the police said. “One was carrying a handgun and shot the victim before they both ran off.”
A GMP spokesman said that two men were subsequently arrested in connection with the incident, but there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges. It is not pursuing any other lines of enquiry, but has appealed for anyone with any information relating to the incident to report it.

Hmm..........does this mean that the poor victim was able to supply the police with the names of the sort of people who might be out to shoot him?

Some things are perhaps implied by the article but clearly cannot be expressed

Horrified_Solicitor

What amazes me is that these "pile it high, sell it cheap, go bust" conveyancing firms manage to get insurance. For the last few years, insurers have been very twitchy about conveyancing solicitors and asked searching questions on proposal forms. The Wolstenholmes model should have scared them witless. Has anyone any idea which unfortunate insurer is picking up the tab? Is it Quinn perchance?

distresses

RRPhantom wrote: »

Genius.

What, so there's no tickbox on the form for "stress"?

Or even "hassle"?


It's bang out of order, that.

In this compensation culture in which it is in which we live in, you think you'd be able to sue for MILLIONS!

I've got an idea - write to Patricia Hewitt.

Thanks for your comments. No need for millions only want justice and the LCS have now assured me that justice will be done (wont hold my breath though).