Every single U.S. State has a Board of Overseers of the Bar* that deals with the issues raised.Shaunhorny said:
*Not always termed that.
Lawyers!!!!!!!
- Thread starter spankingman
- Start date
*Not always termed that.
No, it's because you bow down to your perceived betters. He who has the credentials is right and everybody else is wrong (arguments be damned). A vulgar, but all too common, display of pomp.Aardvark154 said:
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1750219#post1750219
Well at least somebody is getting true `bang` for their bucks.MichaelZzzz said:
SH, now that we have settled that your "issues" were caused by one or more lawyers in the U.S., and that you were unaware of insurance coverage for Canadian lawyers:
a. what would you considerable to be a "reasonable" fee to be charged by a lawyer, for what type of work, and how do you come to this conclusion?
b. what would you consider to be a "reasonable" fee to be charged by an accountant, financial advisor, business consultant or investment banker?
a. what would you considerable to be a "reasonable" fee to be charged by a lawyer, for what type of work, and how do you come to this conclusion?
b. what would you consider to be a "reasonable" fee to be charged by an accountant, financial advisor, business consultant or investment banker?
It wasn't I who was unaware of coverage for CDN lawyers, it was others who were unaware of non-coverage for non-CDN lawyers.blopar said:
lol, you're not going to drag me into an indefinite discussion on what "reasonable fees" are. Sorry. I'm here to fuck around, not to educate others every two minutes.blopar said:
So, how about your last SP session? Eh? Wasn't it hot!!? Mine was too!!! hahaahha
Not so fast.Shaunhorny said:
You are the one that started this debate by calling lawyers "utter human trash".
Since that post, you have continued to take a high and mighty approach "...It wasn't I who was unaware..." and "...I'm...not here to educate others every two minutes".
Yet, you have failed to provide a single FACT---rather than broad and inapplicable characterizations fuelled by your anger---to support your position.
Instead of bashing an entire profession, based upon limited experiences in another country, let's just leave it that you had a very bad experience with a bad lawyer, in the U.S., that would not accept his being at fault. I have no reason to believe that your anger at this person isn't justified.
That, of course, is a far cry from ALL lawyers in ALL countries in ALL areas of practice being "utter human trash".
Will Shakespeare - "first we kill the lawyers"
I'm sure the lawyers on terb are the exception, but the rest at best are maggots.
Aardvark are you really a lawyer? Go to the Law society? Are you stupid the UCLS is there to protect lawyers not regulate them... well in the real world anyway. The old adage hire a good lawyer and listen to him is also a crock, trust no one especially a lawyer. A judge friend of mine recommended a lawyer to me so I thought I would listen to him, he was incompetent, dubious, ineffective, lazy, greedy and most of all dishonest.
Advise to the taken, ASSESSMENT, lawyers don't want you to know about this, it don't work for a lot but it worked for me. The assessment dude? I reduced my bill by over 50% because I proved what a piece of crap this lawyer was, he told me that I was in the top 5% of assessment adjustments he makes in a year.
Going forward if I ever end up having to go to court again I will hire a paralegal to help with paper work and fillings and represent myself, I may loose but at least I care about the outcome.
b d
I'm sure the lawyers on terb are the exception, but the rest at best are maggots.
Aardvark are you really a lawyer? Go to the Law society? Are you stupid the UCLS is there to protect lawyers not regulate them... well in the real world anyway. The old adage hire a good lawyer and listen to him is also a crock, trust no one especially a lawyer. A judge friend of mine recommended a lawyer to me so I thought I would listen to him, he was incompetent, dubious, ineffective, lazy, greedy and most of all dishonest.
Advise to the taken, ASSESSMENT, lawyers don't want you to know about this, it don't work for a lot but it worked for me. The assessment dude? I reduced my bill by over 50% because I proved what a piece of crap this lawyer was, he told me that I was in the top 5% of assessment adjustments he makes in a year.
Going forward if I ever end up having to go to court again I will hire a paralegal to help with paper work and fillings and represent myself, I may loose but at least I care about the outcome.
b d
blopar said:
I didn't start any debate, nor have I taken a high and mighty approach. I've stated a position based on my experience and clarified that position to people who made unfounded assumptions about it.
My experience is a fact and my position is supported by the collective experience of millions of others across class, race, geography, and time lines - hence the bad rap lawyers have. Look no further than big dogie's posting of a Shakespearean quip about lawyers. The feeling is mutual and has existed throughout the ages for good reason. Maybe we're all just part of the illiterate poor masses that have misunderstood lawyers who scammed us for our own good. huh?blopar said:
I was taking a bit of literary license. Surely not all lawyers everywhere are trash, but there are far too many that are. Look, don't take it too seriously. If you're a lawyer, practice law and do it properly. If you don't, you may just run into trouble some day. I'm locked and loaded.blopar said:
The following link was in post #34 http://www.lsuc.on.ca/public/a/complaints/big dogie said:
on the right hand side of the web-page is a link that takes you to assessment. I do assume that people on TERB have a certain level of intellectual curiosity and don't have to be spoon fed everything.
However, note that not all jurisdictions do it as does Ontario. Particularly in the U.S. this is typically a function of the Board of Bar Overseers (the same folks, with whom you file disciplinary complaints).
I am not a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada, however, in most jurisdictions the discipline of lawyers is treated very seriously, and I presume it is in Ontario as well. To say that merely because other lawyers are involved in the disciplinary process that such complaints are not taken seriously, is similar to saying that because the Medical Licensing Board (in the case of Ontario the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario) is made up of physicians that therefore they protect physicians rather than regulate them.
But what late in the Reign of Elizabeth I (1590) was Shakespeare writing about when in Act IV of Henry VI - part II he has Dick say "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."Shaunhorny said:
Historically the setting is Cade's Rebellion where slightly latter comes the line where Messenger is describing Cade's aim to King Henry saying that Cade intends to try to take over the Country as a usurper and adds "All scholars, lawyers, courtiers, gentlemen, They call false caterpillars, and intend their death."
Why do they intend their death, because it still is those with a knowledge of government and law who are a bulwark against illegitimacy, anarchy and the demands of the mob.
And why might that have sounded a chord for Shakespeare in the 1590's? Certainly that is no wonder when the Babington Plot, the execution of Mary Queen of Scotts and the defeat of the Spanish Armada had all occured within the previous four years. Obviously the need for peace, order and legitimate government would have been clearly seen as important, further although a subject not publicly discussed it had become obvious that Elizabeth I was not going to marry and who her successor would be and the lawfulness and peacefulness of that succession important issues.
