|The Law Society Consumers Complaints Services that acts for the Protection of Lawyers|
|"Solicitors from Hell" .com|
17 August 2006
Your ref: 35295
Dear Ms Manzoor
Re: Richard Hegarty, Chair of the Compliance Board
you for your recent letter dated 9th August '06
and I take note this letter will not be answered and just put in my
'file'. That appears to be just about what has been happening to all
my letters since your report that was dated 18 January '05.
I have decided to write this letter to give my thoughts and show my
contempt of how you carry out your 'investigations'. You will probably
say it is a case of 'sour grapes' but no, in my case I supplied documentary
evidence to support every claim or accusation I may have made and you
failed to discredit or dispute any evidence or anything I said. On Richard
Hegarty's side it appears no evidence, although you don't admit this,
was forthcoming even though you criticized the CCS for lack of contact
your 'criticism' concerning the 'lack of contact' with Richard Hegarty,
you and the CCS have based your decision on assumptions and as the Law
Society said that he (Richard Hegarty) had 'indicated' what his version
of the contents of that evening 'phone call was I can only assume that
between your 'report' (18/1/05) and the CCS's
'response' (one year later 18/1/06) while you
were 'colluding' with the CCS, they would have informed you of just
what it was that Richard Hegarty had 'indicated'.
Don't let us lose sight of your insistence on 'unbiased' and 'transparency'
during an investigation!
me once again indulge in my favourite past time, quoting you; "Complainants
have to be pretty persistent to get through the very complicated process.
I often say that they must have persistent genes. I wonder what percentage
of complaints do not make it off first base. In these cases we are really
looking at the reduction of access to justice for them". Let
me further quote your advice for clients who believe they've had a rough
deal, you say; "Be persistent. Remember it's your right
to have your complaint investigated and you should pursue it because,
hopefully, it can be mediated and conciliated to everyone's satisfaction".
Now let me quote from your 'Little Blue Rule
Book' that you send to everybody who refers a complaint to
your office; "What the Ombudsman will do is check that all your
complaints were addressed and that this was done within a reasonable
Come on you use the words 'justice', 'reasonable time', conciliation' and you blather out the words 'unbiased', 'transparency', 'fairness', you stood in parliament giving 'promises' and 'undertakings' about 'enforcing' rule 15 including giving training to law firms who do not have a 'complaints procedure' in place. Just what are you, some sort of sadistic maniac who gives the impression you are running an 'unbiased' appeal procedure but from behind the scenes you are running a 'lawyers protection racket'?
Let us look at your 'attributes' that no doubt 'Chuckling Charlie' saw you possess.
As usual I will publish this letter on the internet which as you know will be seen all over the world, if you consider it to be 'defamatory' and/or a 'defamation of character' I challenge you, if you have the balls, to take me to the High Court. On the other hand you can ignore me just as you have done in previous letters which will be an admittance of there is a 'Lawyer Protection Racket' in existence which you are clearly a key part of.
B R Gray