Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 10:29 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 212
hopefull is on a distinguished road
Default

.....*most* lawyers are akin to used car sales people i.e. they are shysters with a primary mandate to suck you dry, hence the reason why they ask for your financials upfront.

The more you have, the more they know you will be paying for their next exotic location, or help payoff their luxury car. Better yet, your money as in the recent case posted on here, will be used as loan to a client the lawyer is banging
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 10:58 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,567
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hopefull View Post
.....*most* lawyers are akin to used car sales people i.e. they are shysters with a primary mandate to suck you dry, hence the reason why they ask for your financials upfront.
I disagree. There are a lot of great lawyers who do not do this. Only a small handful of them do this. Unfortunately, they get more attention than the thousands upon thousands that are great.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 11:19 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hopefull View Post
.....*most* lawyers are akin to used car sales people i.e. they are shysters with a primary mandate to suck you dry, hence the reason why they ask for your financials upfront.

The more you have, the more they know you will be paying for their next exotic location, or help payoff their luxury car. Better yet, your money as in the recent case posted on here, will be used as loan to a client the lawyer is banging
I get what you're saying. Unfortunately, there are a few bad apples in every bushel .. but this is in nearly "every" profession. We have to be careful not to generalize. I personally don't find it strange that lawyers ask for financials up front. Financial companies also do this to make sure they'll get paid.

What I disagree with is the extraordinary amount they charge, including the thousands up front. This is precisely why many begin to self rep.

It's just getting too expensive to hire lawyers and unfortunately they'll put themselves out of business in the future. We live in the age of internet, FLIC offices, etc. Most are becoming aware that they can actually do well self-repping in court if they're willing to put in the blood, sweat and tears...saving tens of thousands in the process.

Remember this is a business. Case conferences, settlement conferences, mediation, 4 way meetings, etc. Everyone in those rooms are making a ton of cash except the litigant.

There's so much cash being made that there's no incentive for lawyers to settle. This is the bottleneck of the system. The litigants are stressed, some not seeing their children .. but the more court appearances and "non-settlement" (due to there being no incentive for lawyers to settle - their pay stops), the more inflamed the situation for everybody...except lawyers, judges, etc bank accounts.

They write these rules and claim to follow them, but many don't.

We call them the Primary Objectives:

Quote:
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE
(2) The primary objective of these rules is to enable the court to deal with cases justly. O. Reg. 114/99, r. 2 (2).

DEALING WITH CASES JUSTLY
(3) Dealing with a case justly includes,

(a) ensuring that the procedure is fair to all parties;

(b) saving expense and time;

(c) dealing with the case in ways that are appropriate to its importance and complexity; and

(d) giving appropriate court resources to the case while taking account of the need to give resources to other cases. O. Reg. 114/99, r. 2 (3).

DUTY TO PROMOTE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE
(4) The court is required to apply these rules to promote the primary objective, and parties and their lawyers are required to help the court to promote the primary objective. O. Reg. 114/99, r. 2 (4).

DUTY TO MANAGE CASES
(5) The court shall promote the primary objective by active management of cases, which includes,

(a) at an early stage, identifying the issues, and separating and disposing of those that do not need full investigation and trial;

(b) encouraging and facilitating use of alternatives to the court process;

(c) helping the parties to settle all or part of the case;

(d) setting timetables or otherwise controlling the progress of the case;

(e) considering whether the likely benefits of taking a step justify the cost;

(f) dealing with as many aspects of the case as possible on the same occasion; and

(g) if appropriate, dealing with the case without parties and their lawyers needing to come to court, on the basis of written documents or by holding a telephone or video conference. O. Reg. 114/99, r. 2 (5).
Honestly, just think about your case if you've had one, go through the primary objectives one by one and see if your lawyer (or the OP's lawyer) adhered to them. I bet your bottom dollar one of them didn't. So why have these laws even been drawn up so neatly if they're rarely followed?

Why is it that lawyers have carte-blanche and rarely get penalized for going "sideways" as the article puts it. If judges like the one in the article are starting to drop the "costs" hammer on self litigants, I sure hope the same will be done more often for lawyers who go sideways and ignore the primary objectives.

Just like we can get jaywalking tickets but nothing for abduction. There are close to no repercussions for lawyers not following the primary objectives of court .. and that my friends needs to change.

Regarding the article, if self-reps don't put in the blood, sweat and tears they may go "sideways" for sure. On the other hand, if judges want to start placing self litigants in lose-lose situation (Pay a lawyer or pay the courts) people may just start taking matters in to their own hands altogether and stop using courts .. at which point our prisons will start filling up and society as we know it will go awry.

Let's just start putting kids before money in all instances if that's at all possible.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 11-01-2016 at 11:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 12:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 228
PeacefulMoments is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Note: Their are lawyers who are actually worse than self-represented litigants.

Stupid lawyers are the most dangerous. You never know what they are going to do. The second worst are crooked lawyers but, at least they have a modus operandi that is easy to detect these days and good judges often filter their crap.
I agree.

My daughter's first lawyer was so bad at the urgent motion that pretty much every word out of her mouth hindered my daughter rather than helped her.

It took everything I had to sit quietly and listen to her screw things up.
Despite being very emotionally connected to the situation, I am sure I could have made far better oral arguments, even unprepared.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 212
hopefull is on a distinguished road
Default

........Lawyering up should not be the first course of action for most people. People on legal aid don't really give 2 hoots anyway as it's not their money. If legal aid wasn't available, people will learn to sit down and work it out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
I get what you're saying. Unfortunately, there are a few bad apples in every bushel .. but this is in nearly "every" profession. We have to be careful not to generalize. I personally don't find it strange that lawyers ask for financials up front. Financial companies also do this to make sure they'll get paid.

What I disagree with is the extraordinary amount they charge, including the thousands up front. This is precisely why many begin to self rep.

It's just getting too expensive to hire lawyers and unfortunately they'll put themselves out of business in the future. We live in the age of internet, FLIC offices, etc. Most are becoming aware that they can actually do well self-repping in court if they're willing to put in the blood, sweat and tears...saving tens of thousands in the process.

Remember this is a business. Case conferences, settlement conferences, mediation, 4 way meetings, etc. Everyone in those rooms are making a ton of cash except the litigant.

There's so much cash being made that there's no incentive for lawyers to settle. This is the bottleneck of the system. The litigants are stressed, some not seeing their children .. but the more court appearances and "non-settlement" (due to there being no incentive for lawyers to settle - their pay stops), the more inflamed the situation for everybody...except lawyers, judges, etc bank accounts.

They write these rules and claim to follow them, but many don't.

We call them the Primary Objectives:



Honestly, just think about your case if you've had one, go through the primary objectives one by one and see if your lawyer (or the OP's lawyer) adhered to them. I bet your bottom dollar one of them didn't. So why have these laws even been drawn up so neatly if they're rarely followed?

Why is it that lawyers have carte-blanche and rarely get penalized for going "sideways" as the article puts it. If judges like the one in the article are starting to drop the "costs" hammer on self litigants, I sure hope the same will be done more often for lawyers who go sideways and ignore the primary objectives.

Just like we can get jaywalking tickets but nothing for abduction. There are close to no repercussions for lawyers not following the primary objectives of court .. and that my friends needs to change.

Regarding the article, if self-reps don't put in the blood, sweat and tears they may go "sideways" for sure. On the other hand, if judges want to start placing self litigants in lose-lose situation (Pay a lawyer or pay the courts) people may just start taking matters in to their own hands altogether and stop using courts .. at which point our prisons will start filling up and society as we know it will go awry.

Let's just start putting kids before money in all instances if that's at all possible.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 01:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,008
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

You can have the best lawyer or the worst lawyer it doesnt matter. One of the biggest impacts in family law are the litigants. Case in point, my partner. He and his ex wife had great lawyers. His ex didnt want to take her lawyers advice and screwed herself. My partner had a barracuda and he wanted to be "reasonable". In the end she tells people he "stole everything" and hes dealing with the consequences of trying to play fair. On the other hand I have a friend who is divorced and she and her ex are not each others biggest fans. She has tried to be reasonable and put the kids first. They work together quite well when it comes to the kids because they both love their kids. Outside of that, he is an ass and she ignores him.

It would be interesting to see if self reps being forced to pay are doing so because of their behaviour or actual legal losses. And also what percentage of the legal losses are because of their attitude or refusal to adhere to the rules of the court. Look at it this way, some litigants could have great lawyers giving them the best advice but if they choose to not follow that advice and end up paying via contempt, custody loss, additional court fees etc, its the same as a self rep losing. The self rep just saves the massive legal bills.

You cant always blame the lawyer!
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 01:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 212
hopefull is on a distinguished road
Default

....hmmmm, any chance you are being biased here i.e. taking sides? I mean your friend probably isn't telling you everything, and you put blinders on as to what might be happening behind closed doors when she deals with her ex.

You called the guys an "ass", your friend might just be a wench

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
You can have the best lawyer or the worst lawyer it doesnt matter. One of the biggest impacts in family law are the litigants. Case in point, my partner. He and his ex wife had great lawyers. His ex didnt want to take her lawyers advice and screwed herself. My partner had a barracuda and he wanted to be "reasonable". In the end she tells people he "stole everything" and hes dealing with the consequences of trying to play fair. On the other hand I have a friend who is divorced and she and her ex are not each others biggest fans. She has tried to be reasonable and put the kids first. They work together quite well when it comes to the kids because they both love their kids. Outside of that, he is an ass and she ignores him.

It would be interesting to see if self reps being forced to pay are doing so because of their behaviour or actual legal losses. And also what percentage of the legal losses are because of their attitude or refusal to adhere to the rules of the court. Look at it this way, some litigants could have great lawyers giving them the best advice but if they choose to not follow that advice and end up paying via contempt, custody loss, additional court fees etc, its the same as a self rep losing. The self rep just saves the massive legal bills.

You cant always blame the lawyer!
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 02:20 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hopefull View Post
....hmmmm, any chance you are being biased here i.e. taking sides? I mean your friend probably isn't telling you everything, and you put blinders on as to what might be happening behind closed doors when she deals with her ex.

You called the guys an "ass", your friend might just be a wench
It's also possible that the guys an ass. Rockscan is anything but biased .. trust me.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 03:47 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,962
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

I had a fantastic lawyer for 6 years until end of litigation (or so I had hoped) in 2015. My ex took me back to court this year and I successfully represented myself.

I am currently out of the province and was just alerted by my old lawyer that my ex is scheduled for a motion today. I was not given any notice of this application by my ex. My ex-lawyer happened to notice the name on the docket this morning. Fortunately my ex-lawyer is going to represent me today. Won't my ex be surprised haha.

I cannot say enough about hard-working, dedicated lawyers.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2016, 06:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 141
ifonlyihadknown is on a distinguished road
Default

I see several main issues with the Family Court system.
  1. It's designed by lawyers to do things the lawyer way. This leaves out everyone else who isn't a lawyer. It's an old boys (and girls) club and outsiders aren't welcome.
  2. Win or loose, the lawyer gets paid. The longer things drag out, the more both lawyers benefit. Loose the case, you still get paid.
  3. Lawyer's who game the system are difficult to catch. Everything is subjective. I imagine (I'm not an expert) that a lawyer has to very blatantly screw up to be scanctioned.
Given the risks and rewards for an overly zealous or unscrupulous lawyer, it's no surprise that things turn out the way they do.

I'm not ignoring bad behaviour by the other participants, but the system as it is only encourages longer trials and bad behaviour.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.