Fisch & Co

Phoenix House
3 South Parade
Leeds
West Yorkshire
UK


Solicitor :
Bilkis Mahmood

0113 243 1714

Fisch Solicitors of Leeds Legal Expertise Beyond Compare… How They Can Transform Your £21,000 County Court Claim Into a £21,000 Debt (to them)

Hi, my name’s Chris Ineson. I used to be a hard-working, small-businessman. Until I turned to the legal profession for help, that is.

That’s when I discovered solicitors put themselves first, and can ruin you without compunction.

If you’ve had an experience anywhere near- similar to mine, particularly at the hands of either of the two outfits below, please write and tell me about it. I may be able to assist you: I have friends at both the BBC and The Mail on Sunday, and they love this kind of material.

These are the outfits featured in this short horror-story:

Inesons Solicitors Albion Street Cleckheaton West Yorkshire BD19 3JG 01274 872202 Partners: Paul Tennant Normandale & Joy M Potentier

Fisch & Co Solicitors Phoenix House 3 South Parade Leeds LS1 5QX 0113 243 1714 Proprietor: (Mr) Isadore Fisch Fisch Solicitors

Here’s What They Did For Me Or: Here’s How They Did For Me I n 1993, I started a mail-order business. Operating from a home-office, with just one part-time girl to help, we did pretty well. In fact, BBC2 made a full-length documentary about me. From about 1995, my solicitor was Paul Normandale of Inesons Solicitors; he advised me on everything, both business and personal. Mistakenly, as it turned out, I regarded him as an ally. Becoming established, I started to rent out our customer and enquirer data to other direct-mail businesses. By 2002, these data were pretty extensive – over half a million records. And valuable.

Then, in April 2002 my computer – and all the back-up disks – ended up in the hands of the police. Nothing came of this, and later the same year they said I could have it back. But they didn’t tell me. Instead, Inesons Solicitors, in the shape of Mr Paul Normandale, secretly travelled seventy miles to pick up what had been almost the entire contents of my office, including my computer and back-up disks. He put the lot in his strong-room (and never charged me any rent). Amazing.

The Law Society even commented later: “We’ve never heard of a solicitor offering free warehousing-facilities”. Then he “lost” it. More accurately, the computer, complete with all the back-up disks, simply disappeared. An unkind person might conclude that the loss was deliberate, an attempt to get rid of material that could turn out embarrassing, but that would be unfair. The “loss” happened in late 2002. Or maybe early 2003; they’ve never had the courtesy to tell me.

I’m a fairly patient type, but by 2006 I got tired of excuses and promises to put the matter in the hands of insurers. So I took Paul Normandale’s blunt advice and issued a civil claim at Leeds County Court (6LS53840). Not having much money, I represented myself, obtaining what’s called Judgment and Costs in about September 2006. This means that the defendant had been “found guilty”, so to speak, and that they’d have to pay my legal costs from then on. I thought I was home and dry. But I’d reckoned without the outstanding expertise of Fisch & Co Solicitors, who were about to step in and take control of my case. Next, a valuation had to be established, ready for a trial for value. Lacking a lawyer’s fine education, I thought I’d be out of my depth preparing for trial; so I trustingly decided to find a solicitor to handle it for me. After e-mailing a few likely law-firms in Leeds with an outline of the case, emphasising that I’d already obtained judgment and costs, I soon had a shortlist. Judging by the number of replies, it must have looked an attractive proposition. Picking Fisch and Company, I met with Simon Batt, then a partner in the firm, now working elsewhere. He was very upbeat and enthusiastic; not surprising, considering he’d been presented with an open goal-mouth and fees somewhere north of £20,000.

Here’s the story, as related in papers just filed at Leeds County Court. On 17 May 2006 I issued claim number 6LS53840 at Leeds County Court against a firm of solicitors, Inesons of Cleckheaton, who, during late 2002 or early 2003, “lost” important property belonging to me. Representing myself, I obtained judgment and costs in about September of that year, subsequently engaging the Defendant firm to prepare for and represent me in what would have been the resulting trial for value, originally set for 24 October, but vacated. A Conditional Fee Agreement was signed on 28 September 2006; expert witnesses were sought, and a valuation of approximately £21,000 was eventually placed on my lost property. On or about 1 November 2006, Inesons Solicitors made a Part 36 payment into court of £4,000. In a letter dated 5 November 2006, Simon Batt, then partner of the Defendant firm, advised me that this amount was unacceptable, and that we should proceed to trial. The next trial date, 2 January 2007, was aborted because Ian Jones of the Defendant firm simply neglected to prepare my case.

On 19 January, with a fresh trial- date set for 26 February, Inesons Solicitors served an amended disclosure list on me, belatedly raising issues already well-known to us, but which my barrister, Mr De La Poer, after two cancelled meetings, eventually said would necessitate an adjournment. On 12 February 2007, Mrs Bilkis Mahmood of the Defendant firm led me to believe that the matters raised by Inesons Solicitors obliged me to settle before trial. Under the distinct impression that I would receive £4,000, net of any costs, I reluctantly agreed. The Defendant firm say that they then attempted to negotiate further on my behalf, but, assuming she was cognisant of the true position, this was just a cynical attempt to mitigate Fisch’s own “loss”. In a letter dated 16 March 2007, Mrs Mahmood informed me that Fisch Solicitors would be retaining the £4,000 that had been paid into court, as part- payment of their costs, in the region of £20,000.

They also told me they reserved the right to sue me for the balance. According to the Defendants, my position had become untenable because information had “come to the knowledge of Inesons quite recently”, and, “It was not our duty nor responsibility to advise your opponents of…” These statements, among others, demonstrate negligence of a high order, for the following reason. The information referred to was not only spelt out in my original claim form, filed at court in 2005, and in my statement dated 10 July 2006, it was also raised by me with the Defendants on at least three occasions, once in the presence of Counsel. I allege that had the Defendants taken proper care of my case, and if what they are now saying is true, they should have advised me to settle for the £4,000 the moment it was received by the court. Whereupon, they would also have received payment of their costs from Inesons Solicitors – including a £472.73 disbursement paid by me to the expert witness, which I include in my claim.

So there you have it; £21,000 worth of property, the basis of a viable business, poured down the drain by one solicitor; the same amount lost through the (alleged) negligence of another. And a debt to go with it. That’s £40,000 lost to the legal “profession.” It’s beyond parody. And you know what? These two firms are incapable of writing letters that have grammatical integrity, nor anything approaching accuracy. I have reams of their letters, seemingly composed by morons. Considering that a lawyer’s livelihood is almost wholly predicated upon a supposed ability to interpret and set down the written word with precision, it’s come to a pretty pass when you see cretinous syntax and spelling such as “monitory”; infantile punctuation (documents passim); together with an institutional disregard for accuracy (£12,000 becoming £4,000 within two paragraphs). How can it be that lawyers’ mystique, and ability to issue substantial “professional” bills can endure, when they send out papers seemingly written by ten-year olds? Maybe that’s why most don’t earn very much. If you’re contemplating litigation, think twice before you employ a solicitor. In my opinion and experience, the entire profession’s no more than a bunch of chancers. Update 23 March 2007 Here’s the text of a dim-witted letter to me from Fisch & Co, dated 23 March. Dear Sir Further to your attempt to disgrace the reputation of both Fisch & Co and its staff, please note that your attempt has been totally unsuccessful.

Your accusations are completely unfounded and demonstrates to us your vindictive and cruel nature. We do not need to address any of the issues raised in your scandalous letter but merely ask you to look at the character and nature of your own dealings. Please note that any attempt to instigate any action against Fisch & Co will result in us taking an action against you for Defamation. Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours faithfully How’s that for arrogant bullying?

Don’t forget, if you have a similar story, or any comments, you can email me at