Page 306 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half

she stated, that she could hand in the bundle when she got back from the Christmas and
her New Year holidays, this was clearly not adequate as there should have been a case
handler in her position to handle the Applicants case load.
55. Effectually a text was sent to the solicitor stating that this was going to have an effect on
families Christmas and New Year due to the Appellant knowing that the Court had
ordered the bundle to be submitted to the Court by a certain date and this time limit given
by a judge not being merited, a text was received back from the solicitors, this stated the
following:- “to be at the office by 18:00 PM” The Appellants mother attended and two
bundles was Paginated and indexed which took until around01:30 AM. Miss Ward was
not happy due to the time that had to be spent dealing with this as she was due to fly out
in the early hours to Ireland. The bundles were left with the Appellants mother, this was
achieved so that one mastered copy could behand-delivered to the Court in the morning
on the 23 December 2015 and the other bundle was recorded delivered via the Post Office
to the police.
56. Miss Ward stated after the Christmas and New Year holidays she would get the
Appellant's bundle ready so it could be given to him. The Appellant had not seen the new
bundle as the solicitor did not want to meet him, and due to the lateness in which the
bundle was made to get into the court and the police, there was not the time for the
Appellant to see the new bundle.
57. One of the texts that were sent to the Appellants mother please see below. Stated: that on
the 22/12/2015, “This is a legal aid case Lorraine and Simon need to recognise that he is
not paying privately so needs to work within the constraints of the legal aid system.”
Upon receiving the text the Appellants mother was upset, it was the Court who had set the
day for the bundle to be within the Court, not the Appellant.
58. The solicitors should have dealt with the case in a timely manner and made sure that
things were not left to the last minute.
59. All that the Appellant ever wanted was for the solicitors to do what was right and needed
for the Applicant their client, to which never happened.
60. When overseeing the past activities of: “the case handlers”, it is a sure fact that things was
always left or not achieved at all, this would always lead the Appellants to his
disappointment, in turn, causing wrongful suffering and loss, this seems to continue to
leave the Appellant being in receipt of getting the blame, when he should not.
61. It was also upsetting because it seemed as if: - the Appellant paid for the solicitor's
services then things would have been addressed a lot differently. I feel it should make no
difference between paying privately or having legal aid put in place, a solicitor's job is to
represent their client to the best of their ability seek justice for their client the best they
possibly can, this was not the case throughout this case. After the Christmas and the New
Year's holidays, we had to keep asking for the Appellant's bundle, we managed to get this
in the beginning of February 2016, not long before the trial was due to start, it would also
seem the solicitors was having problems getting a barrister for the Appellant still had not
seen a barrister, this was at the time of the full hearing at the Magistrate's Court, the
original barrister that represented the Appellant at the Magistrate's hearings, was on
sabbatical leave. It is also noted that the acting solicitors, did not want a meeting with the
Appellant and was mostly dealing with the Appellants mother.
62. On the 19th February 2016 the acting Solicitors put into the Court for a mention hearing,
the Appellant believed this was due to nondisclosure, but the solicitors had also put an
application into Break Fixture this was dismissed by His Honour Judge Morrison, this
was three days before the three-day Appeal hearing was due to start.
63. “The Court will not and does not accede to any application for The Appellants.”