Friday, January 22, 2010

Marching Orders Part #6

Law firm Ding, Dong & Dell had acted for Mine Host for many years. They were privy to all his affairs.

Mine Host becomes embroiled in a dust-up with his landlord. The landlord, an arm of a merchant bank, is named (say) McBank.

Mine Host was being shafted by the landlord. In hindsight this was landlord's original intention.

Mine Host visited Ding, Dong & Dell in their CBD tower chambers (river-view from each office) met with the managing partner, explained the unfolding scenario and asked would there be any impediment to D,D & D acting for him in the matter?

"Yes, no conflict of interest, no impediment whatsoever to prevent us acting for you"

Time passed, A mediation conference was looming, Mine Host contacted Ding, Dong & Dell for desperately needed advice.

The response was a terse letter explaining there was a conflict of interest for them and that they would not be able to act in this matter.

Too panicked to have time to spare for shoving pins, nay roofing nails, into little wax dolls of his erstwhile lawyers, Mine Host went to the next office tower, rode the lift up to the first law firm listed on the lobby wall, and found himself a new lawyer.

The mediation conference is in the offices of Acme Properties, a hard-nosed ruthless bunch of bullies somehow involved in this mess.

Water is sipped & small talk made until all parties arrive, the intercom peals, & a chirpy female voice announces to the directors of Acme that their lawyer has arrived: a "Mr So-and-So of Ding, Dong & Dell."

This was going too far. Mine Host objected most vehemently to the presence of Ding, Dong & Dell, stating the reason why.

The conference, when eventually held, is a failure.

The matter is finally decided in the most expensive of circumstances in Sydney. A Three-cornered spat, Mine Host had not imagined there could exist such a thing, a legal dispute consisting of Three equally opposing parties.

The Three parties are:
Mine Host
XYZ Insurance Company (representing Acme Properties, by now fallen out with McBank)
McBank

Readers may be assured it was unpleasant enough being taken on by McBank, without having XYZ pumelling from the opposite direction. XYZ & McBank used most of their energy getting stuck into each other, Mine Host was more or less crumbs, however that was all that was needed. Mine Host lost his shirt.

The clanger?

At the hearing XYZ Insurance Company were represented by the firm Ding, Dong & Dell.

4 comments:

Palate Sensations said...

That really sucks!

Legal Eagle said...

That's appalling. Definitely a valid reason to sack your lawyer.

真心 said...

看看blog調整心情,又要來繼續工作,大家加油.........................

phatboy said...

The you should appeal as the lawyers were acting in clear breach of their professional obligations towards you.

Having the knowledge about your affairs they should not have embarked on litigation against you.

It maybe that you cannot successfully appeal the decision; however, you may have a valid claim against BG&J in any event.