No single profession attracts the ire of Barbadians like lawyers. On a daily basis For example, we often hear complaints about lawyers taking unreasonably long periods of time to transfer monies from clients accounts to their clients. The complaints come from Barbadians living overseas who having entrusted life long savings (pensions) to lawyers to settle various transactions in absentia or Barbadians on the rock who have no choice but to take on the stress of the legal system to process routine transactions.
The Bar Association (BA) has done little to assuage the concerns by Barbadians that it is an efficient self regulating body. Suggestions to include ordinary folks on the BA’s Disciplinary Committee has not met with a favourable response. There is a sense lawyers and by extension the legal system has the country in a vice grip headlock. Where are ordinary citizens to turn for justice if the Court System, its trusted officers (lawyers) and the BA continue to NOT satisfactorily resolve concerns from citizenry?
BU accepts bad apples are to be found in all professions – doctors, engineers, construction class, bankers and the list is very long. However, what cannot be denied is the ‘omnipresence’ nature of the legal profession on our little society. What cannot be denies is the right of Barbadians to assign priority to issues affecting them as they think fit. The time for citizens, ordinary and others, to fight back.
Take Note Commenters
The objective of BU LAWYERS in the NEWS page is to highlight reports of interest to the public about the activities of Barbados based lawyers.
No Comments will be allowed.
If you have information you think qualify email Barbados Underground by clicking on the following LINK.
This comment from the AG characterizes the ridiculous process that has been ongoing in the House of Assembly of Jokers for the past weeks.
-We elect ‘LEADERS’ to represent OUR collective interests.
-THEY appoint officials to do the work
-Then the parade the people that THEY appointed in public, to take the licks for the shiite that is ongoing.
Standard management practice is that those with ultimate responsibility step forward to accept, and deal with WEAKNESSES, while sorting out their internal inefficiencies in private.
Instead we have these jokers looking to grab the spotlight with every idiotic, knee-jerk, ‘initiative’, only to blame the friends & family that THEY appointed when the shit hits the fan.
But brass bowls like that kinda thing, so Bushie is just observing….
You want Mottley and her AG (Executive) to pursue a dictatorial approach as it pertains to lawyers being intimidated to hold lazy judges (Judiciary) accountable?
You REALLY think that it is the duty of the Bar Club to enforce proper performance on their members who are employed by the crown?
Boss, the ONLY interest of the Bar is to protect their professional status and to ensure that no kind of audit of client fees EVER occurs bout here, and to ensure that the bar remains ’solid’…
It is the role of the damn ADMINISTRATION (ie the Ministry, PS, AG, and ultimate the PM) to ensure that proper management practices and RESULTS are obtained for the salaries paid.
You had better have ANOTHER look at the MPH video about Singapore….
It is actually simply a matter of setting MINIMUM performance STANDARDS and enforcing them. (Check out what a ‘meritocracy’ means).
The idea that adding more lazy, unsupervised judges to the pool of non-performers would do ANYTHING except increase the Mercedes Benz fleet was always laughable….
Good luck with having lawmakers who are made up of many lawyers be agents for change.
This article will interest you.
Good morning Boss…
No interest really…
Ralph Jemmott writes as if this is some kind on anomaly, when he HAS to know that this shiite is endemic.
It is precisely because we all PRETEND that things are generally OK that such wickedness prevails.
Why is Jemmott not calling DAILY, for those shiite lawyers to be subjected to annual audits of their clients accounts, with the results to be published publicly, .. just like they publish financial statements of public companies and banks that hold customer funds?
Why is Jemmott not calling on the FSC to apply their anti money laundering rules to these damn lawyers – just like they do to little people like vendors who want to open a small bank account?
Perhaps (??) like some others who will not be mentioned here, Jemmott has some legal ‘connections’ and wants to avoid their wrath… 🙂
Lotta shiite…. A fake attempt at ‘righteous indignation’ by Jemmott …in Bushie’s humble (or perhaps not-so-humble) opinion… LOL
Jemmott is not of my time – perhaps yours LOL – but you are aware many of our esteemed lawyers attended schools with sought after school ties. Would a teacher of such men be inclined to advocate what you suggested? Barbados is a small and clannish society. You are astute enough to complete the blogmaster’s thought.
Right on all counts.
Perhaps even some level of responsibility for the status quo..?
The blogmaster reminds me of a man on a bus for which has lost its four wheels four wheels. Instead of looking at his dire situation, the man takes the time to point out the four wheel are still rolling down the highway.
” there are some judges who “persistently delayed decisions”,
So what you gonna do bout it willis.
A great fan of Ralph Jemmott but I disagree with the following.
” Laws can and must be passed that prevent the monies from the sale of a client’s estate being deposited in any lawyers’ account and if such monies are paid, the same must by law be paid into the client’s account within a very constricted period of time, under penalty of the severest censure. What is so difficult about that?”
New laws for the same crooked lawyers will not solve this problem. The solution is to separate the lawyer from the vast bulk of the client funds from the very start.
Here is the solution:
1. A serious, detailed and HONEST estimate is made of the lawyers fees.
2. The lawyer is paid his fees.
3. The remainder minus a suitable small portion is paid to the client. That small portion is then used to settle any outstanding balances.
4. All transactions should be completed in a short time.
Basically, at the settling, there should be a cheque for the lawyer, a cheque for the client and perhaps a third cheque to settle ‘outstanding’ fees (someone can work out the third cheque bit, I am not being paid). T
The lawyer’s and the client’s monies need to be separated at the settling.
Comments are welcome.
There is an even simpler solution.
All Lawyers SHALL maintain one or more escrow accounts ONLY for Clients Funds.
On completion of settlements, the lawyer SHALL instruct the payer to
– Disburse the client’s portion of the settlement directly to the client and the lawyer’s fees directly to the lawyer
– Deposit ALL funds received to their Escrow account wherein the client SHALL be notified in writing of their funds availability for collection no later than 5 working days after the funds have cleared.
A bit disappointed with RJ’s article. Calling for new laws and not fully addressing the elephant in the room. He addressed the rear end – the crooked lawyers.
He ignored the crooked judges and the farcical crooked justice system that spits on victims that comes before it.
Nothing will change until bloggers grow a pair. Sitting in a stalled bus, commenting on the wipers and watching two of the wheels rolling down the road is now the national pastime
The truth is that knee jerk ‘solutions’ like demanding separate cheques may not be the solution either.
Serious issues can arise when, say an insurance company writes a payout cheque to an individual – only to have someone else crawl out of the woodwork to claim THEIR just part of payout.
Most companies will not expose themselves to that possibility, NOR pay the cost of the research and due diligence needed to do so.
THAT IS THE VALUE THAT LAWYERS ARE MEANT TO BRING TO THE PROCESS.
The VERY simple solution is to enforce the VERY SAME laws that apply to OTHER professions who hold client’s money such as banks, insurance companies etc.. (and who would be inclined to misuse those funds too – except for the consequences)
ANNUAL AUDITS and public review of results.
(although Bushie admits that we have this at the very highest level with the Auditor General and yet the process is frustrated by the political/lawyer fraternity who are able to frustrate the needed consequences)
In reality, the ultimate answer was enunciated by EWB some years ago when he proposed that all lawyers be given a free cruise …in a leaky boat… in rough seas…
If I may (in layman speak) offer a few remarks…
1st… when I read Mr Jemmont’s remarks I copied the same section that I then saw had caught @Theo’s attention … I had, however, a diametrical different analysis.
2nd … I also thought as the Blogmaster and @BushGriot noted that Jemmont was essentially kowtowing to a system which he perpetuated (and effectively helped build as a leading educator) and was somewhat ‘mealy-mouthed’ (even if eloquently so😎) in his initial remarks!
That said … his comments that “”Laws can and must be passed that prevent the monies from the sale of a client’s estate being deposited in any lawyers’ account and if such […] by law be paid into the client’s account within a very constricted period of time…”” is a bluntly sound doctrine that should have been done EONS ago … the reasons it has not are difficult to grasp but easy to understand (as suggested above).
Moreover, it comprehensively incorporates the other alternative suggestions with its blunt note that “such monies […] same must by law be paid into the client’s account within a very constricted period of time”.
And to @BushGriot …”when, say an insurance company writes a payout cheque to an individual – only to have someone else crawl out of the woodwork to claim THEIR just part of payout” …
… isn’t it the RESPONSIBILITY of the Insurer/Payer to ENSURE that no fraud or other misrepresentation is made regarding any payout!!
I am taken aback by the remark that “Most companies will not expose themselves to that possibility, NOR pay the cost of the research and due diligence needed to do so.” … If fraud is adjudged the burden would be on WHO was mamaguyed of course but still a great burden would initially be on the company surely!
And to your other point, if there is a “VERY simple solution [and] VERY SAME laws that apply to OTHER professions who hold client’s money” then surely it would also have been automatically applied to lawyers.
The fact that it doesn’t is many fold but surely two factors stand out.
1)_attorneys act as key agents for the client as they know very personal, in depth facts about same. As such the TRUST of client to attorney is considerable right up to the point of betrayal. That trust dependency generally DOES NOT happen with a bank or an insurance company or any other business relationship!
2)_in most civil matters (like land deals) clients do not perceive that it’s necessary to establish a contract within a contract with their attorney i.e to determine when monies MUST be paid after a transaction is completed. They should and it should be de rigueur. Just as lawyers will often demand a payment schedule (deposit prepay to start, and installments along the way) so should clients DEMAND such.
Not to suggest that it’s the fault of clients in these matters but simply stated this (swamp life) has been on going far TOOO long and as consumers we MUST enforce change by being more proactive…. to as you say exact “consequences” on these entitled lawyers.
BTW @the Blogmaster, are there no attorneys in Bim who see the upside to building a practice (lucrative too I would imagine) on the basis of servicing the many aggrieved clients like the family highlighted above.
That’s a sizeable sum ($457,000+) and using the same legal system to enforce a lien on the lawyer’s assets (surely he can’t hide eva thing) and sell property or seize bank accounts would be worthwhile.
Yes of course it means the plaintiff family are giving up monies which is already theirs but 90% (let’s say or even if only 70% is recovered) of $457K is substantially better that 0%!
It’s confusing that the family got not a penny since the judgement was lodged against this attorney …
Life can be a *itch … had this attorney suffered a mugging which left him badly handicapped or other misfortunate struck a member of his family we would be empathetic being unaware of his evil business behaviour … now knowing the above it would more be to that ‘karma’ we hear so much about!
Do you mean a lawyer willing to create a niche that feeds on the dysfunction of the legal establishment?
Gentlemen, I have read your submission and though in principle I agree with them, my perspective remains unchanged. You see a system that can be made to work with minor fixes. But it is difficult to see how this cabal of experienced crooks would fix/enforce anything that would separate them from their client funds.
Sometimes, I wonder if this system is not working exactly how it is expected to work. Victims come to the court, they see fancy lawyering and then they get robbed three times when justice is dispensed.
1) The crooked lawyer gets to keep all of the money the money
2) They then have to pay a next (possibly just as crooked) lawyer for his her representation. Allow me to misquote Benjamin Franklin: A “Bajan’ between two lawyers is like a fish between two cats.
3) A clown in a gown utters some sweet words and send them away empty handed. A mockery, a scam, a scam, farcical junk justice.
Those who run this system and benefit from it will be reluctant to change it; and if they do, they will mouth the sweet words but continue to deliver junk justice to clients.
I read your submission, but you may have the same failing of Mr. RJ. The solution to this problem is to keep the bulk of the clients’ funds out of the hands/accounts of lawyers.
You still planning to retire in Barbados ?
Not if I can avoid it.
Was planning to move in at cuhdear, but she is in hiding (I hope all is well with her), there has been invite from Donna or ‘The A guy’ and Lorenzo is not on the list) on my squatters list as I suspect his welcome would include a bullwhip and a pot of urine.
So, it is either Trinidad or Florida, but I am hoping that I don’t find any flights that go past Miami.
Would you update your image carousel to
1. Reflect the additional names of Ernest Jackman.
2. The 2nd lawyer who recently got locked up and
3. A front view of David Bryan
David Bryan has carefully managed his online presence. No frontal image to be found.
Norman Leroy Lynch is the name you are looking for.
Did he get time?
Do you know how much?
Do you have a link?
Phillip Nicholls complainant are dead …
In a small section in today’s BT’s epaper
“Dead complainants creates challenges in case against a lawyer”.
“Nicholls is alleged to have stolen $674,172 belonging to Hazel Connor, and engaging in transactions totaling $674,172 being the proceeds of the crime between Feb 28 and October 16, 2008, but he has not yet been arraigned in High Court on these charges.”
Yesterday when the case was called the DPP said “The complainants I have a challenge with, in the sense that they are dead”.
Cases of these types are sham justice… The delay and delay until you die..
It puzzles me that these lawyers have an idea that you will die before they do.
Two categories of complainant in Barbados – Reluctant or Dead
Here’s a snippet from a 2019 article
“Neither the Barbados Bar Association (BBA) nor the police can take action against crooked lawyers if their clients who have been wronged do not come forward.
So says president of the association Liesel Weekes, who admitted that while there had been ‘talk’ of certain lawyers being dishonest, evidence had to be presented to justify those claims and to have that judicial officer punished.”
So you step forward and the system stalls and strings you along until you are dead. Then they call your name in court one of their courts after you are dead.
Judge “Theo, are you here? Calling Theo to court B. Looks as if Mr Theo does not want us to proceed with this case today, let’s postpone it”.
Court clerk “Your honor, Theo is dead”.
Judge: “Dead. He wasted my time. He should have croaked years ago.
Who is the next croaker? Oops I mean what is the next case?”
Cannot believe this. I feel like crying for some of these victims.
Forced to play the silly game where the final outcomes are robbery or death.
Boss, you NEED to write some calypsos…
You are SWEET AS SHIITE in your articulation of the persistent shaving cream being liberally dispensed in Brassbados.
…and you make it as CLEAR as glass, what the legal degenerates are up to… even BBs such as Enuff and the others of that ilk cannot fail to get your message…
Please Theo… or should Bushie say, the ‘Mighty Gazzarts KC’… a calypso