Sooner or later, and, now it has happened

[icowden]

How about £55million for one firm in three years?
There are loads of others.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ing-deportation-flights-Channel-migrants.html

Is that the best you can do? A heavily biased article from the daily fail, that fails to realise that these people are entitled to Legal Aid and that the people representing them are entitled to get paid for it?

This is the newspaper that called the judiciary "enemies of the people".
Again - if the Government worked with France to process claims faster they could save £55 million over three years as they wouldn't need Legal Aid to go to court.

 

[Cirrus]

An interesting piece, well I though it was, from people who try to help the migrants in Calais:- Calais activists: Migrants call us from boats asking for help - BBC News

An extract from one of the helpers:-

"Ludovic shares her frustration with the government. "They apply the same solution for 30 years now, and the solution doesn't change anything," he says.
The 38-year-old believes that many of the people now trying to reach the UK didn't plan to when they first arrived in Europe but after years of sleeping rough decide the UK is the only option.
"Europe doesn't accept them, doesn't offer them a real life with the possibility to have a good job and to rent a flat," he says. For him, this is not an abstract debate - there need to be practical measures to stop people making the dangerous sea crossing, which are continuing even during the riskier winter months."

 

[Bromptonaut]

How about £55million for one firm in three years?

There are loads of others.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ing-deportation-flights-Channel-migrants.html

Duncan Lewis are a very big firm and the Mail's account suggests £55million is across the entire field of legal aid work. That's gross charges not profit. It may include money like barristers' fees that DL simply pass on.

The standard of first instance decision making in the Home Office is abysmal - I know this as I worked for 11 years within the parts of the MoJ concerned with, amongst many other things, monitoring the cases going to Tribunal. There was an HO mindset that meant cases that looked difficult were declined - let the Tribunal sort it out.

It was proposed that there be a 'polluter pays' principle in how the tribunals are funded to incentivise HO (and DWP) to improve decision making.

If the HO could get decisions 'right first time' the part of that £55m accounted for by immigration would be substantially reduced.

 

[Pale Rider]

Is that the best you can do? A heavily biased article from the daily fail, that fails to realise that these people are entitled to Legal Aid and that the people representing them are entitled to get paid for it?

This is the newspaper that called the judiciary "enemies of the people".
Again - if the Government worked with France to process claims faster they could save £55 million over three years as they wouldn't need Legal Aid to go to court.

You can rest assured the sum claimed is spot on, although I accept @Bromptonaut's point it includes all their Legal Aid work.

Were you unfortunate enough to get into a criminal scrape, as a working taxpayer you would find yourself making a substantial contribution to your legal bill.

Some offences no longer qualify for legal aid, all because 'we are short of money'.

Yet millions upon millions can be spaffed on economic migrants, many of whom are seeking to deceive the system.

I think the average Joe can be forgiven for being a bit grumpy about that.

 

[lazybloke]

You can rest assured the sum claimed is spot on, although I accept @Bromptonaut's point it includes all their Legal Aid work.

Were you unfortunate enough to get into a criminal scrape, as a working taxpayer you would find yourself making a substantial contribution to your legal bill.

Some offences no longer qualify for legal aid, all because 'we are short of money'.

Yet millions upon millions can be spaffed on economic migrants, many of whom are seeking to deceive the system.

I think the average Joe can be forgiven for being a bit grumpy about that.

The average racist might be grumpy. Bad luck.

 

[theclaud]

Are you sure you are a lawyer Paley?

LOL.

 

[theclaud]

LOL.

Beaten to the lolz by Muggers, I see!

 

[Pale Rider]

The average racist might be grumpy. Bad luck.

Feeble attempt to play the race card, but no less than I expected.

Don't worry, the Legal Aid Board doesn't discriminate.

A British Asian or black man would have to pay just as much in contributions as anyone else.

 

[winjim]

Again a startling lack of imagination shown when interpreting the comments of a French politician about the English on a highly controversial issue.

 

[Deleted member 28]

If anything I was extending sympathies , it can't be very nice having so little ability to empathise.

As someone with the same problem at times it's really ok to be honest as you don't notice it until conversations like this arise.

Even then because of how I am I tend to see a lot of it as self induced so still not a problem.

An example of which, in the local news today there's a lass has who has 8 kids but now a couple of them are over 16 her benefits have been reduced, she's complaining they have to use foodbanks to survive!

My initial reaction is 'why have 8 kids if you can't afford to feed them' and why not get them earning in order to help you pay for the food?

Not one ounce of sympathy at all.

 

[Bromptonaut]

You can rest assured the sum claimed is spot on, although I accept @Bromptonaut's point it includes all their Legal Aid work.

Were you unfortunate enough to get into a criminal scrape, as a working taxpayer you would find yourself making a substantial contribution to your legal bill.

Some offences no longer qualify for legal aid, all because 'we are short of money'.

Yet millions upon millions can be spaffed on economic migrants, many of whom are seeking to deceive the system.

I think the average Joe can be forgiven for being a bit grumpy about that.

Couple of points:

1. Genuine question - what offences do not qualify for legal aid
2. You won't contribute to Criminal Legal Aid if, as Asylum Seekers are, you're potless.
3. Still waiting for evidence that they're mostly eco migrants. The percentage of claims that succeed would tend to point the other way.

 

[Bromptonaut]

As someone with the same problem at times it's really ok to be honest as you don't notice it until conversations like this arise.

Even then because of how I am I tend to see a lot of it as self induced so still not a problem.

An example of which, in the local news today there's a lass has who has 8 kids but now a couple of them are over 16 her benefits have been reduced, she's complaining they have to use foodbanks to survive!

My initial reaction is 'why have 8 kids if you can't afford to feed them' and why not get them earning in order to help you pay for the food?

Not one ounce of sympathy at all.

Please could you provide a link to that news report; professional interest in why turning 16 would disqualify.

 

[mudsticks]

As someone with the same problem at times it's really ok to be honest as you don't notice it until conversations like this arise.

Even then because of how I am I tend to see a lot of it as self induced so still not a problem.

An example of which, in the local news today there's a lass has who has 8 kids but now a couple of them are over 16 her benefits have been reduced, she's complaining they have to use foodbanks to survive!

My initial reaction is 'why have 8 kids if you can't afford to feed them' and why not get them earning in order to help you pay for the food?

Not one ounce of sympathy at all.

So a war, bombardment even by your own government, or persecution for your political beliefs, or even your sexuality, being the 'wrong' ethnicity, your land having been invaded by dangerous militia, or even heaven help us , daring to be a woman in a country where existing as such, means your freedoms have all but been taken away.

Are 'self induced' are they??

As for the other bit about your local news , I have no idea about that particular case, and it's not really comparable is it??

 

[winjim]

Please could you provide a link to that news report; professional interest in why turning 16 would disqualify.

Child benefit presumably.

 

[theclaud]

I was moderated in the other place for speculating that he may be a part time court usher. Am I right in thinking you’re a scribbler @Pale Rider ?

I reckon Fozy had it right in this one that I saved for posterity.