You won't tell me your name. Therefore you cannot support your claim to be 'a lawyer'. It's only hot air. You are a faker.
And, yes, as a matter of fact, it is a criminal offence to claim to be a lawyer if you are not.
The Solicitors Act, 1974, Section 21: 'Any unqualified person who willfully pretends to be, or takes or uses any name, title, addition or description implying that, he is qualified or recognised by law as qualified to act as a solicitor shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to [F1 a fine not exceeding the fourth level on the standard scale.]'
You would know this if you were a lawyer. You don't know it because you're not.
Well if you are true, why are you allowing your taxes to pay me handsomely as a solicitor.
More fool you for paying me my salary for a job you claim I dont do.
The extract you quote confirms what i said about it being a criminal offence to make such a claim.
And, yes, as a matter of fact, it is a criminal offence to claim to be a lawyer if you are not.
The Solicitors Act, 1974, Section 21: 'Any unqualified person who willfully pretends to be, or takes or uses any name, title, addition or description implying that, he is qualified or recognised by law as qualified to act as a solicitor shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to [F1 a fine not exceeding the fourth level on the standard scale.]'
You would know this if you were a lawyer. You don't know it because you're not.
BTW you are wrong here as it is an offence under the Solicitors Act to claim to be a solicitor...not a lawyer!
Not all lawyers are solicitors, but all solicitors are lawyers.
Oh and I am a solicitor , before you try to claim otherwise
UpminsterO wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:15 am
Why does mr spen appear to dominate this football board with repeated confrontation re his alleged job. Have I missed something about this guy Is he requiring constant attention and comments about his job and knowledge ?
Maybe he was dropped on his head as a child.........
UpminsterO wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:15 am
Why does mr spen appear to dominate this football board with repeated confrontation re his alleged job. Have I missed something about this guy Is he requiring constant attention and comments about his job and knowledge ?
You could always not read his posts Mr Upminstesteban.
What I don’t understand is why, on this forum, many seem to dislike a boarder with real knowledge and experience in a particular field. Me, I welcome educated input from Lawyers, Teachers etc. Why not?
I’ll tell you why not. Some people like spouting off about things they know F-all about and get arsey when corrected by people who actually know. Me, I’m happy to be corrected by someone who really knows.
I’ve long past come to the conclusion that know-it-all types don’t like people who actually do know something based on education and experience. As they say, why let facts spoil a good story. Maybe I’m wrong!
dOh Nut wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:51 am
What I don’t understand is why, on this forum, many seem to dislike a boarder with real knowledge and experience in a particular field. Me, I welcome educated input from Lawyers, Teachers etc. Why not?
I’ll tell you why not. Some people like spouting off about things they know F-all about and get arsey when corrected by people who actually know. Me, I’m happy to be corrected by someone who really knows.
I’ve long past come to the conclusion that know-it-all types don’t like people who actually do know something based on education and experience. As they say, why let facts spoil a good story. Maybe I’m wrong!
1) I don’t have to prove that you’re not a lawyer, solicitor or barrister. You claim that you are so the burden of proof falls on you to prove what you say. You have declined to show such proof.
2) You say, “BTW you are wrong here as it is an offence under the Solicitors Act to claim to be a solicitor...not a lawyer!.”
You have offered no proof that you are a lawyer or solicitor.
3) You say, “ Oh and I am a solicitor , before you try to claim otherwise.”
You have previously claimed to be ‘a lawyer’ at various times on this board.
Ex 1) On Thursday, Apr 18, 2019 1:19 pm, on this forum, on the ‘Joey Barton Having Collar Felt Again’, you wrote
“I am happy to put my 4 decades working as both a defence and prosecution lawyer up against you....”
dOh Nut wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:51 am
What I don’t understand is why, on this forum, many seem to dislike a boarder with real knowledge and experience in a particular field. Me, I welcome educated input from Lawyers, Teachers etc. Why not?
I’ll tell you why not. Some people like spouting off about things they know F-all about and get arsey when corrected by people who actually know. Me, I’m happy to be corrected by someone who really knows.
I’ve long past come to the conclusion that know-it-all types don’t like people who actually do know something based on education and experience. As they say, why let facts spoil a good story. Maybe I’m wrong!
You're wrong.
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
dOh Nut wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:51 am
What I don’t understand is why, on this forum, many seem to dislike a boarder with real knowledge and experience in a particular field. Me, I welcome educated input from Lawyers, Teachers etc. Why not?
I’ll tell you why not. Some people like spouting off about things they know F-all about and get arsey when corrected by people who actually know. Me, I’m happy to be corrected by someone who really knows.
I’ve long past come to the conclusion that know-it-all types don’t like people who actually do know something based on education and experience. As they say, why let facts spoil a good story. Maybe I’m wrong!
You're wrong.
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:51 pm
Actually Baz, you were the first to claim that he wasn't, so prove it or shut up.
As I've already pointed out, I don't have to prove that Spen isn't a lawyer, barrister or solicitor. He has claimed to be both a lawyer and a solicitor. The burden of proof is his, not mine.
If I claimed to have played in two FA Cup Finals you'd want proof, wouldn't you? Surely you wouldn't just accept what I say?
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:51 pm
Actually Baz, you were the first to claim that he wasn't, so prove it or shut up.
As I've already pointed out, I don't have to prove that Spen isn't a lawyer, barrister or solicitor. He has claimed to be both a lawyer and a solicitor. The burden of proof is his, not mine.
If I claimed to have played in two FA Cup Finals you'd want proof, wouldn't you? Surely you wouldn't just accept what I say?
Wrong, I am not claiming anything. I am defending myself against accusations from others.
Oh and since when has there been a burden of proof on a message board?
If you want to deny the truth, then that is up to you. Feel free.
I have no need or desire to prove anything about myself to you because it is irrelevant to my professions what you think. You are irrelevant to my professions
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
Nope, still wrong I'm afraid.
I can live with it if that’s the case. Of course you may be in the ranks of the know-it-all’s. In which case you will say I’m wrong. What else would you say.
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
Nope, still wrong I'm afraid.
I can live with it if that’s the case. Of course you may be in the ranks of the know-it-all’s. In which case you will say I’m wrong. What else would you say.
Nope. I'm far from a know-it-all, so still wrong matey!
Yes you are. You have variously claimed to be a solicitor and a lawyer (see above). Your claims are contradictory and you’ve not explained why. I say that you are neither a solicitor or a lawyer. You have been given ample opportunity to prove that you are, professionally, what you claim to be. You’ve failed to offer any proof that you are legally qualified. Therefore, you are in breach of Section 21.
You say, “I am defending myself against accusations from others.”
Not so. You have made no attempt whatsoever to defend yourself. Proving that one is a lawyer, barrister or solicitor is easy. You’ve offered no proof at all. You simply throw up flak and evade the question.
You say, “I have no need or desire to prove anything about myself..”
That’s true, you’re not obliged to. However, given the nature of of my challenge, and the ease with which you could disprove it – if you were able – there is only one possible conclusion to be drawn from your inability/refusal to do so.
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
Have been before, will be again. Strikes me I’m the only person on this forum ever to admit to being wrong. I think that alone makes my comments right.
Nope, still wrong I'm afraid.
If you say so.
Take it easy mate. Chance and probability dictate that one day you will get something right. Imagine the celebrations we would have when that day comes.
Yes you are. You have variously claimed to be a solicitor and a lawyer (see above). Your claims are contradictory and you’ve not explained why. I say that you are neither a solicitor or a lawyer. You have been given ample opportunity to prove that you are, professionally, what you claim to be. You’ve failed to offer any proof that you are legally qualified. Therefore, you are in breach of Section 21.
You say, “I am defending myself against accusations from others.”
Not so. You have made no attempt whatsoever to defend yourself. Proving that one is a lawyer, barrister or solicitor is easy. You’ve offered no proof at all. You simply throw up flak and evade the question.
You say, “I have no need or desire to prove anything about myself..”
That’s true, you’re not obliged to. However, given the nature of of my challenge, and the ease with which you could disprove it – if you were able – there is only one possible conclusion to be drawn from your inability/refusal to do so.
If you are so interested in my details, then you go do the detective work.
I know who I am & am satisfied I know my qualifications asasboth the Law Society and the ICAEW who are the bodies who admit me .
I could go to the roll of solicitors and give you any name on there, You wouldn't know any different & if you do, then you already know my details
It’s not hard to find out about spenny online. Took me about 2 minutes to 1) find his blog 2) link to his fb profile c) connect the name up as a bona fide solicitor.
slacker wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 6:52 pm It’s not hard to find out about spenny online. Took me about 2 minutes to 1) find his blog 2) link to his fb profile c) connect the name up as a bona fide solicitor.
You have to laugh at just how many message boards and social network platforms he is on. I suppose he gets some vicarious thrill at annoying the hell out of such a cross-section of people.
What do you think would be a reasonable price for them, without me going through everything thats there and working it out it seems pretty high already
It’s not hard to find out about spenny online. Took me about 2 minutes to 1) find his blog 2) link to his fb profile c) connect the name up as a bona fide solicitor.