FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
‘FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education’
The information provided below is not legal advice, and it may not apply in every situation. FAIR is not a legal service and we do not recommend particular lawyers or firms. We do not provide legal advice. This page is for information purposes only.
ALERT
We are hearing about more and more cases where the time limitations for filing have lapsed due to a failure by a plaintiff’s legal representative to meet deadlines. Claimants should stay informed of what is happening with their files and forms and ask the questions about filing dates and limitations. Please see some of the decisions and articles listed at the bottom of this page for details
More information on choosing a lawyer or if you have issues with your legal bill here.
***************************************
FAIR does not accept responsibility for comments, opinions, statistical information etc. associated with the links listed below. Any opinions, points of view, etc. are not necessarily shared by FAIR.
The Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) has been in consultation since June over issues with contingency fee agreements and now feedback from the profession is starting to come in.
The Federation of Ontario Law Associations (FOLA) has taken a stance and is advising the law society use caution in its review as it believes problems for lawyer-client relations could arise if the LSUC puts certain rules in place.
When I first became involved with the Hit Twice campaign, it was a relief to find out there were other victims out there like me. I was injured in a car accident and then taken advantage of by the lawyer who was supposed to protect my rights. It didn’t take long to find out that I was hardly alone.
Organized bar groups are ringing alarm bells about the constitutionality of various proposed changes to the Criminal Code’s impaired driving provisions, but some legal academics contend the warnings are overblown.
In 2002, the Law Society of Upper Canada amended its Rules of Professional Conduct to allow lawyers to pay referral fees to other lawyers. The rationale was that referral fees would encourage lawyers to refer work to lawyers better able to serve a client’s interests, reducing the likelihood that the lawyer would accept a retainer to act on a matter that may be beyond his or her ability. Ultimately, it would be a “win-win-win”: the referring lawyer would receive a payment, the referee lawyer would obtain a new client, and the client would be served by a lawyer well-qualified to act.
Lawyer/client communication-related claims are the number one source of malpractice claims in all areas of practice. These claims can arise when there is a mis-communication or no communication at all. The lawyer and client can be confused over who is doing what. Were instructions received but ignored? Was the lawyer supposed to do something which wasn’t done? Was a recommendation not taken and subsequently regretted, leading to the client ultimately blaming the lawyer? Good practice habits can help eliminate these problem areas. Let’s take a look at the habits that can help you take instructions and give recommendations effectively.
http://avoidaclaim.com/2017/go