Year 3, week 9:

So I had my case yesterday against TopFirst in which my client has gone AWOL. Well, at least  I understood that he’d disappeared and thought that today I’d be applying for an adjournment. But when I arrived at court my solicitor, the infamous SlipperySlope himself, was there to meet me smirking slightly and standing next to a man who he introduced as “our missing client”. Yeh, right. Though I’d never met him, the medical report clearly stated that he was aged twenty-five and this chap looked about fifty. Not only that but according to one of the file notes the client was said to be about six foot two whereas the man to whom I was introduced was about five six. Never having met the client myself I took Slippery to one side and asked: “Are you sure this is our client? He looks shorter and somewhat older than I was expecting.”
“Mere details, BabyB. Look, here’s his passport. Definitely him.”

I examined the passport and it certainly legit but I still didn’t believe it. “What’s going on?” I asked.
“Oh, BabyB, don’t you worry your little barrister head,” he replied.
“We’ll both be worrying if I withdraw from this case and the judge orders an investigation.”
“You wouldn’t dare.”
“I would unless you’re straight with me. However bad, I still want to know what you’re up to.”

He didn’t look at all happy and hesitated for quite a while as he looked at me as if coming to a decision. “Okay. But this one is definitely privileged.”
“Rent a client dot com. Solved many a tricky little situation. Sometimes, your client simply won’t survive cross-examination. Other times, like today, he actually disappears.”
“You what?”
“It fulfils a need, BabyB. We’ve got two hundred grand in costs riding on this hearing and all we need is someone to turn up at court, agree to the witness statements that we’ve already drafted and to answer a few questions about his earnings and his job prospects. Easy really and worth ever penny of the ten grand it costs.”
“You what?”
“Oh, don’t be so precious. You’ve got twenty grand of your own fees riding on the success of this case. That’s on top of the fact that I just happen to know that you hate your opponent’s guts and would do anything to do one over on him.”

He was, of course, right on both counts. So what did I do?

Well, let’s put it this way: TopFirst didn’t come out on the winning side.

November 24, 2008 · Tim Kevan · 2 Comments
Posted in: Uncategorized

2 Responses

  1. Old Sweat - December 4, 2008

    It is rumoured that in the past certain of the more proactive claims farmers might occasionally invent their “accidents” to sell to solicitors. But to invent the victim too, that’s genius!
    And if those claimants never actually existed anyway the meaner insurers can’t commission any nasty video footage of claimants doing rather more than claimed to the quack
    Poor things, the insurers will be forced to make up their losses by lobbying to extend the small track limits so the punters don’t get proper advice and settle for whatever the insurer feels like offering rather than what a court might award.

  2. another lawyer - December 5, 2008

    I don’t actually believe this story. Both barrister and solicitor would be instantly disbarred/struck off if found out.