Yes, I have read itI wondered when Peter Carter Ruck would take an interest in iwantgreatcare.org. Of course, they ought to consider what damages they can obtain for their client because I suspect Neil Bacon hasn't got a great deal in the coffers. Anyway, the hot air was blown today and Pulse was there to feature it.
This what Peter Carter Ruck said
This what Peter Carter Ruck said
"The letter details a number of concerns relating to the site’s comment-moderation policy and warns: ‘We put you on formal notice that if one of our clients is defamed on your website and instructs us to take action, a copy of this letter will be made available to the court at the appropriate stage in the proceedings.’
‘The court’s attention will be drawn to the fact that we have raised our concerns about the risks involved and have reminded you of the need to put robust structures and procedures in place to ensure that no doctor is libelled on the site at any stage.’
Amusingly, I don't think much of Peter Carter Ruck but they will know that this is fair comment considering I went to them for advice regarding my first case against the GMC. To Peter Carter Ruck I was simply apparently an little unimportant junior doctor. In fact, I have never been so humiliated and degraded as I had been with Peter Carter Ruck. The court date against the GMC was drawing near and Peter Carter Ruck had no solutions for me.
Of course, they assessed the case for free despite me telling them I wanted representation and not CFA. In 2004, I had raised £30,000 by working overnights in two months to fund my case against the General Medical Council. I felt that Peter Carter Ruck appeared to think that I was rather unworthy of their services. They told me that there was no prospect of success for Pal v GMC at the strike out hearing. They told me that I should not hire a city law firm. They assumed that I couldn't pay for their services. I love these assumptions. How wrong they were. It is a short for "shoo away riff raff". Would Peter Carter Ruck really apologise? Of course, not. Lawyers never apologise. They simply act as if they own the world and protest about how right they were despite the evidence of how wrong they are.
As they discovered later in life, I didn't listen to them but did finally find someone to represent me. In fact, it was Queens Counsel, one of the top barristers in the UK who told me that the case had potential. I won the strike out application against the GMC and they finally settled. I have of course never forgotten the condescending attitude of Peter Cater Ruck. Magnus Boyd has continued to have the same attitude despite his "we can save doctors" attitude in his Hospital Doctor articles. Yes, we know - whistleblower, troublemaker, low class, downtrodden - not worthy of defending! I have come across many lawyers with this attitude issue. And you know what, the good thing is that my competitive attitude to these toffee nosed gits is this - what they can do, I can do too.
Peter Carter Ruck were supposed to be the best in their field yet they turned me down and had no solution. Thats the issue with lawyers, they have a case, they throw it out but have no solution for the person. At the time of my approach to them, I was in crisis, tired due to the sheer hours I had worked and needed good advice. I have followed their trail and amused myself at the types of doctors they have represented. They represented Tonmoy Sharma in a failed harassment case. Tonmony Sharma was finally struck off the GMC Register. They also represented a case where the GMC had published wrong details on their website.
Peter Carter Ruck may like to know that in my view their attitude to my case was insulting and offensive. Of course, they will disagree because they are hotshot lawyers and I am just a whistleblower. I read the law books myself, constructed my arguments and got my case back on the road. Oh yes, I bet another junior doctor would have crumbled with the extent of Peter Carter Ruck's attitude. I got representation and I won my hearing - MY WAY. If I had listened to Peter Carter Ruck, I would never have succeeded against the GMC. Let that be an unmoderated comment regarding their services.
I have no doubts they will be representing consultants and top chaps while the rest of us juniors can scrabble around reading the law books and being insulted. They should learn to treat those who work hard and those who are rich equally.
I can sit here today and tell Peter Carter Ruck publicly that I was right and they were wrong. As it happens, I finally did get a conditional fee on the case by Sahota Solicitors who treated me much better than these posh upper class gits in Central London. Sahota was amused. Just because Peter Carter Ruck wear pin striped suits does not mean they know the meaning of being respectful to the average people. I am average. I am simply a person who attempted to get on with life in the midst of some terrible things that happened to me.
Oh yes, they can sue me for the above opinion cause I can read law books just as well as they can. You just open them and start reading. If they do sue me, there is no doubt I would give them a run for their money because I haven't lost a libel case yet.
So if the question is - would I opt for Peter Carter Ruck. The answer is "No". I would opt for Lovells or David Price Solicitors. Thats my view. Of course, reading this Adam Tudor will huff and puff as he always does. I promised him I would write about him just at the right time. What are they going to do - threaten to sue me? Issue a pre-action protocol? Huff and puff at me. Well, a apology might be useful but I don't expect that from such people. They are lawyers afterall and lawyers work for money. Justice is simply accidental.
Of course, they assessed the case for free despite me telling them I wanted representation and not CFA. In 2004, I had raised £30,000 by working overnights in two months to fund my case against the General Medical Council. I felt that Peter Carter Ruck appeared to think that I was rather unworthy of their services. They told me that there was no prospect of success for Pal v GMC at the strike out hearing. They told me that I should not hire a city law firm. They assumed that I couldn't pay for their services. I love these assumptions. How wrong they were. It is a short for "shoo away riff raff". Would Peter Carter Ruck really apologise? Of course, not. Lawyers never apologise. They simply act as if they own the world and protest about how right they were despite the evidence of how wrong they are.
As they discovered later in life, I didn't listen to them but did finally find someone to represent me. In fact, it was Queens Counsel, one of the top barristers in the UK who told me that the case had potential. I won the strike out application against the GMC and they finally settled. I have of course never forgotten the condescending attitude of Peter Cater Ruck. Magnus Boyd has continued to have the same attitude despite his "we can save doctors" attitude in his Hospital Doctor articles. Yes, we know - whistleblower, troublemaker, low class, downtrodden - not worthy of defending! I have come across many lawyers with this attitude issue. And you know what, the good thing is that my competitive attitude to these toffee nosed gits is this - what they can do, I can do too.
Peter Carter Ruck were supposed to be the best in their field yet they turned me down and had no solution. Thats the issue with lawyers, they have a case, they throw it out but have no solution for the person. At the time of my approach to them, I was in crisis, tired due to the sheer hours I had worked and needed good advice. I have followed their trail and amused myself at the types of doctors they have represented. They represented Tonmoy Sharma in a failed harassment case. Tonmony Sharma was finally struck off the GMC Register. They also represented a case where the GMC had published wrong details on their website.
Peter Carter Ruck may like to know that in my view their attitude to my case was insulting and offensive. Of course, they will disagree because they are hotshot lawyers and I am just a whistleblower. I read the law books myself, constructed my arguments and got my case back on the road. Oh yes, I bet another junior doctor would have crumbled with the extent of Peter Carter Ruck's attitude. I got representation and I won my hearing - MY WAY. If I had listened to Peter Carter Ruck, I would never have succeeded against the GMC. Let that be an unmoderated comment regarding their services.
I have no doubts they will be representing consultants and top chaps while the rest of us juniors can scrabble around reading the law books and being insulted. They should learn to treat those who work hard and those who are rich equally.
I can sit here today and tell Peter Carter Ruck publicly that I was right and they were wrong. As it happens, I finally did get a conditional fee on the case by Sahota Solicitors who treated me much better than these posh upper class gits in Central London. Sahota was amused. Just because Peter Carter Ruck wear pin striped suits does not mean they know the meaning of being respectful to the average people. I am average. I am simply a person who attempted to get on with life in the midst of some terrible things that happened to me.
Oh yes, they can sue me for the above opinion cause I can read law books just as well as they can. You just open them and start reading. If they do sue me, there is no doubt I would give them a run for their money because I haven't lost a libel case yet.
So if the question is - would I opt for Peter Carter Ruck. The answer is "No". I would opt for Lovells or David Price Solicitors. Thats my view. Of course, reading this Adam Tudor will huff and puff as he always does. I promised him I would write about him just at the right time. What are they going to do - threaten to sue me? Issue a pre-action protocol? Huff and puff at me. Well, a apology might be useful but I don't expect that from such people. They are lawyers afterall and lawyers work for money. Justice is simply accidental.
0 comments:
Post a Comment