4 ms·

Here's the review, interesting that it's still up: https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/56324e750000ff0001e69c5f https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/56324e750000ff0001e6

Here's the review, interesting that it's still up: https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/56324e750000ff0001e69c5f https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/56324e750000ff0001e69c5f > A total waste of money another scam solicitor > Avoid this solicitor - Summerfield Browne use their own clients confidential information to sue them if they give a bad review. That's why you will not see a bad review of this solicitor, they are now trying to sue me for defamation for the following honest review, rather than refund my money: A total waste of money, another scam solicitor. Stacey mills left the company half way through my assessment and the replacement was useless. I paid upfront for a legal assessment of my case, but what I got was just the information I sent them, reworded and sent back to me. No new information or how to proceed or what the law says or indeed the implications of what was done. I Just got their false assumptions, full of errors showing a lack of understanding for the situation and the law. Once they have your money they are totally apathetic towards you. You will learn more from forums, youtube and the Citizens advice website about your case, for free. You can judge for yourself if this is defamation and untrue. "Scam solicitor" is the term that probably pushes this over the edge.

imdsm 6y ago
£25,000 — an expensive review. Totally the chaps fault for defaulting though, should have just shown up.
- albertgoeswoof 6y ago
  Here is why he claims he didn't show up: > I didn't lie in my review of Sommerfield Browne and them suing their own client for gain shows everyone what they are. > Their friends and family will back them up, as will the other lawyers. > I submitted my case based on written law and the judge said it did not apply to me and ordered me to omit the law from my submission, before the trial hearing. > The fact is the judge put £6,000 costs on me before the case was even heard - I was literally priced out of justice. I could not attend or I would be accepting these costs. I cannot fight a rich solicitor in front of a biased judge. Seeing there was no justice here I decided not to give the court legitimacy by attending.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Mindwipe 6y ago
    I mean, that's not very good logic given he's now on the hook for four times that. His understanding of the costs is wrong anyway.
    - geoduck14 6y ago
      If only he could find a lawyer to help him understand the costs.
    - andrepd 6y ago
      >His understanding of the costs is wrong anyway. Which is yet another point against the justice system. If a regular person being accused cannot understand things nor can they afford someone who does... hiw can they defend themselves?
      - tjalfi 6y ago
        > Which is yet another point against the justice system. If a regular person being accused cannot understand things nor can they afford someone who does... hiw can they defend themselves? They mostly can't in the US - our justice system relies heavily on coercive plea bargaining. People like Shanta Sweatt[0] plead guilty because the alternative is to face a much longer potential sentence at trial. 90+%[0][1] (94% of convictions at the state level, 97% at the federal level) of cases go through plea bargaining and never reach a courtroom. I've also heard from a judge that people who represent themselves are often mentally ill. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/innocence-is-irrelevant/534171/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/innocen... [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-because-prosecutors-are-coercing-plea-deals-yes-ncna1034201 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-bec...
  - conistonwater 6y ago
    > I submitted my case based on written law and the judge said it did not apply to me and ordered me to omit the law from my submission, before the trial hearing. I wonder what this means? I don't fully trust that guy to accurately summarize issues of law.
agilob 6y ago
Look at this on google maps https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Summerfield+Browne+Solicitors/@51.5110929,-1.2593079,8z/data=!3m1!5s0x487604d5ba6fc26d:0xb79e982267c11e28!4m10!1m2!2m1!1sSummerfield+Browne!3m6!1s0x0:0x376c022f0bbfdbac!8m2!3d51.5110929!4d-0.1387024!9m1!1b1?hl=en https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Summerfield+Browne+Solic...
- HatchedLake721 6y ago
  Lol, Streisand effect in action

imdsm 6y ago

£25,000 — an expensive review. Totally the chaps fault for defaulting though, should have just shown up.

albertgoeswoof 6y ago
Here is why he claims he didn't show up: > I didn't lie in my review of Sommerfield Browne and them suing their own client for gain shows everyone what they are. > Their friends and family will back them up, as will the other lawyers. > I submitted my case based on written law and the judge said it did not apply to me and ordered me to omit the law from my submission, before the trial hearing. > The fact is the judge put £6,000 costs on me before the case was even heard - I was literally priced out of justice. I could not attend or I would be accepting these costs. I cannot fight a rich solicitor in front of a biased judge. Seeing there was no justice here I decided not to give the court legitimacy by attending.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  I mean, that's not very good logic given he's now on the hook for four times that. His understanding of the costs is wrong anyway.
  - geoduck14 6y ago
    If only he could find a lawyer to help him understand the costs.
  - andrepd 6y ago
    >His understanding of the costs is wrong anyway. Which is yet another point against the justice system. If a regular person being accused cannot understand things nor can they afford someone who does... hiw can they defend themselves?
    - tjalfi 6y ago
      > Which is yet another point against the justice system. If a regular person being accused cannot understand things nor can they afford someone who does... hiw can they defend themselves? They mostly can't in the US - our justice system relies heavily on coercive plea bargaining. People like Shanta Sweatt[0] plead guilty because the alternative is to face a much longer potential sentence at trial. 90+%[0][1] (94% of convictions at the state level, 97% at the federal level) of cases go through plea bargaining and never reach a courtroom. I've also heard from a judge that people who represent themselves are often mentally ill. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/innocence-is-irrelevant/534171/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/innocen... [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-because-prosecutors-are-coercing-plea-deals-yes-ncna1034201 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-bec...
- conistonwater 6y ago
  > I submitted my case based on written law and the judge said it did not apply to me and ordered me to omit the law from my submission, before the trial hearing. I wonder what this means? I don't fully trust that guy to accurately summarize issues of law.

agilob 6y ago

Look at this on google maps https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Summerfield+Browne+Solicitors/@51.5110929,-1.2593079,8z/data=!3m1!5s0x487604d5ba6fc26d:0xb79e982267c11e28!4m10!1m2!2m1!1sSummerfield+Browne!3m6!1s0x0:0x376c022f0bbfdbac!8m2!3d51.5110929!4d-0.1387024!9m1!1b1?hl=en https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Summerfield+Browne+Solic...

HatchedLake721 6y ago
Lol, Streisand effect in action