Govan Law Centre

GLC rings alarm over growing mis-selling of consumer credit products across the UK

2012-02-11T16:06:00.000Z

With around £9bn of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) mis-sold to UK consumers the issue of the mis-selling of financial products is big consumer news; yet the potential for the mis-selling of consumer credit products - particulary pay day loans and second charge mortgages regulated under the Consumer Credit Act - is relatively new and unchartered waters.

Govan Law Centre believes alarm bells should be ringing over the growing potential for mass mis-selling in the UK consumer credit market, with the growth of aggressive pay day lending and the ongoing mis-selling of expensive home secured loans. Changes introduced by the 2006 Consumer Credit Act have opened new gateways for consumer redress in law and through the independent Financial Ombudsman Service.

GLC todays publishes a 'think piece' paper which discusses the scope and possibility for consumer redress in relation to mis-sold and unfair consumer credit products in the UK. The paper is available here. Thoughts and comments are welcome and can be made below.

GLC secure unsecured loan write-off using CCA

2012-02-06T12:50:00.001Z

In RBS plc v. Ahmed, a creditor sought to recover payment under a unsecured loan agreement for a sum just under £2,500, together with its legal expenses, which would have been on the undefended summary cause scale, at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

GLC had defended the action upon the basis the statement of claim was lacking in specification, and was irrelevant on a number of grounds, including failing to indicate whether a default notice under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) had been properly served prior to proceedings being raised.

RBS agreed to dismiss the action with expenses at 10% of the sum sued in favour of the defender, together with an undertaking to write off the debt under the loan agreement. The case serves to illustrate the importance of advisers always checking court documents for payment, as opposed to taking the debt and charges as stated as being necessarily due at the level claimed, or being lawfully due.

Further hearing in Scottish repossession test cases on pre-action requirements

2012-01-21T09:28:00.000Z

The court has appointed parties be heard further in the Scottish repossession test cases of RBS plc v. McConnell and NRAM plc v. Millar next week. Sheriff AF Deutsch has given parties an opportunity to be heard on a new point in relation to the Interpretation Act 1978.

Since the Scottish Government's Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010, a lender must now give certain information to a debtor upon entering into 'default' before a repossession action is raised in court. This is known as the 'pre-action requirement' and failure to comply with this requirement can render the court action incompetent.

Many lenders and law firms in Scotland have interpreted 'default' to mean merely a failure to pay sums due under a mortgage, whereas Govan Law Centre has argued that 'default' is a technical term which means the failure to comply with a calling-up notice.

The cases of RBS plc v. McConnell and NRAM plc v. Millar look set to provide clarity on this point. Many repossession actions across Scotland have been continued or sisted (stayed) pending the court's judgment in these cases.

UK consumers should use statutory rights to reduce interest on credit agreements

2012-01-14T11:50:00.002Z

Financially vulnerable consumers across the UK taken to court for defaulting on high interest credit - including 'second charge' mortgages - are unaware of powerful statutory rights which can help, according to Glasgow's Govan Law Centre.

Section 136 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) permits the court to amend 'any agreement or security' in making a time order under section 129 of the Act as it considers just, having regard to the means of the debtor. That includes the right to ask the court to reduce the rate of interest within a consumer credit agreement.

Most consumers are completely unaware of these statutory rights, which are seldom used, which have the scope to help make unmanageable, spiralling debts, manageable and affordable. Govan Law Centre's Mike Dailly said:

"The reason we believe section 136 of the Consumer Credit Act is so important right now is because of the disparity between interest rates in inter-bank lending and the wholesale market, and what UK consumers are being charged in many credit agreements. The Bank of England's base interest rate is 0.5% and the standard variable rates of most UK banks are around 2.5% at present. Yet many consumers will have second mortgages (regulated under the CCA) with interest running at 11 or 12%, or unsecured loan and credit agreements running at 18 to 30% APR".

"To give a typical example, a client facing repossession through default of a second charge mortgage borrowed £96k at 11.2% APR, resulting in monthly interest payments of £873. The client is eligble for some DWP help with housing costs while in receipt of benefits, but there is a major shortfall. If her rate of interest was 2.5% the differential in monthly payments would be a whopping £674 per month. Accordingly, consumers in financial difficulty should be asking the court to reduce or freeze the rate of interest on credit agreements to a fairer level so they can meet their financial obligations".

Consumers can make an application under sections 129 and 136 on the 'time to pay' form that comes with court papers, or as part of any legal defence to proceedings raised by a creditor. Always obtain independent legal advice from a community law centre or other local advice agency or firm of solicitors.

Your money, your rights: new STV Glasgow blog from GLC

2012-01-12T09:34:00.002Z

GLC has launched a new consumer rights information blog on STV Glasgow to help people in Glasgow become better empowered as consumers, avoid being financially or legally scammed, and save or gain money. The regular consumer rights blog is written by GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, and can be found at STV Glasgow's online site here. Entries will also be posted at one single location on this site for ease of reference, along with some occasional additional extras and tips.

Free know-how on Scottish repossession competency arguments disseminated by GLC

2012-01-10T19:59:00.003Z

In response to requests, having regard to our public legal education ethos, and considering the wider potential public interest and the need for advisers to consider the potential need to protect the interests of their own clients, Govan Law Centre (GLC) is making its competency arguments in the test cases of NRAM v. Millar and RBS plc v. McConnell publicly available for free (see below).

The decision of Sheriff Deutsch in the said test cases is expected sometime in February 2012, and advisers will need to consider what steps, if any, they may wish to take to safeguard the interests of their own clients pending the outcome of that judgment, and any implications and developments that may arise following thereon.

GLC's arguments are presented in the format of an illustrative set of Defences (known as 'Answers' as repossession procedure in Scotland is now by way of summary application procedure). Please note the disclaimer, namely that this document contains information only and does not constitute legal advice; you should obtain your own independent qualified legal advice from a Scots law practitioner and must not rely upon this document which is illustrative only.

View as a WEBPAGE or download as a WORD DOCUMENT

.

Govanhill citizens' empowerment project

2012-01-08T10:34:00.001Z

STV Glasgow reports on a groundbreaking project which will help tenants and home owners tackle issues around property factoring and landlord disputes with the help of a DIY kit is to be launched in Govanhill. The project is funded by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation.

The Public Legal Education Project will be launched in February by the Govan Law Centre as a pilot for one year and will train local people on how they can protect their rights with the help of letter templates, application forms and housing advice. The full story can be read online here.

Lender refunds repossession expenses charged to customer in part: new GLC legal argument

2011-12-28T12:48:00.000Z

GLC has settled a court action seeking a refund of a bank's legal expenses levied as the cost of their solicitors raising repossession proceedings against a Scottish homeowner. The action was raised in 2005, and the bulk of legal fees were charged over five years ago.

In Ayr v. BOS plc, the pursuer had contended that on a clear construction of standard condition 12, sch 3, Convenyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970 and other provisions in that Act, the lender had not been entitled to recoup its legal expenses against its customer because it had failed to serve a pre-litigation 'calling-up notice'. In light of RBS v. Wilson and others, it ought to have done so.

The case, which was not without additional legal complications, settled extra-judicially for a refund of £600, representing almost half of the lender's costs. GLC will continue to work on how more consumers can secure possible refunds of legal costs, added to their mortgages.

GLC progresses challenge to mortgage arrears charges under Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

2011-12-24T06:32:00.001Z

GLC has settled litigation against a 'sub-prime' lender in relation to 'administrative charges' imposed when their customers went into arrears of their mortgage. The following charges were applied on a repeat or monthly basis: ‘Unpaid Direct Debit Fee’ (£25), ‘Arrears Management Fee’ (£50), Late Payment Management Fee (£25), and ‘Litigation Management Fee’ (£115).

Utlising the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and other legislation, GLC secured a refund of 75% of the 'administrative charges' imposed historically, a figure of just under £1,000, together with legal expenses. If this was replicated across the current UK 'sub-prime' mortgage book, GLC has estimated around £150m could be refunded to UK consumers; with a similar figure in relation to 'prime' mortgage book.

GLC's Mike Dailly said: "Govan Law Centre has been developing and testing innovative legal arguments as a means to challenge the imposition of unnecessary and unfair mortgage charges where UK consumers are in arrears. We believe the law is on the side of consumers, and we will continue to refine our legal strategy with a view to disseminating free information to empower UK consumers, and facilitate access to justice".

GLC recruitment: new Govanhill Public Legal Education Project

2011-12-23T13:10:00.000Z

Glasgow's Govan Law Centre (GLC) requires a newly qualified solicitor with civil court experience. The post is funded for one year and will be based at Govanhill Law Centre's office within Glasgow's Govanhill community. Experience of housing and property factor disputes would be a major advantage.

The successful candidate will lead a dynamic new Public Legal Education (PLE) Project in Govanhill with a focus on empowering local citizens, community groups and residents associations to tackle property factor and landlord and tenant disputes. The PLE project is funded by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation. The post holder will also undertake some general law centre work in Govanhill, supported by the Glasgow Regeneration Agency, in partnership with Crossroads.

The successful candidate with work with both partners in GLC's professional legal practice. Applications in writing with C.V. to Principal Solicitor, Govan Law Centre, Orkney Street Enterprise Centre, 18-20 Orkney Street, Glasgow, G51 2BZ. We will not accept employment agency applications.

The closing date for applications is close of business on Thursday 26 January 2012. Applications thereafter will not be accepted. GLC aims to be an Equal Opportunities employer.

Decision on 'Pre-action Requirements' in Scottish repossession test cases expected February 2012

2011-12-23T12:36:00.000Z

The judgment of Sheriff Deutsch in the GLC test cases of RBS plc v. McConnell and Northern Rock (Asset Management) plc v. Millar is expected sometime in February 2012. These cases test the issue of precisely when compliance with the 'Pre-Action Requirements' from the Applications by Creditors (Pre-Action Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2010 (SSI 2010/317) and Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010 needs to occur, in relation to mortgage arrears repossession actions proceeding on a breach of standard condition 9(1)(a), sch 3 of the Conveyancing and Fedual Reform (Scotland) Act 1970, as amended by the 2010 Act.

Action needed to tackle 'debt farming' of UK consumers in mortgage arrears: launch of Govan Law Centre report

2011-12-08T20:06:00.008Z

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has found that the average Scottish homeowner in three or more months arrears of their mortgage has £816 added to their account in 'arrears charges' - the bulk of which appear to be unfair in terms of industry regulatory rules - with one fifth of homeowners incurring arrears charges in excess of £2,000.

As lenders' charging policies apply equally across the country, these figures are likely to be indicative of the general position across the UK. The findings published in a GLC report, entitled 'Debt Farming? - unfair treatment of mortgage customers in arrears by UK lenders', reveal that lenders are continuing to treat mortgage customers in arrears unfairly.

'Sub-prime lenders' continue to be the worst offenders imposing multiple charges most of which are repetitive, unnecessary and excessive. For example some 'sub-prime lenders' can levy some or all of the following charges each month: unpaid direct debit fee £30, arrears fees £45, telemessage fee £25, questionnaire fee £75, referral to solicitors £50, repossession fee, £29.38, litigation management fee £115, and late payment fee £25.

GLC estimate that such charges in current mortgage arrears cases across the UK could represent just under £400m - the bulk of which are arguably unfair and contrary to industry rules. Over the last three years the City regulator, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), has imposed a number of substantial fines on lenders who have failed to treat their mortgage customers in arrears fairly.

GLC is calling upon the regulator to consider requiring both 'sub-prime' and 'prime' lenders to undertake a review of their active mortgage accounts with a view to voluntarily reimbursing (by way of a credit to the consumer's mortgage account) all of their customers who have been charged unnecessary, unfair, repetitive or excessive charges. To some extent this process is currently happening for the mass misselling of Payment Protection Insurance by authorised firms and financial intermediaries.

Time to tackle shark practices of debt companies and their Scottish solicitors says GLC

2011-11-18T14:12:00.000Z

Govan Law Centre (GLC) is concerned that the OFT's Debt Collection Guidance is being routinely ignored in Scotland not only by UK debt purchasing companies but more worryingly by certain firms of Scottish solicitors who undertake debt collection as one of the primary activities of business.

Besides causing unnecessary human misery, unfair, oppressive, and disproportionate business practices are resulting in vulnerable Scottish homeowners being threatened with homelessness as creditors use inhibitions for tiny debts. The practice results in creditors being able to scupper Scottish Government mortgage to rent transactions, where families facing homelessness can have their house purchased by a social landlord.

Although, the OFT expects solicitors firms who undertake debt collection work as one of their primary activities of business to obtain a 'Category F' consumer credit licence, most Scottish debt collection firms of solicitors operate under the Law Society of Scotland's 'group consumer credit licence'. GLC believes this results in a lack of effective regulation of Scottish law firms undertaking debt collection work because the Law Society of Scotland does not specifically regulate such work, and therefore, this work appears to be largely unregulated in practice.

GLC's Mike Dailly said:

"To give an illustration of the problem, we have a case in Glasgow where it has taken us many months to defend a repossession action and broker a complex mortgage to rent transaction, which is now being thwarted by a Scottish firm of solicitors acting on behalf of an English debt purchasing company for a debt of £810. Last month the company was prepared to accept repayment at £5 per week, but since obtaining an inhibition it wants all of the money as a lump sum".

"Our client is on incapacity benefit and has offered £100 plus £5 per week but the company's solicitors advise their client says no. We believe this Scottish law firm and company have engaged in aggressive, oppressive, and unfair practices contrary to the OFT's expected standards for consumer debt recovery, and contrary to section 25 of the 1974 Consumer Credit Act".

"Govan Law Centre is considering all legal remedies available to our clients against such companies and their Scottish solicitors - including where appropriate 'naming and shaming' - however, it is quite clear there is a major regulatory role here for the Law Society of Scotland which needs to be addressed, a need for the OFT to intervene, and ultimately a pressing need for the Scottish Government to review the ability of their own Mortgage to Rent scheme to be de-railed by unsecured creditors with relatively tiny debts through the inappropriate use of inhibitions".

Move to end time bar for abuse victims

2011-11-12T09:16:00.001Z

The Herald reports that Scots lawyers have called for a change in legislation north of the Border to make it easier for abuse victims to claim compensation. The move comes after an English High Court ruling opened the door to people who suffered at the hands of priests to sue the wider Catholic Church as vicariously liable in tort (delict in Scotland) and not just the individual.

While the ruling in England is not binding in Scotland, human rights lawyers Mike Dailly, of Govan Law Centre, and John Scott, of Capital Defence Lawyers, say it is a significant step that would offer a “persuasive” precedent in the argument if such cases are now raised in Scotland.

Currently actions relating to personal injuries have to be brought within three years, or in the case of children within three years of turning 16, unless certain exceptions apply or the claimant can persuade the court that it would be equitable to disapply the time bar. A Scottish Parliamentary committee will shortly examine a Scottish Government proposal to extend the time bar to five years, but campaigners say this does not go far enough.

GLC's Mike Dailly said: “Very often the nature of sexual abuse is such that many vulnerable people cannot even speak of it until after the time bar has elapsed. The Scottish Government has so far refused to change the law here, but it cannot be right that a victim of sexual abuse in Scotland should be denied access to justice due to a technical time bar rule – justice demands change here.”

Public consultation on Property Factors (Scotland) Act 'Code of Conduct'

2011-09-27T07:29:00.001+01:00

The Scottish Government has launched 12-week consultation on a proposed statutory Code of Conduct, to be made under the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011, which was passed by the Scottish Parliament earlier this year.

Property managers administer communal areas, roofs and stairwells in an estimated 225,000 flats and tenements across Scotland. Land maintenance companies look after the common green space on many new housing estates. The act, which comes into force no later than October 1, 2012, aims to provide protection for homeowners in Scotland who receive services from property factors.

Compulsory registration for all property factors and a tribunal based dispute resolution process for homeowners will be introduced.

Minister for Housing and Transport, Keith Brown said: "Property managers have an important role to play in maintaining and improving housing stock condition and open space. While the majority of property factors provide a good, effective service, the Scottish Parliament voiced concerns about how some property and land management services are delivered".

"The act will provide protection for homeowners in Scotland who receive services and the code of conduct is a central element of that act. “I would urge everyone with an interest in this important issue to respond to the consultation.”

During the consultation period the Scottish Government will hold a series of consultation workshops for property factors and for homeowners and members of the public. The act was introduced as a member’s bill drafted by GLC on behalf of Glasgow MSP, Patricia Ferguson. The Scottish Government supported the bill and worked with Ms Ferguson to make the legislation as effective as possible.

The consultation will run from Monday 26 September until Friday 16 December.

GLC's Principal Solicitor wins Solicitor of the Year

2011-09-12T19:01:00.000+01:00

This years Solicitor of the Year award has been given to Govan Law Centre's Mike Dailly at a gathering at the Hilton in Glasgow last week.

The prestigious award was determined by an independent panel of Scottish judges, chaired by former Secretary of State for Defence, the Rt Hon Lord Browne. Mike is now the only solicitor to have won the award twice, having previously won in 2007.

The award for Legal Personality of the Year was given to Maggie Scott QC and Legal Academic of the Year went to the late Elaine Tyre. The 2011 Lifetime Achievement Award was given to Lord Rodger of Earlsferry who sadly passed away earlier this year.

Heather goes to Holyrood

2011-09-11T23:49:00.000+01:00

Heather MacKay

Govan Law Centre solicitor, Heather Mackay, has commenced a three month personal sabbatical to take part in an internship programme with the Scottish Liberal Democrats in Edinburgh.

During her internship, Heather will gain experience working in the Scottish political process and will have the opportunity to further understand the system of law-making in Scotland. Heather will be spending time in Holyrood and local parliamentary constituency offices.

Heather said: "This is a fantastic opportunity and I am extremely excited to be able to take part in the internship programme. I am looking forward to putting the skills and experiences I acquire to good use upon my return to Govan Law Centre in December.".

Recruitment: Temporary position for qualified solicitor at GLC

2011-08-25T09:00:00.000+01:00

GLC has a vacancy for a solicitor qualified in Scots law on a temporary basis. Applications by letter and CV should be addressed to the Principal Solicitor, Govan Law Centre, 18-20 Orkney Street, Glasgow, G51 2BZ. The closing date for applications is Friday, 2 September 2011.

Former Deputy Editor of The Sunday Post appointed by Govan Law Centre

2011-08-24T17:45:00.000+01:00

Govan Law Centre has appointed Colin Grant, the former Deputy Editor of The Sunday Post, as its media consultant, advising on, and handling, a wide range of media, communication and public relation projects for GLC. Colin is currently the Director of Spectrum PR.

Among Colin's many achievements at DC Thomson was the establishment of the award-winning CHAS (Children’s Hospice Association Scotland) campaign, which Colin ran single-handedly for four years from 2001-2005. During that period The Sunday Post raised a record £4 million which helped build and run Scotland’s second children’s hospice, Robin House, near Loch Lomond. In addition, Colin created the highly-successful Scottish Curry Awards.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "We are delighted to welcome Colin Grant to Govan Law Centre as our media consultant. Colin is an outstanding journalist with a first class track record and Govan Law Centre's Board of Trustees is confident he will make a major contribution to our work".

GLC launches new 'Schools Trust' for Govan kids and invites grant applications from schools

2011-08-23T13:08:00.001+01:00

Govan Coat of Arms with motto 'Nihili
Sine Labore' (Nothing Without Work)

GLC has today launched a new charity called the 'Govan Law Centre Schools Trust' (Scottish charity number SCO42451), with the objective of promoting the advancement of education by making small grants to schools in the Greater Govan area of Glasgow.

Fundraising has already been undertaken by GLC to enable the first round of grants to be made by the end of October 2011. Headteachers of local primary and secondary schools in the Greater Govan area have today been sent a letter inviting them to make an application for a grant(s) by 22 September 2011.

Individual grants are unlikely to be awarded in excess of £250. There is no formal application form and no additional prescriptive rules as the GLC Schools Trust believe that local schools will be in the best position to know what would be a good use of grant funding.

GLC backs Scottish Government's position on RBS plc v. Wilson

2011-08-02T16:57:00.000+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) supports and welcomes the Scottish Government's decision to take no legislative action in light of the UK Supreme Court's decision in RBS plc v. Wilson and others as the 'right thing to do' in the circumstances.

While the majority of consultees alleged that the implications of this case would be negative, GLC believes there is no empirical evidence to back up such assertions, and that the Scottish Government was correct to advocate no law reform response, particulary so in the current climate of forebearance and difficult economic circumstances.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Calling-up notices are the equivalent of 'default notices' for consumer credit debts and they serve a useful purpose in enabling the debtor to address problems before litigation can be raised. The only difference with a mortgage is the fact it is secured on heritable property and it is therefore entirely consistent to support the requirement for lenders to serve calling-up notices prior to entitlement to raise litigation. It is in the interests of both parties, lender and borrower".

"It is also instructive to note that some lenders and their solicitors did generally serve calling-up notices and did so as a matter of good practice without any difficulty".

"GLC rejects the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) assertion that the Wilson decision may not be in the 'best interests' of borrowers. For those with no prospects of retaining ownership or occupancy of their homes a calling-up notice can act as a spur to selling their property with or without their lenders assistance, and for those that need more flexibility to pay their debts the calling-up notice acts as a spur to take advice to set up a repayment solution which the lender would have to explore in any event in terms of the Pre-Action Requirements'.

"What the CML calls 'delay' is in fact a sensible and reasonable opportunity for practical solutions to be brokered and found to enable the mortgage to be paid, arrears cleared and homeowners to retain their homes. GLC is pleased the Scottish Government has acted to safeguard the rights of vulnerable homeowners in Scotland".

Solicitor of the Year nominee for GLC

2011-07-29T10:29:00.001+01:00

Govan Law Centre's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, has been shortlisted for the Solicitor of the Year Award at the Law Awards of Scotland 2011.

The nominees were announced last night at a reception held at 29 Royal Exchange Square in Glasgow. There were three solicitors in total who made the short leet in the category of Solicitor of the Year.

Mike previously won this prestigious award in 2007. The 2011 winner will be announced at an awards dinner in Glasgow's Hilton Hotel on 8 September 2011.

Risk of homelessness to private tenants from Scottish housing associations' debt recovery practice

2011-07-11T12:22:00.002+01:00

GHA's CEO, Martin Armstrong

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has raised concern over the growing practice of Scottish housing associations using 'arrestments in execution' against private sector tenants in relation to debts owed by their landlords to housing associations, generally in the association's capacity as a property factor.

GLC believes this policy will force private sector tenants to incur rent arrears, exposing them to eviction, the risk of homelessness and unnecessary detriment. Housing association officers typically refer to such arrestments as 'rent arrestments' and use them every month or four weeks, repeatedly, against individual 'innocent' private sector tenants.

GLC's Principal Solicitor has today written to Martin Armstrong, CEO of the Glasgow Housing Association (GHA) to express the law centre's concern that this policy is disproportionate, regressive, and ultimately puts innocent private sector tenants through unnecessary detriment, with the risk of homelessness. Other housing association landlords in Glasgow are using this practice against private tenants, and GLC believes the Scottish Government should intervene to examine the practice and consequences of this policy.

Lindsay Paterson, Solicitor with Govanhill Law Centre said: "We believe this policy causes unnecessary cyclical monthly detriment to innocent private sector tenants, and exposes them to unnecessary potential fines and emotional distress".

"It can be a frightening experience for our clients to have sheriff officers come to their door to serve such documents on a regular basis, and in our experience the service of schedules of arrestment is causing significant distress and inconvenience to ‘innocent’ private sector tenants".

"We hope the GHA and other social landlords will reconsider their policies here and stop using this form of diligence against 'innoncent' private sector tenants".

Law centre opposes closure of Glasgow's Bilingual Support Unit following 'flawed' consultation process

2011-07-04T15:56:00.001+01:00

Govanhill Law Centre (GhLC) has opposed the proposed closure of Glasgow's Bilingual Support Unit (BSU), presently positioned in Shawlands, between Govanhill and East Pollokshields, two of the most ethnically diverse communities in the City. Its opposition is supported by GLC.

Responding to a Glasgow City Council consultation, GhLC says that in its experience there are severe barriers to education and employment for Roma families in Glasgow. A saving of £186,000 from closing the BSU would represent very poor value in relation to the significant benefits gained from specialist language provision to youngsters in Glasgow's education system, youngsters who often have the lowest educational and employment prospects.

The law centre has identified five key flaws in the current proposed closure process:

(1) No educational benefits evidenced
(2) Financial savings alone seem to be driving force
(3) Flawed consultation process
(4) Failure to meet with needs of children with little or no English
(5) Failure to meet needs of Roma children

With respect to the need to undertake a proper consultation at a meeting on June 9th, 2011, GCC's Director of Education, Maureen McKenna said “this is not a statutory consultation so it is not a public consultation. It is good practice for service reform”. However, GhLC believes that GCC has failed to have 'due regard' to its statutory duties under the Equalities Act 2010.

GhLC Associate Solicitor Lorraine Barrie said: "Glasgow City Council’s public sector duty under the Equality Act 2010 states that an Equality Impact Assessment document should be produced, containing sufficient information to show it has paid ‘due regard’ to equality duties in its decision making. In that regard, we have referred the Council to the recent case of R (W) v. Birmingham City Council [2011] EWHC 1147 where the High Court found that ‘where a decision may affect large numbers of vulnerable people … the due regard necessary is very high’ (at para 151). We believe that is the case here. Further, the court held that ‘consideration of the duty must be an integral part of the formulation of a proposed policy …’.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s guide for decision makers states “whether it is proportionate for an authority to conduct an assessment of a financial decision depends on its relevance to the authority’s particular function and its likely impact”. We would argue that as the proposal is likely to have a significantly adverse impact on the learning of all of the pupils who attend the BSU and future pupils, we believe the ‘due regard’ duty is very high, and accordingly GCC are required to carry out an equality impact assessment.

The only mention in the document of the Equality Act 2010 is as follows: “The proposed Service reconfiguration supports the Council’s responsibilities under the Education (Additional Support for Learning) Scotland Act 2004 (Amended 2009) and the Equality Act 2010”. This bald statement in our view, completely fails to demonstrate whether GCC have given “due regard” to their legal duties to equalities; particularly where the due regard duty is ‘very high’

We would hope GCC will produce an Equality Impact Assessment, and make its consultation public, otherwise it may render itself vulnerable to legal challenge under the 2010 Act".

Govanhill Law Centre's full consultation response is here (opens as PDF).

GLC challenge proposed care package cull for severely disabled Glaswegians

2011-07-01T18:50:00.000+01:00

GLC has written to Glasgow City Council's (GCC) Director of Social Care challenging the legality of plans to cut funding by up to 40% for care packages for adults with profound learning disabilities, often requiring 24/7 'one to one' care services in the City.

The proposals follow GCC's adoption of a 'Self Directed Support' (SDS) funding system whereby clients can take charge of their own funding to ensure a more personalised, choice-based service. However, Govan Law Centre is concerned that the new SDS system is being used to mask an irrational funding cull for some of the most vulnerable adults and children in Glasgow.

The new system is being introduced in phases; the current first phase affecting 1,800 adults with learning disabilities in the City, with future groups including children with learning disabilities and those with mental health disabilities.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Govan Law Centre has identified a number of apparent major legal flaws in the new SDS system and its imposition to vulnerable persons via a 'review' of their care needs. We believe the Council needs to urgently rethink its entire process here, and in the interim continue existing funding packages. Otherwise, we believe the Council will be vulnerable to challenges by way of judicial review."

"There is also a fundamental human rights issue at stake with this care package cull: a 40% cut to care services to severely disabled persons who may be unable to communicate or undertake basic tasks, translates into placing human beings at high risk of self-harm, pain, suffering, and ultimately death, due to the fact, for example, no-one will be watching them during the night if they start choking or self-harming. Why would any Scottish public body want to do this?".

Christie Commission Report: GLC says hundreds of millions of pounds could be saved by earlier, co-ordinated, intervention in homeless prevention

2011-06-29T15:34:00.001+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has welcomed the Christie Commission’s emphasis on the need to prioritise preventative spending to tackle the root causes of social problems, and believes that if its innovative earlier prevention of homelessness systems were rolled out across Scotland, hundreds of millions of pounds of public money could be saved each year.

GLC’s prevention of homelessness senior coordinator, Alistair Sharp said: “At the moment our innovative earlier prevention of homelessness systems have a 84% success rate, resulting in a potential saving of £48m per annum if rolled out across the City of Glasgow – or potentially several hundreds of millions of pounds per annum if replicated across Scotland”.*

“We are further developing and progressing prevention and partnership through a new innovative process of early intervention with our partners. This will allow us to provide services at a much earlier stage to protect people in their tenancy’s and owner occupancy by providing legal advice and representation, money and benefits service and access to other targeted support from the voluntary sector and social work services teams.”

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Govan Law Centre would like to see an amendment to the Homelessness etc., (Scotland) Act 2003 to require all local authorities in Scotland to provide a co-ordinated earlier intervention prevention of homelessness system. We have seen the impact and success that such an approach can have in the Southside of Glasgow, and there is no reason that such an approach could not be delivered across Scotland".

The Christie Commission reports that as much as 40% of all spending on public services is spent on social problems which could have been prevented in the first place and by ‘prioritising a preventative approach’ and developing ‘a radical, new collaborative culture’ with the public and voluntary and private sectors working in partnership could cut demand and ‘big bills’ in health, social care and justice.

Govan Law Centre’s Prevention of Homelessness Partnership is made up of Govan Law Centre, Money Matters Money Advice Centre and Glasgow South West Social Work Services and in 2010 won the Scottish Social Services Accolade for Partnership Working in Adult Social Care. The Prevention of Homelessness Partnership project has prevented over 2,000 people and their families from homelessness since it began in 2005. Successful in both creating a collaborative culture through its multi disciplinary/agency partnership approach and by making prevention paramount for homelessness prevention in Glasgow South West.

We have already proven the impact of cost reduction to the public purse as reported in an independent evaluation of the Prevention of Homelessness Partnership project (2009). By preventing over 2,000 people and their families from eviction, repossession and homelessness the cost savings to the public purse can be calculated in terms of: the estimated economic costs of eviction and of a typical homelessness case being £23,074, (it can be as high as £83,000 for the most complex case); the cost of each case to local authorities and the housing provider is £15,000. (SCSH briefing Tenancy Failure and How Much it Costs & Crisis: How Many How Much). This shows that massive cost savings are achievable.

* Our estimate is based on our previous 84% success rate in preventing homelessness in relation to Glasgow City Council section 11 notification data (providing the number of cases taken to court for eviction and repossession in Glasgow – in 2010/11 (12 month period) there were 2,485 section 11 notices in Glasgow alone); utilising an average figure for the cost to the taxpayer for providing a range of housing, social work support and health service costs per household in the sum of £23,074 (COSLA Prevention of Homelessness Guidance, 2009).

GLC welcomes FSA intervention to prevent 'double charging' to Scottish homeowners threatened with repossession

2011-06-27T12:06:00.003+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has welcomed the intervention of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) to prevent lenders 'double charging' Scottish homeowners where court proceedings are re-raised following the Supreme Court ruling in RBS plc v. Wilson and others.

It is estimated that as many as 5,000 cases were requried to be dismissed for want of service of a pre-court 'calling-up notice', with up to 15,000 historic cases potentially affected. News of the FSA's intervention was revealed in The Herald over the weekend.

Govan Law Centre's Jennifer Laughland, who defends mortgage repossessions across Ayrshire as part of a local partnership 'AHAP' service, said: “We welcome the FSA’s intervention on this important issue, particularly as we are now seeing repossession actions, which had been dismissed after last year’s Supreme Court ruling, being brought back to court".

“The clients whom we see facing homelessness through mortgage arrears are generally struggling to pay their mortgage and make ends meet. The last thing they need in these tough financial times is to be billed twice by their bank’s lawyers, through no fault of their own. The FSA’s action here will protect some of the most vulnerable homeowners in Scotland.”

GLC challenges excessive mortgage charges

2011-05-23T09:29:00.003+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) is raising a number of actions seeking repayment of excessive and unfair fees applied by lenders when homeowners fall into mortgage arrears.

The worst offenders are 'sub-prime' mortgage lenders who typically levy four types of monthly fees: ‘Unpaid Direct Debit Fee’ (£25), ‘Arrears Management Fee’ (£50), Late Payment Management Fee (£25), and ‘Litigation Management Fee’ (£115).

GLC believes these fees do not reflect the actual administrative cost to lenders, and if so, are contrary to legal rules made by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Separately, many of the charges are unfair or excessive to consumers in terms of FSA rules.

Several sub-prime lenders have already been fined by the FSA for failing to treat mortgage customers fairly. In October 2009, GMAC-RFC was fined £2.8m, while in December last year the Kensington Mortgage Company Ltd was fined £1.22m for the unfair treatment of its customers in arrears.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Although some lenders have already been fined for excessive mortgage arrears charges, the reality is such charges have simply been added to customers' mortgage accounts. Lenders should voluntarily refund excessive charges, but they won't, which is why GLC hopes to establish a quick route to refunds for our clients".

Bank charges fight still alive: GLC guest comment on MSE

2011-05-20T12:20:00.001+01:00

Bank charges reclaiming has largely fallen off the radar after the banks' 2009 Supreme Court victory. But GLC's Mike Dailly thinks the fight is still on.

In a guest comment piece on MoneySavingExpert.com, Mike argues that last month's High Court defeat of banks on mis-selling payment protection insurance (PPI) may present the catalyst for change that consumers having been waiting for. That case clarified the precise status of the Financial Service Authority's (FSA) rules.

Consumers may found upon the FSA's new banking rules to argue that overdraft charges are not 'fair' to the individual customer who has to pay them because their price is calculated to cross-subsidise 'free banking' for customers who remain in credit. They can use them to seek financial redress. Read Mike's article here.

GLC to launch series of financial services test cases

2011-05-10T13:51:00.002+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) will be launching a series of financial services test cases, commencing with a case seeking a refund of legal expenses in a Scottish mortgage repossession case where no calling-up notice was served prior to litigation.

Other cases (with UK wide applicability) will include court actions to recover charges for mortgage arrears management, litigation management and associated charges.

This is in addition to our current unfair UK bank charge litigation (which tests ss.140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and regulation 5 of the UTCCR on non-price fairness grounds).

GLC would be interested to hear from anyone in Glasgow who has incurred a number of current account overdraft charges during 2010 and/or 2011 with a view to us seeking to recover these for free using new legal research; please contact 0141 440 2503 in strict confidence.

More details to follow in due course.

GLC supports Margo's proposal to cap interest rates in Scotland

2011-05-02T23:32:00.001+01:00

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has offered to draft Margo MacDonald's proposed Interest Rate Cap Bill if she is re-elected. Ms MacDonald is reportedly delighted with GLC's support for her proposal to use Scots criminal law to set a cap on interest rates to protect low paid workers and vulnerable consumers in Scotland.

The proposal is in response to the growing prevalence of loans and credit at excessive rates of interest - often several hundred to several thousand percent - all at time when the banks' base interest rate is historically very low: currently 0.5%. The UK removed interest rate caps in 1974, however, consumer interest rates caps are common in Europe and many US states. Excessive interests rate are lawful in the UK.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Two and half thousands year ago the Romans capped interest rates at 8.3%, rising to 12% some 355 years later. Usury laws have a long history around the world for good reason: it is unjust and immmoral to exploit people and trap them in a cycle of debt due to excessive interest".

"This is a highly complex area of law and practice - not least because unfair lending can occur with hidden charges and extras, as well as APR rates - but I believe GLC has the trackrecord and expertise in this field to support Margo MacDonald, and work with other civic groups in Scotland, to make this fantastic proposal a reality".

Prodigal son returns to Govan after 30 years

2011-04-26T13:23:00.004+01:00

GLC's Chairperson, Tommy McMahon, with
GCC's Local Heritage Officer Kate Dargie.

The 127 year old 'Govan Baby' has been returned to the restored Aitken Memorial Fountain in Govan's Water Row, marking the ongoing physical regeneration of Govan, which Govan Law Centre has fully and consistently supported for many years.

The Aitken Memorial Fountain was created in 1884 and is the only surviving example the decorative, cast iron drinking fountains produced by Cruikshanks & Co.'s foundry at the Denny Works, Stirlingshire.

Hills Trust pupil's impression of
the Aitken Memorial Fountain.

The fountain commemorates Dr. John Aitken (1838-1880), who provided medical care to the workers of the nearby Ibrox and Drumoyne collieries, and who served as the Police Surgeon and Medical Officer to the Burgh of Govan from 1864, until his death in 1880.

The Aitken Memorial Fountain will be officially opened on Wednesday 1 June 2011 at 10am, with celebrations, craft, farmer and market stalls running until 3pm.

Royal Assent for Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011

2011-04-22T19:06:00.000+01:00

The Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 has received Royal Assent this month, marking the end of a four year campaign initiated and led by Govan Law Centre (GLC), and the start of a better deal for Scotland's homeowners.

The genesis of the Bill was grassroots. At GLC's fortnightly casework meetings our solicitors would repeatedly flag up the growing number of instances of homeowner exploitation by property factors. GLC's local Board of Trustees were equally troubled with the ability of Glasgow's citizens to be ripped-off with impunity. It was apparent something had to be done to redress the imbalance between the rights of unregulated companies and the rights of Scottish homeowners, many of whom were financially or otherwise vulnerable.

A Bill proposal and consultation paper drafted by GLC was first introduced in the Scottish Parliament by the then Govan MSP Gordon Jackson QC in March 2007, but had insufficient time to progress. The reins were quickly picked up by Maryhill MSP Patricia Ferguson and in October 2007 a fresh proposal and consultation paper was published by the Scottish Parliament. High profile support came from a series of BBC tv and radio investigations and a campaign for law reform sponsored by Glasgow's Evening Times newspaper.

Constant publicity led to the OFT launching a market investigation into Scotland's property factor industry, which had the effect of kicking Patricia Ferguson's Bill proposal into the long grass. Despite the OFT recommending the Scottish Government's favoured solution of 'voluntary accreditation', Patrica Ferguson and GLC ploughed on, gathering support and finally making a winning case for major law reform to protect Scottish homeowners.

GLC's Mike Dailly and draftperson of the Bill said: "We're very proud of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 because its a victory for common sense, and will help prevent homeowners in Scotland being exploited, while providing a new accessible tribunal remedy with 'legal teeth' if they do get stung. It's also an example and case in point of the importance of local community law centres. Law centres are being threatened in England and Wales, but we need more of them in the UK, not less".

"Without Patricia Ferguson's tireless dedication and hardwork the Bill would not have seen the light of day. We would acknowledge the tremendous support from Patricia's researcher Chris Kelly, the Parliament's excellent Legislation Team, the Local Government Committee and various civil servants at the Scottish Government who all helped to make this progressive piece of legislation possible".

GLC warns UK consumers 'don't get ripped off when seeking PPI refunds'

2011-04-21T09:34:00.001+01:00

The High Court in London has rejected the Brittish Bankers Association (BBA) judicial review which challenged the UK's financial regulator's power (Financial Services Authority, FSA) to require banks to review all of its Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) complaints (most of which the banks had rejected).

The challenge related to rules introduced by the FSA in August last year and whether breaches of FSA 'Principles' (high level general rules) can be a basis of redress for a customer who complains. The banks had unilaterally decided to place all complaints on hold pending their judicial review; the FSA had not issued a waiver to permit them to do this.

Campaigners have estimated that the High Court's decision could lead to three million customers receiving £4.5bn in refunds, consisting of premiums and interest. However, banks said they would continue to put claims on hold until they have decided whether to appeal against the decision, despite a call from the FSA to reconsider complaints immediately.

Govan Law Centre's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, today warned consumers not to be ripped off by dodgy Claims Management Companies who promise to get you thousands of pounds back for an upfront fee of around £500 hundreds pounds or more.

Mike said: "Many people will be eligible for a refund but not everyone. You can check your eligiblity online using Money Saving Expert's free guide, which also has free style letters on how to complain and obtain a refund. The key point is that you do not need to pay a Claims Management Company or anyone else to get a refund. You can do this yourself by writing a letter. There is no need to go to court. So if you've been ripped off with a useless PPI policy don't get ripped off again when it comes to seeking a refund".

PPI covers payments for loans and credit cards if the policyholder falls ill or loses their job, but the policies are riddled with loopholes, such as exempting claims from the self-employed or those with back injuries, the major cause of workplace illness in the UK.

Govanhill Law Centre client wins sex discrimination case

2011-04-14T21:39:00.000+01:00

A Govanhill Law Centre client has recently received payment from Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) of £18,357.57 following a successful Employment Tribunal claim.

Mrs. R, who wishes to remain anonymous, raised a claim against her former employer for unfair dismissal as a result of pregnancy, and sex discrimination.

Mrs R had worked for P.I.A on a series of fixed term contracts for around 18 months. She took a period of authorised unpaid leave to attend a family wedding. Mrs R fell ill at the wedding and her husband contacted her employer to advise she would be unable to return on time. Despite the fact she produced a medical certificate, Mrs R was dismissed for gross misconduct on her return to work, without having an opportunity to explain her position. Ms R appealed the decision but her appeal letter was ignored. Mrs R believed that the real reason she had been dismissed was because her employer knew she was pregnant and wanted to use her sick leave as an excuse to dismiss her.

After hearing three days of evidence, the Tribunal found that the true reason Mrs R had been dismissed was because she was pregnant and that she had been unfairly dismissed. The Tribunal held that this constituted an act of sex discrimination, contrary to section 3A(1) (a) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. Mrs R was represented by GhLC solicitor Lindsay Paterson at the hearing.

The Tribunal issued its decision in October 2010, but Mrs R has only recently received her settlement. As a result of the delayed payment, the Respondents were forced to pay additional interest of £237.37 to Mrs R.

Mrs R said: “While I worked at P.I.A. my boss treated me badly. He told me I should wear high heels to look smart and tall. He insulted me in front of my colleagues. I was dismissed after he knew I had fallen pregnant and this caused me a lot of stress and financial worries. My husband and I had to move out of our home as we could not afford the rent".

"I am very happy with the Tribunal decision. I had worked in the travel industry for 7 years and I felt my good reputation had been damaged. I can now hold my head up high and feel confident to apply for jobs in the future. I want to thank Govanhill Law Centre – if it was not for them, I would not have won my case “.

Lorraine Barrie, Associate Solicitor at Govanhill Law Centre said: “We are delighted that our client has now received full payment from her former employer, after a long wait. Our client was very distressed following her dismissal and she suffered significant financial worries when her first baby was on the way. We are pleased that the Tribunal have recognised the significant stress caused to our client by awarding £5,000 for injury to her feelings”.

Places still available on GLC's Employment law seminar on 14 April 2011

2011-04-05T16:50:00.000+01:00

GLC's 'Employment law basics for NQ solicitors, trainee solicitors and advisors' is still taking bookings - to reserve a place please call 0141 440 2503 or you can use our booking form.

Our half day seminar is aimed at advisors with little or no knowledge of employment law. The training event will help solicitors and advisors identify potential breaches of the law, and provide practical tools to allow the advisor or the client to take further action.

The seminar includes contributions from the following speakers: Lorraine Barrie, Associate Solicitor at Govanhill Law Centre. She represents a number of clients with employment law disputes including unlawful deductions from wages, unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and redundancy issues. She has assisted migrant workers to report breaches of the law to the relevant enforcement agencies.

Giles Woolfson is a director of McGrade + Co. He has specialised in employment law for over ten years, advising both employers and individuals on various employment issues including whistleblowing, discrimination, breach of contract, unfair dismissal, restrictive covenants and TUPE. He is also a trained mediator.

Paula Chan is a solicitor at McGrade + Co. Paula completed a specialist traineeship in employment law and has practiced solely in this area following qualification. She has experience in a range of contentious and non-contentious work having represented and advised individuals, companies, voluntary organisations and trade unions.

Cost: £65 (concessionary rate for voluntary organizations £55). Registration 9.30am, 10am to 1pm.

Scotland ill-prepared for ‘summer repossession spike’ - GLC calls for proactive solutions

2011-04-04T18:21:00.001+01:00

While the UK Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) predicts a 11% increase in mortgage repossessions across the UK in 2011 as against the figure for 2010 [1], there are a number of reasons to think this figure could be optimistic; however there is absolutely no doubt that Scotland is on course for a ‘summer repossession spike’ according to Scotland’s Govan Law Centre (GLC).

The principal reason for the Scottish spike is due to the fact that between 3,000 and 5,000 mortgage repossession court actions had to be abandoned following the decision of the UK Supreme Court in RBS plc v. Wilson and others, at the end of November last year. Many of these cases have had to be re-raised, and these new cases will start to call in court (following the time it has taken to undertake the pre-action ‘calling-up notice’ and the re-raising of proceedings in compliance with the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010).

In addition, the CML had estimated there were 15,000 historic cases in Scotland where lenders had obtained decree but not enforced it, because payment arrangements were in place; many of these cases will now require fresh court actions as such decrees are no longer sound following the Wilson case [2].

In addition to these Scottish drivers, there are also UK-wide drivers which could not only result in more repossession actions in Scotland, but critically, lead to an increase in the number of cases which are very difficult to resolve:

The UK Government’s decision last October to significantly reduce the level of Support for Mortgage Interest (SMI) for those out of work;
The impact of UK Government public spending cuts on jobs, and the wider impact of welfare cuts too;
The fact that additional forbearance by lenders – since April 2009 at the request of the UK Government – may now be masking the true number of financially difficult cases; and
The uncertainty over when mortgage interest rates will ultimately begin to rise.

Govan Law Centre’s position is that three urgent solutions are required to help address the expected additional pressure in Scotland:

1. Scrap the restrictive Mortgage to Rent rules introduced by the Scottish Government in March 2009, invest more in the Scheme, and extend this excellent Scottish safety net. In June 2009, we contributed to a report which predicted the Scottish Government’s rules would result in a ‘post code lottery’ for vulnerable homeowners facing repossession with many households rejected due to the restrictive eligibility criteria.[3] A FOI response to Govan Law Centre from the Scottish Government confirms we were correct[4].

For the period 31 August 2009 to 31 August 2010 almost half of the people applying to the Scottish Government Home Owner Support Fund (the Mortgage to Rent Scheme and Shared Equity Scheme) were refused help; out of 719 registered applications, 315 did not proceed.

Worryingly, of those Scottish households turned down for help, 37% were refused help because their home was valued more than the Scottish Government new valuation limit (which is a crude figure based upon the lowest quartile value of houses within a local authority area in relation to the number of rooms); while another 37% were refused help because no local authority of housing association was willing to participate in the Scheme. Clearly, the Scheme is unable to cope with the current demand, never mind the expected significant increase in demand which GLC predicts later this year.

2. Introduce a new ‘Post Repossession Tenancy’ in Scots law so that occupiers whose homes had been repossessed could lease them back from their lender until the properties were sold. At present lenders would be highly unlikely to do this, as they would be granting a Short Assured Tenancy of at least six months, with complex liabilities for repairs etc., However, we know that many properties can take several months or considerably longer to be sold and it would benefit lenders, repossessed occupiers and local authority homelessness departments if former owners could enter into a simple ‘no frills’ tenancy until the property was sold. Former owners who were unemployed or on low incomes would be eligible for housing benefit, and such an initiative would utilise otherwise empty properties in Scotland.

3. Enhance the requirement for early intervention to prevent homelessness in Scotland – we recommend an upgrading of section 11 of the Homelessness etc., (Scotland) Act 2003 to require local authorities to use innovative techniques (such as embedded homelessness triggers within their computerised client contact systems) to detect and prevent threatened homelessness much earlier, and to provide a co-ordinated and holistic response in terms of legal, money advice, welfare rights and social care services.

[1] http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2836

[2] www.cml.org.uk/cml/filegrab/rbs-v-wilson-nw.pdf

[3] http://www.govanlc.com/help_is_at_hand_report.pdf

[4] Scottish Government Housing and Regeneration Directorate written response dated 12 November 2010, from Keith McDowell, HOSF Scheme Co-ordinator for Scotland.

All together: Scottish law centres show solidarity with TUC campaign

2011-03-31T12:23:00.000+01:00

GLC solicitors with the radical socialist
lawyer, Michael Mansfield QC

GLC solicitors Lorraine Barrie and Lindsay Paterson joined the Trades Union Congress (TUC) 'All Together' campaign in London at the weekend to show Scottish law centre solidarity with the TUC's call for an alternative to the unfair and savage cuts the UK Government is imposing on welfare benefits and vital public services across the UK.

The TUC suggest progressive and fairer alternatives such as investing in growth and introducing fair taxation. A tiny tax on big financial transactions by banks – a Robin Hood tax – could raise £20bn per year.

The TUC say that tax avoidance by big companies and the super rich is more than £40bn a year. And investing in our public transport, housing and the green economy can build a sustainable future.

Application to the European Court of Human Rights for Margaret Jaconelli

2011-03-22T21:25:00.002Z

Govan Law Centre (GLC) today submitted an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) in Strasbourg for Mrs Margaret Jaconelli.

The application seeks just satisfaction, an order to require the Scottish Government to ensure that Scots law on CPOs of dwelling-house (and eviction thereafter) is compliant with the European Convention of Human Rights, and a quashing of the CPO made against Mrs Jaconelli's home.

GLC's Principal Solicitor's Mike Dailly, was required to enter through a small window of Mrs Jaconelli's barricaded home, in order to discuss her application to the ECrtHR, take her instructions and complete the necessary legal paperwork in order to lodge an application to the European Court.

The application to the ECrtHR argues that: the applicant, Mrs Jaconelli, was unlawfully deprived of her possessions as she did not obtain a fair trial as required by Article 6 of the ECHR in relation to the making of the Compulsory Purchase Order which deprived her of ownership of her property. Accordingly, Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 6 have been violated.

The applicant had no equality of arms, she being unrepresented and there being no legal aid available. The applicant was unable to present a fair defence in proceedings which were highly technical. She did not receive a fair hearing in terms of Article 6. Reference is made to the cases of Steel and Morris v. UK (Application 68416/01); Ashingdane v. UK (Application 8225/78); Golder v. UK (Series A No.18 of 1975); and Airey v. Ireland (Application 6289/73).

The applicant’s right under Article 8 of the ECHR to respect for her private and family life and her home has been violated. The applicant relied on the decision of the UK Supreme Court in Manchester City Council v Pinnock, 2010 3 WLR 1441 for authority for the proposition that she was entitled to found upon Article 8 as a defence to the eviction action against her.

The case of Pinnock was authority (at paragraph 53) for the proposition that in response to an Article 8 defence the Council had to ‘plead’ and ‘adduce evidence’ to justify its interference. No examination of the disputed facts was permitted to take place by the court; reference is made to Connors v. UK (2004) 40 EHRR 189 at paragraphs 81-83 and 92; McCann v. UK 40 EHRR 189; Zehentner v. Austria (Application 2008/02) and Paulic v. Croatia (Application 3572/06).

Under reference to paragraph 92 of the European Court of Human Rights decision in Connors v. UK the applicant in the present case contends that the Scottish court procedure was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Article 8 because Glasgow City Council was not required to establish any substantive justification for evicting the applicant. There was no opportunity for an examination of the facts in dispute between the parties and the applicant’s Article 8 rights have therefore been violated.

Glasgow City Council's eviction of the Jaconelli family in Glasgow's East End: Govan Law Centre statement

2011-03-18T13:52:00.000Z

Govan Law Centre finds it reprehensible, inhumane and unnecessary for our client, Mrs Margaret Jaconelli and her family, to be forcibly ejected today from her home of 34 years when she has offered to leave voluntarily, and without any qualification, following the emergency mediation offered by the Scottish Government last night.

Glasgow City Council have refused the Scottish Government's offer of mediation, notwithstanding Mrs Jaconelli has agreed to voluntarily leave her home after an opportunity to get the round the table, represented by Govan Law Centre, with an independent mediator from the Scottish Government.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said:
"There is no need to evict my client, and to do so in circumstances where she has agreed to leave after Scottish Government emergency mediation makes no sense. Glasgow City Council's barbaric action is positively unGlaswegian and does not reflect the spirit of our great City".

"I remain extremely worried and perplexed that Glasgow City Council would prefer to forcibly evict a Glasgow family from their home of 34 years, rather than get round the table on Monday and discuss matters; particulary as I have advised the Council that my client is willing to voluntarily leave without further qualification".

"Before yesterday's Court of Session action the Council was prepared to be flexible and compassionate, and give additional time to secure a civilised departure. However, Council officials have done an inexplicable U-turn within the space of 24 hours, and there is a fear that this case may have become overly personalised. But it is still not too late to be reasonable".

Unfair bank charges update from Govan Law Centre

2011-03-18T13:16:00.000Z

The Scottish Legal Aid Board have granted full civil legal aid certificates in the cases of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland plc and Reid v. Clydesdale Bank plc. This will enable Govan Law Centre to argue that the overdraft charges applied to our clients' current accounts were unfair in relation to s.140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, as amended, and separately, regulation 5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (on grounds excluding price in relation to the UTCCR as per the decision of the UK Supreme Court in OFT v. Abbey National plc and others).

Highland pupil's road safety dispute

2011-03-02T14:00:00.001Z

The Press and Journal reports that a Highland couple have kept their 10-year-old daughter off school for 18 months – for fear she might be knocked down and killed on a busy single-track road.

Robert Brooks and his wife Shermaine from Skye claim it is not safe for Katie-Ann to walk three miles along the 60mph limit A855 Uig to Staffin road to Kilmuir Primary School because there is no pavement or street lighting.

They decided to keep her at home after Highland Council ruled in August 2009 that she no longer qualified for free transport because she lived less than three miles from the school, a distance children aged eight and over are expected to be able to walk.

Louise Melia, associate solicitor at the Glasgow-based Govan Law Centre, who has taken up the family’s case, said a legal precedent had already been set whereby walking distance rules could be overridden on the grounds of road safety. Ms Melia said councils have a “huge amount of discretion” and the authority could decide to provide free transport if it wanted.

A spokesman for Highland Council said the council had carried out a new risk assessment of the A855 and the results would be shared with Mr Brooks “very shortly”.

Final hurdle for Property Factors (Scotland) Bill next week

2011-02-25T08:31:00.002Z

The Scottish Parliament will debate the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill at Stage 3 on the afternoon of Thursday, 3 March 2011. This is the final hurdle for the Bill. The Bill, drafted by Govan Law Centre's Parliamentary Unit for Glasgow MSP Patricia Ferguson, has now secured the backing of the Scottish Government, the Parliament's Local Government and Communities Committee, and also has wide public support across Scotland. However, the Bill now needs to secure the support of MSPs in the full Chamber next Thursday in order for it to become law.

A mortal blow to members' rights: proposed changes to Law Society of Scotland's constitution

2011-02-24T13:23:00.004Z

The draft constitution which the Council of the Law Society of Scotland (LSS) will propose at its AGM next month will irretrievably damage the rights of the 10,500 members of the Law Society. Today, GLC publishes an article by Glasgow solicitor, and LSS Council member, Walter Semple which explains how the proposed new constitution diminishes the rights of ordinary members, and exposes Scottish solicitors to the unnecessary financial risks of 'Tesco law firms', know as 'licensed legal service providers' (LPs) under the Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2010.

Glasgow Council member and GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "The Law Society is a members-based organisation, paid for by 10,500 members across Scotland, but a small elite want to severely restrict the ability of members to influence their own organisation. That's undemocratic and unnecessary. The Society should be fully open, transparent and accountable to its members. It isn't and the constitution proposed by the Council isn't fit for purpose".

"Walter Semple is correct to highlight the irreconcilable conflict in the Society both regulating 'Tesco law' businesses and supposedly promoting the interests of solicitors. These bodies are not Scottish solicitors, yet the proposed constitution would see Scottish solicitors underwriting their financial risks. That is not in the interests of the Scottish legal profession, so why are we doing this?"

The proposed new constitution would require any members motion to influence the policy of the Society to require a 2/3rds majority, unless it had the support of Council. Further, LPs would be covered by the Society's Guarantee Fund (a fund built up by a levy on partners and principals in Scottish legal firms) and the Society's Master Policy.

What can you do? If you are a solicitor you can grant a proxy so that your vote can be cast against the proposed new constitution; OPEN PROXY FORM (this should be returned to the Registrar, David Cullen, of the Law Society of Scotland in Edinburgh. Or you can attend the AGM on 25 March 2010 and cast your own vote.

Protecting Scotland's vulnerable citizens: Access to Justice Committee Discussion Paper

2011-02-02T02:41:00.000Z

The Law Society of Scotland's Access to Justice Committtee (AJC) has published a radical Discussion Paper (DP) suggesting that the Scottish Government's 8.2% legal aid cut could be achieved by tax efficient regulatory restructuring. The DP also calls for the redeployment of PDSO resources to fund victim support and other unmet civil legal need services.

The Convenor of the Law Society's Access to Justice Committee, GLC's Mike Dailly, said: ' We believe the priority must be to protect Scotland's vulnerable and low income citizens from the worst consequences of unprecedented welfare benefit and public funding cuts. This cannot be done in the current economic climate without innovative regulatory and structural reform of our existing legal aid system".

The Acccess to Justice Committee's Discussion Paper can be read here.

GLC 2011 conference and seminar programme

2011-01-27T16:23:00.007Z

Full details of Govan Law Centre's new seminar and conference programme will be announced shortly. The first event is a national conference in Glasgow on 9 February 2011 entitled 'Disability Discrimination Claims in the Additional Support Needs Tribunals'.

From 18 March 2011, certain disability discrimination claims will be heard by the Additional Support Needs Tribunals, rather than the Sheriff Court. Govan Law Centre’s Education Law Unit are hosting a conference in Glasgow on this topic, with a line-up of prestigious speakers, including our keynote speaker, the Minister for Children and Young People, Adam Ingram MSP.

Other events include a seminar on 10 June 2011 on the operation of the Private Rented Housing Panel, with Ms Aileen Devanny, President of the PRHP in Scotland, an event on the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill, and many more to be announced - for further details please click here.

Faulty goods? Visit the OFT's new Sale of Goods Act 'hub'

2011-01-27T12:09:00.002Z

The Office of Fair Trading has developed an comprehensive 'online hub', which brings together up-to-date practical guides and information on UK consumer rights in relation to the purchase of faulty goods. Although aimed at UK retailers and their staff, the 'hub' provides provides helpful customer guides, and useful materials. So if you've purchased faulty goods and want to know if you can get a replacement or your money back, this is the site for you.

Scottish Parliament Committee hear evidence of employers who “take advantage” of migrant workers

2011-01-24T22:38:00.002Z

Govanhill Law Centre’s submission to the Scottish Parliament’s Inquiry into Migration and Trafficking has been cited in the Parliament’s final report.

The Inquiry, held by the Equal Opportunities Committee last year, heard evidence from a large number of stakeholders including migrants, local authorities, the voluntary sector, police, academics, journalists, MSPs and the Crown Office. The innovative partnership working approach of the Hub in Govanhill was recognised by the Committee as an example of good practice.

The Inquiry heard evidence on the nature and extent of migration to Scotland and described the lack of migration data, public perceptions about migration and the influence of the media as “key overarching issues“.　 The Committee recognised key challenges in “improving awareness among migrants about public services, and their rights and entitlements“, “employment including exploitative employment practices“, health, education, housing, policing and enforcement.

Govanhill Law Centre Solicitor Lorraine Barrie said “we are pleased that the Committee have recognised the significant barriers many migrants experience when living and working in Scotland in terms of receiving advice and information about their rights and practical barriers to reporting exploitative employers. 　 We are also pleased that the partnership working approach of the Hub in Govanhill, which we are part of, has been recognised as an example of good practice“. The full story can be read on Govanhill Law Centre's website here.

Scotland's Justice Secretary must back Scottish Consumers over unfair bank charges says MSP

2010-12-14T22:06:00.000Z

Consumers in Scotland are being denied justice against UK banks according to the MSP for Glasgow Ballieston, Margaret Curran, who is the local constituency MSP and MP for GLC's client Jennifer Sharp.

Ms Sharp has been refused legal aid by the Scottish Legal Aid Board to pursue her claim for a refund of unfair bank charges against the Bank of Scotland plc. Labour MSP and MP Margaret Curran has issued the following statement:-

" 'Scotland’s Justice Secretary has refused to back Scottish consumers who are challenging unfair and excessive bank charges. The Justice Secretary needs to decide whose side he’s on. Scotland’s consumers or the banks? Scottish consumers are being routinely denied access to justice on this issue and Kenny MacAskill must break his silence and support hardworking Scots who’ve been treated unfairly by the banks'.

Last year there were approximately 120,000 Scottish households who had complained about excessive overdraft charges. The banks have since rejected their complaints and now there is effectively no redress through the Scottish courts on this issue.

In July, Kenny MacAskill claimed Scottish consumers have no problem in trying to recover overdraft charges in our courts: 'People are still able to raise bank charge cases in the small-claims court – this ruling does nothing to stop that. We totally support the right of people to bring such actions and the courts will decide each case on its own merits.'

However, the experience of Scots tells a very different and worrying story. Kenny MacAskill has displayed nothing but arrogance, and incompetence in failing to do anything whatsoever to help financially vulnerable Scots at least be able to access justice – with at least 120,000 Scottish households standing to benefit from action on this issue.

Last week the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) refused to grant civil legal aid for citizens on low income/benefits to pursue court actions for a refund of unfair bank charges. In the cases of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland plc and Reid v. Clydesdale Bank plc SLAB refused legal aid because they said the value of the sums sued were too small.

Applying a ‘cost/benefit analysis’ test, SLAB said someone who was able to privately fund litigation would not risk spending their own money to pursue a claim under £3,000. Of course, this was the reason the small claims system was set up with restricted expenses.

However, bank charges cases in Scotland have been removed from the small claims system by the courts on the motion of UK banks (a tactic used in other parts of the UK too). Accordingly, as matters stand Scotland’s legal aid and civil court system have failed Scottish consumers who want to try and reclaim their overdraft charges.

Scotland’s Justice Minister needs to wake up from his slumber on this issue and take urgent action".

Confidence must be restored in Scotland's legal aid system

2010-12-14T21:09:00.001Z

The Scottish Legal Aid Board has issued its second public statement in relation to its refusal to grant civil legal in the bank charges case of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland plc. According to GLC this statement does nothing to restore public confidence in the Board's ability to provide access to justice for Scots, particulary in relation to their unfair treatment by UK banks.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "According to the Board a page of an application form for civil legal aid 'is not the application', while not all the form 'may be read by the Board'. Further, we are told any documents or letters provided in relation to the application don't count as they are 'not included in the initial application'. How can Scots have any confidence in a publicly funded body that offers absurd bureaucratic excuses instead of legal aid? Scotland deserves better".

Response to Scottish Legal Aid Board statement re bank charges

2010-12-10T16:59:00.003Z

On Wednedsay 8 December 2010 the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) issued a formal statement in relation to GLC's case of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland and the generally availablity of civil legal aid for Scottish consumers to pursue claims for unfair bank charges.

SLAB alleged that "Following receipt, the application was considered but refused as it did not meet the reasonableness test for civil legal aid. No mention was made of wider public interest by Govan Law Centre at this time". That assertion was false. The statutory statement at page 19 of the application expressly stated the strong public interest in this case, on the following basis:

"Page 19: Para 5. On the motion of the opponents these proceedings were remitted to the ordinary cause roll due to exceptional complexity. The applicant also seeks an order under the 1974 Act to prohibit any further charges being levied to her account in the future. Approximately 100,000 people in Scotland lodged complaints with their bank seeking a refund of overdraft charges, and therefore, there is a very strong public interest element to this case".

Before SLAB issued its original refusal of legal aid in this case on 12 October 2010, Dundas + Wilson, solicitors for the Bank of Scotland, lodged a 6 page letter of objections to SLAB on 27 August raising exceptionally complex and novel points of consumer credit law, issues around the UK Supreme Court's decision in OFT v. Abbey Nationals and others, and contentious issues around the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, as well as complex issues of fact, in objection to the granting of civil legal aid in this case.

GLC responded to these points on 14 September 2010 with an equally complex and detailed letter. The fact such novel points of law were at stake - from a Scottish and UK perspective - with such a massive public interest to at least 100,000 Scottish consumers (and by implication 900,000 consumers in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland), renders it extremely worrying that SLAB has chosen to falsely claim none of these issues were mentioned to them.

Separately, SLAB had claimed "GLC’s press release suggests that legal aid is unlikely to be obtained for certain cases. This is not accurate". We have just received another refusal of civil legal aid, this time in the case of Reid v. Clydesdale Bank plc, where SLAB once again rely on the 'cost/benefit test'. GLC believes the that ridgid reliance on this test is unreasonable, irrational and unlawful for the reasons set out in our most recent letter to SLAB.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, said: "The Scottish Legal Aid Board's statement is fundamentally flawed and represents a failure to accept responsibility. It claims that GLC made 'no mention' of the wider public interest of the case when we lodged our client's application for legal aid. We believe, the Board's CEO should apologise for that false and unfair statement, and take responsibility for the self-evident failure to correctly apply the statutory tests in this case".

Access to justice denied: Scottish Legal Aid Board kills off hope of reclaiming unfair bank charges in Scotland

2010-12-07T20:45:00.002Z

SLAB's CEO
Lindsay Montgomery

The Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) has refused to grant civil legal aid in a leading Scottish test case on unfair UK bank charges - Sharp v. Bank of Scotland plc - with their decision to refuse legal aid being upheld on an internal appeal to the Board this week.

The decision effectively means that no-one in Scotland can ever obtain civil legal aid to pursue a modest bank charges claim, and further, that any complex consumer credit or consumer law complaint of a modest value is unlikely to ever qualify for legal aid in Scotland. In short, SLAB have killed-off access to justice for many tens of thousands of consumers in Scotland.

The previous unfair UK bank charges campaign, which Govan Law Centre played a key role in as solicitors to the UK campaign team, resulted in over £1bn being refunded to consumers across Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Despite the widescale public interest in enabling tens of thousands of Scots reclaim unfair overdraft fees, SLAB has refused legal aid on the grounds of a 'cost-benefit analysis test'.

The 'cost-benefit analysis' is based upon an assumption that a 'privately paying client of modest means would not pursue an ordinary action in these circumstances'. Of course, the fact the action was ordinary cause and not a small claims, was due to the court holding that the subject-matter was legally complex; and the fact UK banks have sought to remove claims against them from the small claims court.

GLC had agreed to cap all of its fees and outlays at a purely nominal sum (£375) in order to keep the risk to the public purse to a bare minimum and proportionate level. We also pointed out the case was not just about money, it was a matter of huge public interest, and we were also seeking an order to prohibit the future imposition of overdraft charges under s.140B of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. All of these arguments were summarily dismissed by SLAB.

Today, GLC has written to SLAB advising that in order to avoid the need for a petition for judicial review of the Board’s refusal of civil legal aid in this case, as Wednesbury unreasonable, et separatim irrational and illegal, we would ask the Board to reconsider its decision to refuse civil legal aid under reference to the following relevant and significant considerations:

"If the Board granted civil legal aid then in relation to the cost/benefit analysis, GLC's client and this firm would undertake to seek a protective expenses order to cap expenses at the equivalent small claims limit, and if this was not granted the Board could reconsider its position;

The Board will be aware of the wider Scottish public interest in this case, and that if civil legal aid cannot granted for bank charges cases due to the cost/benefit analysis applied by the Board, as in this case, the Board will be acting unlawfully in relation to section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and inter alia the applicant’s entitlement to a fair and public hearing. The Board will note the court has already assessed this case as dealing with complex and difficult factual and legal issues in determining to remit same to the ordinary court. Without the benefit of civil legal aid our client will denied access to justice; and

The applicant’s claim proceeds upon a case under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and separately, the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Said Regulations were enacted by the UK to implement its European Community law (EC) obligations under the Unfair Consumer Contract Terms Directive 93/13/EC, while the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended) implemented the UK’s obligations under the Consumer Credit Directive 2008/48/EC (and earlier). The foregoing rights that the applicant enjoys are guaranteed by the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The refusal to grant legal aid in our client’s case is a contravention of Article 47 of the Charter. Article 47 provides as follows:

“Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial

Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law. Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented.

Legal aid shall be made available to those who lack sufficient resources in so far as such aid is necessary to ensure effective access to justice”.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said:

"Govan Law Centre believes the Scottish Legal Aid Board has dealt a death blow to tens of thousands of people in Scotland who would like to obtain a refund of unfair bank charges. We believe that the Board has acted unlawfully, unreasonably and irrationally, and we will challenge the Board in order to protect our clients' European Community law rights. Once again the Board has demonstrated that it cannot be entrusted with the responsibility for monitoring and safeguarding access to justice in Scotland. The Board does not appear to understand access to justice in Scotland; in many respects the Board has become a major threat to vulnerable Scots securing access to justice.".

Property Factors Bill debated before full Scottish Parliament on Wednesday

2010-12-06T21:32:00.001Z

The Scottish Parliament will debate the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill at Stage 1 on the afternoon of Wednesday, 8 December 2010. This is a make or break moment for the Bill. The Bill, drafted by Govan Law Centre's Parliamentary Unit for Patricia Ferguson MSP, has secured the backing of the Parliament's Local Government and Communities Committee, and also has wide public support across Scotland. However, the Bill now needs to secure the support of MSPs in the full Chamber on Wednesday in order for it to progress.

Shopworkers back protection bill

2010-12-05T09:39:00.002Z

The Sunday Herald reports that shopworkers have given their support to proposals to give Scottish workers greater protection from assaults.

The Co-operative Group, Scotmid Co-operative Society and the Scottish Grocers' Federation have announced their support for the Protection of Workers (Scotland) Bill which is being steered through the Scottish Parliament by Labour MSP Hugh Henry. The Bill and supporting documents were drafted by GLC's Parliamentary Unit.

The Bill, which MSPs are first due to vote on in the next few weeks, will give shopworkers and other public-facing staff the same level of protection given to emergency workers who are assaulted while doing their jobs.

If passed, the Bill would make it clear that it is an offence to assault a shopworker while at work or as a result of them doing their job. The Bill already has the support of Usdaw, the shopworkers' union.

Major new early intervention service to prevent homelessness in Glasgow's Southside

2010-12-01T15:11:00.002Z

Govan Law Centre has secured almost £336,000 funding from the Oak Foundation to develop an innovative early intervention service to prevent the most vulnerable and hard to reach citizens in Glasgow's Southside from becoming homeless.

The new project will provide an early intervention and crisis response that fits around the individual service user along with an intensive one to one support service to deal with the underlying causes of homelessness. Headed up by GLC's Alistair Sharp, the project will utilise new technology and innovative approaches to preventing homelessness and will focus on sustainability and long term solutions.

The project will have a major social policy and law reform remit, with an ambitious strategy to secure transformational change to benefit those threatened with homelessess across Scotland.

GLC's Mike Dailly said: "The Govan Law Centre Board of Trustees are indebted to the Oak Foundation for backing our innovative new project. We hope to develop a radical new approach to preventing homelessness on a long term and sustainable basis, working closely with our local partners, Money Matters Money Advice Centre and the South West Glasgow Community Health and Care Partnership, and other agencies".

GLC's Prevention of Homelessness Co-ordinator, Alistair Sharp said: "Our project will provide new hope to vulnerable people at risk of homelessness in the Southside of Glasgow. With the new resources available to us we will be able to intervene to prevent homelessness at a much earlier stage, and avoid the human misery of homelessness".

Thousands face extra bills as court ruling hits property sales

2010-11-30T08:42:00.002Z

The Herald reports that "A landmark ruling on repossessions is resulting in the suspension of property sales at the last minute and thousands of Scots facing large bills from banks on top of losing their homes. Almost a week after the decision by the UK Supreme Court effectively ground all Scottish repossession cases to a halt, there are concerns that hundreds of property deals could be halted as a result.

There are also warnings of the impact of the judgment on the cash-strapped courts service, with thousands of cases scrapped and having to come back into the system. Last night, the Law Society of Scotland called on solicitors to put the brakes on all purchases of repossessed homes until it can be proven it is compliant with last week’s “earthquake” judgment.

Bruce Ritchie, director of professional practice at the Law Society of Scotland, said: “The society’s conveyancing and civil justice committee will be looking at this in detail but our preliminary view on current transactions that have not yet settled is that buyers’ solicitors should be firm about declining to settle the transaction until selling creditors can produce evidence of having followed correct procedure.”

Mike Dailly, of the Govan Law Centre, said he would pursue legal action against the lenders for putting the bill for dealing with the judgment on to his clients. He said: “The question that no-one has asked is ‘who’s going to pay for all this?’ I have no doubt UK banks will do what they always do and pass these costs onto consumers by adding them to their mortgage – which they can do if the costs are reasonable. “We could be looking at up to £40 million or more. “It’s not reasonable to expect vulnerable Scots facing repossession to pay banks and their lawyers twice for what is essentially their solicitors’ responsibility and failure.” "

Update: unfair bank charges on BBC 1's Rip-off Britain

2010-11-27T17:08:00.003Z

Unfair bank charges, including clients of Govan Law Centre, were featured on BBC 1's Rip-off Britain at 9.15am on Monday, 29 November 2010.

Sadly, the programme decided to take a soft approach and focus on peripheral issues around charges (e.g. communication concerns) as opposed to the tough question of whether the UK bank charging model was unfair in law, whether it was morally acceptable to exploit vulnerable consumers to subsidise better off customers, as well as overlooking the plight of thousands of UK consumers still trying to seek refunds of unfair charges.

GLC predicts major shockwaves for Scottish repossession law following RBS v. Wilson and others

2010-11-24T17:09:00.003Z

A judgment of the UK Supreme Court today looks set to have profound implications for the law and practice of repossessions in Scotland. According to GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, the case of RBS plc v Wilson and others "may be to Scottish repossession proceedings what Cadder has been to criminal proceedings in Scotland".

The UK Supreme Court upheld the appeal of two sets of Scottish homeowners in the case of Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Wilson and others [2010] UKSC 50, where a lender's certificate of default did not amount to a 'requisition' for the purposes of section 5 of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894, and where the court held that in the circumstances of the case, a 'calling-up notice' should have been served.

The standard practice of most lenders in Scotland in reposession proceedings has been to raise a writ founding upon a 'default' in terms of standard condition 9(1)(b) (of sch 3 of the 1970 Act) and seek recovery in terms of section 24 of the Conveyancing and Fedual Reform (Scotland) Act 1970. In essence, lenders would not bother with a default or calling-up notice and would simply raise repossession proceeding based upon the mortgage arrears (lodging a 'certificate of default' setting out the amount of arrears).

And that was that for many years in Scotland - defenders could use the Mortgage Rights Act (Scotland) 2001 and now the Home Owners & Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010 to obtain a chance to pay, re-mortgage or restructure, sell, or apply to the Mortgage to Rent Scheme. But no-one challenged the orthodoxy of the lender's right to use standard condition 9(1)(b) for a repossession based upon mortgage arrears; until now.

The UK Supreme Court's ruling makes it clear that standard condition 9(1)(b) cannot be used for a failure to comply with mortgage payments, and instead a calling-up notice is necessary in an arrears case. At para 74 Lord Hope says "As standard condition 9(1)(b) refers to a failure to comply with any other requirement arising out of the security, this section must be taken to refer to defaults other than in respect of the debt secured by the standard security. Content for its application is to be found in the requirements that are set out in standard condition 1 (maintenance and repair), standard condition 2 (completion of buildings), standard condition 3 (observance of conditions in title) and standard condition 5 (insurance) and any other similar conditions that may have been included by way of variation to maintain the value of the security subjects".

GLC's Principal Solicitor said: "The fact the UK Supreme Court has stated that standard condition 9(1)(b) cannot be used for a failure to pay ones mortgage, and that in such cases a calling-up notice and standard condition 9(1)(a) should be used instead, will send shock waves to lenders and their solicitors in Scotland. More than that it could mean thousands of cases might have been raised incompetently, with defenders entitled to seek dismissal with expenses in principle. GLC would recommend that all homeowners in Scotland currently subject to repossession proceedings seek advice from a law centre solicitor or local firm of solicitors in light of this decision".

Local Government & Communities Committee backs Property Factors Bill

2010-11-16T08:59:00.000Z

The Stage 1 Report of the Scottish Parliament's Local Government and Communities Committee has supported the general principles of the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill, which will help pave the way for the Bill's forthcoming Stage 1 debate before the Chamber next month.

The Committee's report is available here; it makes a number of recommendations to amend the Bill to take on board practical issues which arose during evidence; some of the key conclusions are reproduced below:

"45. The Committee believes that there is clear evidence testifying to the problems encountered by members of the public with property factors and that there is therefore a need to proceed with a statutory framework to regulate property factors. It concurs with those witnesses who stated that a voluntary accreditation scheme would not address the problem of factors that provide a poor service to consumers. While the Committee acknowledges the work already conducted by the Scottish Government’s working group in developing a national voluntary accreditation scheme, it does not consider that there is evidence to suggest that this will be ultimately successful in addressing inadequate factoring services. It therefore supports the approach taken by the Member in Charge of the Bill in proposing a statutory framework for the regulation of property factors.

58. The Committee therefore considers that it is appropriate for housing associations and local authorities to be included within the meaning of “property factor” contained in the Bill.

62. The Committee welcomes the meaning given to “property factors” in the Bill. It considers that it is important for the definition to include the ownership and management or maintenance of land that is available for use by the owners of any adjoining or neighbouring residential properties. The Committee considers that consumers should be entitled to a quality service and that a company should not be able to avoid the provision of this service as a land-owning maintenance company ...

110. The Committee recognises that complaints against property factors can often be very technical and concurs that a homeowner housing panel will provide an effective structure for dealing with such complaints.

122. The Committee considers that difficulties faced by homeowners in switching property factor represents a major issue, particularly in relation to land-owning maintenance companies. While it recognises that there may be less need for homeowners to switch once the provisions in the Bill raise standards in the sector, it nevertheless believes that a simplification of the process would be of benefit to the consumer. The Committee believes this is an important issue that might require legislation. However, the Committee also recognises it is a very complex issue and therefore calls on the Scottish Government to undertake further research".

GLC criticises 'pot shots' from Justice spokesman

2010-11-11T15:10:00.001Z

Scottish Conservative Party criticism of legal aid payments for asylum seekers and medical negligence claims in Scotland are ‘reckless, unjust, and ill-founded’ according to Govan Law Centre.

On Tuesday, Conservative justice spokesman John Lamont MSP attacked Scottish legal aid payments for asylum seekers cases, which totalled £3.8m in 2010/11. Mr Lamont said: "These are astonishing sums of money and every penny spent from the justice budget on legal aid is money not available for policing the streets and preventing crime".

Mr Lamont added that "The UK government is having a fundamental look at the legal aid system, to innovate and provide a value for money scheme built on sound foundations. The SNP Scottish Government needs to do the same."

Today, Mr Lamont launched an attack on legal aid paid to victims of medical negligence, which totalled £1.27m in the last six months, claiming: “There has been a shocking rise in the amount of taxpayers’ money being used to fund negligence cases against the NHS over the past few years”.

GLC’s Mike Dailly said: “Much of the legal aid ‘paid’ for reparation claims is judicial expenses recovered from opponents as the rules require awards of expenses to be routed through the Scottish Legal Aid Board; so while it may all look like legal aid it isn’t. Accordingly, Mr Lamont’s figures for medical negligence cases are significantly overstated. It’s also reckless to criticise any apparent rise without knowing if, and why, there have been more cases, or more expensive cases”.

“Attacking money paid for asylum seeker cases or blaming the Scottish Government is ridiculous when you consider that the success rate of immigration petitions for judicial review in Scotland have been running at around 80%. In other words, Mr Lamont might wish to direct his outrage at the quality of decision-making by the UK Border Agency. Or he might consider refraining from taking ill-informed pot shots”.

GLC calls for widescale 'FOI' extension in Scotland

2010-11-02T19:32:00.003Z

GLC has responded to the Scottish Government's consultation on 'Extending the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002', which closed this week, by calling for the Act to be extended to cover the Glasgow Housing Association Ltd, and its factoring company, as well as asserting the general principle that the Act should be extended to a comprehensive range of private, third sector, and other bodies who are in receipt of substantial public funds, subject to 'proportionality criteria'. GLC has argued that:

"As a matter of general principle, we believe there is a strong case for arguing that any body – whether private, third sector or public – should be subject to the 2002 Act in relation to the public money which they receive (and how it is spent) or public services which they provide subject to fair and reasonable proportionality criteria. Such proportionality criteria could be based around (a) the value of the contract or award and/or (b) the number of employees in the entity".

"We fully support proposals to extend coverage of the Act to GHA. We agree that GHA is a RSL unique in terms of size and public profile. In March 2003, Glasgow City Council transferred its housing stock to GHA with the result that GHA carries out functions which were previously carried out by the local authority. This means that people in Glasgow, who were formerly council tenants and are now tenants of GHA are unable to access information other tenants in other parts of Scotland would be able to access through Freedom of Information Act requests. Extending the coverage of the Act to include GHA will help address this inequity".

"We strongly believe that coverage of the Act should also include GHA’s factoring service, ‘Your Place’. As well as taking on responsibility for Glasgow City Council’s rented properties, GHA took over the council’s factoring responsibilities when the stock was transferred. GHA are now the factors of many ex-council properties. They are in a unique position as a factor in that they are the majority owner in many of the common closes they factor. This means that they often have to balance their role as owner and factor. We feel that it would be in the public interest to be able to obtain information regarding GHA’s factoring service through Freedom of Information requests".

No extra funding for Mortgage to Rent Scheme in Scotland

2010-10-26T10:37:00.001+01:00

The Co-ordinator of the Scottish Government's Home Owner Support Fund (HOSF) has confirmed that there will be no additional funding to the scheme to cope with the expected increase in demand following the Department of Works and Pensions cut in mortgage interest payments to unemployed homeowners. Since earlier this month the amount of mortgage interest paid dropped from 6.08% p.a. to the Bank of England’s average monthly mortgage rate, which is currently 3.63% p.a.

GLC had cited an example of a Govan client who had received DWP interest of £742 p.m to her capital and interest mortgage, resulting in a shortfall of £376 p.m. Her family were prepared to make up that shortfall and the court action would be continued on that basis, giving her time to try and get back into work. However, due to the UK Government’s change of policy, this month the DWP reduced her ISMI to £433 p.m, resulting in a 80% increase in her shortfall to £678 p.m. She could not pay this (she received £59.49 IBJSA), nor could her family do so.

HOSF Co-ordinator Keith McDowell's said:
"Thank you for your email of 4 October to Alex Neil MSP, the Minister for Housing and Communities about the Scottish Government’s Home Owners’ Support Fund which has been passed to me for reply.

The Scottish Government is aware that people who find themselves in danger of losing their homes may still be at risk, even having successfully applied for other forms of assistance available to them. As a result, in June 2010 we reviewed the administrative procedures, application form and information leaflet to make it clear to applicants and advisers that if other forms assistance (such as Support for Mortgage Interest) do not remove the threat of repossession, applicants may still apply for assistance from the Home Owners’ Support Fund. The amended scheme literature is published on the Scottish Government website at www.scotland.gov.uk/hosf

In 2009/10 the Scottish Government helped 303 households remain in their home as a result of the Mortgage to Rent scheme with record funding of £20m. I am pleased to say that the budget for 2010/11 has remained at £20m and we aim to help similar numbers again".

Human Rights in Divided Britain

2010-10-15T15:15:00.005+01:00

The erosion of civil liberties, and the need to use the law more creatively and effectively to tackle social injustice and the forthcoming 'austerity agenda', were just some of the topics discussed during a barnstorming debate last night at the University of Cumbria, marking the 20th anniversary of the successful and forward-looking Cumbria Law Centre.

The public debate posed the question of whether the 1998 Human Rights Act was essential or a distraction in the struggle for social justice in Britain. Former chair of the UK Law Centres Federation, and director of Kent University Law Clinic - the UK's oldest university law clinic - Professor John Fitzpatrick gave an inspirational speech on the erosion of civil liberty and freedom in the UK.

Professor Fitzpatrick highlighted the UCL Student Human Rights Programme's report, 'The Abolition of Freedom Act' (opens as PDF) which surveys the 25 Acts and 50 measures in recent years which have eroded our freedom, liberty and rights as citizens of the UK. After considering the incredible struggle and loss suffered to secure our freedoms and liberty, Professor Fitzpatrick contrasted the heady days of 1966, with landmark cases such as Miranda v. Arizona and closer to home, Rice v. Connolly. In the pursuit of being protected by the State, had we ceded our freedom? If so, why had we allowed this to happen?

GLC's Mike Dailly suggested that there had never been a more important time in the post-war period to have a human rights framework incorporated into our domestic law. He argued that the role of law centres in the UK had never been more needed, as it would fall to solicitors and advisors to challenge the worst injustices thrown up by the Coalition Government’s austerity agenda. The Human Rights Act represented a vital tool in the tough struggle for social justice. Mike argued that we needed more law centres in the UK, not less. Citizens needed a greater understanding, and empowerment, as regards their rights, with access to real remedies, and appropriate advice and representation. Mike's speech is available online here.

Rights and the City: a Scots lawyer in New York

2010-10-13T10:35:00.004+01:00

GLC's Lorraine Barrie's new blog - 'Rights and the City - a Scots lawyer in New York' - on life as a volunteer at the South Brooklyn Legal Services (SBLS) in New York City is up and running.

In her first posts, Lorraine discusses the work being done by community activists in Brooklyn to tackle dodgy landlords and secure decent housing, drawing parallels with Glasgow's own Govanhill. She highlights some of the problems and discrimination that HIV+ clients face in accessing public services.

SBLS is a free legal resource for low income Brooklyn residents, and provides advice on subjects including employment, consumer law, domestic violence, mortgage repossession, and benefits. Lorraine will work for their HIV project to enforce legal rights for HIV+ clients.

Urgent action required to prevent repossessions following DWP mortgage cuts

2010-10-04T13:51:00.000+01:00

GLC has written to Scotland's Housing Minister, Alex Neil MSP, requesting that the Scottish Government consider changing and clarifying the Mortgage to Rent Scheme rules, and provide additional resources to the Scheme, in order to counter the impact of the UK Government's cuts to mortgage interest payments, payable to unemployed homeowners in Scotland. Our letter is set out below.

"Dear Minister

As you will be aware this month the Department of Works and Pensions (DWP) implemented the Coalition Government’s reduction in ISMI for unemployed homeowners, resulting in a reduction in the amount of interest paid from 6.08% p.a. to the Bank of England’s average monthly mortgage rate, which is currently 3.63% p.a.

While the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government are to be congratulated in strengthening the rights of homeowners in Scotland, with the coming into force this month of the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010, it goes without saying that this Act provides homeowners with a procedural opportunity to find a sustainable solution to mortgage arrears, as opposed to providing the solution per se.

Sustainable solutions have frequently included giving someone enough time to get back into work, and/or enough time to repay arrears and meet their ongoing monthly mortgage. But the new reduced rate of ISMI now cuts across the ability of out-of-work Scots to maintain an even keel while they sort out their financial position; and this will have profound implications for the role of the Scottish Government’s Home Owner Support Fund (HOSF), and in particular the Mortgage to Rent Scheme (MtRS).

To give a typical example. Our client is a lone parent who had lost her job. She has a young dependent child. The DWP were paying £742 p.m to her capital and interest mortgage, resulting in a shortfall of £376 p.m. Her family were prepared to make up that shortfall and the court action would be continued on that basis, giving her time to try and get back into work. Due to the UK Government’s policy, this month the DWP reduced her ISMI to £433 p.m, resulting in a 80% increase in her shortfall to £678 p.m. Suffice it to say, she cannot pay this (she received £59.49 IBJSA), nor can her family do so.

As you know, the Scottish Government’s MtRS was changed on 16 March 2009, with a number of additional qualifying hurdles being introduced, including the expectation that where applicants were eligible for ISMI they would generally be expected to use that as a short term solution, as opposed to MtRS. Clearly, the DWP ISMI change drives a horse and carriage through that policy, even for unemployed Scottish homeowners with interest rates slightly above the Bank of England’s average rate (i.e. in the example case cited, the rate of interest is 6% p.a. which is not uncommon, and is a prime lender rate from a High Street bank).

Govan Law Centre is very concerned with the impact of the DWP ISMI changes in Scotland. We appreciate this is a Westminster issue, but clearly the Scottish Government has the power to lessen the impact of this regressive policy change through the HOSF. Accordingly, we would be grateful if you could advise whether:

(a) The Scottish Government would be willing to urgently revise the HOSF scheme rules (and application forms) to make it expressly clear that unemployed Scottish homeowners on ISMI at a rate above the Bank of England’s average rate will not be excluded from applying for help due to their ISMI eligibility?; and

(b) In the example case given, our client will now be applying to the HOSF for access to the MtRS, whereas had the DWP changes not occurred she would not have had to do so. There will be many Scottish households facing repossession who will now face this Hobson’s choice. This may well place a significant additional demand on the HOSF. Is the Scottish Government willing to meet this demand by increasing the level of funding available to the HOSF, so that the Scottish households affected by the DWP ISMI changes are not excluded from assistance?

(It will be noted, that in the example given, our client cannot even afford to sell her home, due to the prohibitive cost of a Scottish Home Report, and therefore she is placed in an extremely vulnerable position as regards a short to medium term solution in relation to her financial predicament)".

GLC solicitor Lorraine Barrie goes to NYC to help HIV+ clients in Brooklyn

2010-09-30T20:12:00.001+01:00

Govanhill Law Centre solicitor Lorraine Barrie has taken a period of leave to commence a temporary volunteer position with South Brooklyn Legal Services (SBLS) in New York City.

Project successes include an award of $10,000 for a client whose confidentially was breached when a Social Security Administration employee revealed her HIV status to a family member without her consent.

Lorraine said: “I wanted to work for an organisation committed to challenging injustice and poverty, similar to Govan Law Centre. I am particularly interested in access to civil justice, and look forward to comparing the experiences of clients in New York to those in Glasgow”.

Lorraine will be writing about her work via a blog (details will be given here shortly). She will return to her post at Govanhill Law Centre in January 2011.

Factor cases ‘swamp courts’

2010-09-30T14:58:00.002+01:00

The Evening Times reports today: Courts are being “swamped” by cases of property factors taking legal action against home owners, the Scottish Parliament heard. And two Glasgow MSPs revealed they have been inundated with complaints about factor disputes. Maryhill MSP Patricia Ferguson and lawyer Mike Dailly, of Govan Law Centre, told the Local Government Committee how big a problem disputes with factors had become and that a new law was essential.

Ms Ferguson’s Property Factors Bill would set up a compulsory registration scheme with a set of standards designed to root out rogue factors. It would also provide an independent dispute resolution system to prevent costly court cases. Ms Ferguson said problems with factors has become her biggest caseload, prompting the Bill. She said: “Not a day goes by without someone from across Scotland contacting me for advice. Not one day.”

A series of Evening Times investigations published over the last two years have also uncovered a catalogue of complaints and shocking cases of overcharging and poor work. Our reports were passed to the committee for it to consider. Mr Dailly said that as well as contacting politicians the courts were under pressure and people put into debt, which could be avoided. He said: “The reason Govan Law Centre got involved was because we were seeing what is happening day in, day out. Sheriff courts are swamped with property factors raising actions for payments. “A lot have added on costs, expenses are attached, and I have seen many people sequestrated by factors.”

Glasgow SNP MSP Bob Doris also confirmed the frequency of complaints. He said: “I am not short on the number of these cases I have on a weekly basis from people in factoring disputes.” Ms Ferguson said: There are property factors who threaten court action, but never see it through. Yet the charges are still added to bills.That is not acceptable.” It was the final session of evidence to the committee and it will now consider it before submitting it for the Bill.

GLC's evidence can be seen on the Scottish Parliament's Holyrood TV here (opens as video); and the Bill's Committee Page is here.

Why we believe 'There is a Better Way ...'

2010-09-28T10:42:00.004+01:00

Here, our Principal Solicitor explains why we support the 'Better Way' campaign, led by the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC). The STUC's position is that there is an economic crisis in the UK – a crisis of high unemployment and stagnant growth; and not, as the UK Government insists, a crisis of the public finances. The Better Way campaign provides an alternative economic strategy to unprecedented cuts to welfare and public sector funding in Scotland and the UK.

Legal Personality of the Year award for GLC's Principal Solicitor & Ian Smart

2010-09-17T12:29:00.001+01:00

GLC's Principal Solicitor has been honoured at the 2010 Law Awards of Scotland. The prestegious Legal Personality of the Year award went jointly to GLC's Mike Dailly, and past President of the Law Society of Scotland, Ian Smart. Last night, awards host Richard Draycott explained the thinking behind the decision of the Judges as follows:

"Surely nobody would argue with the proposition that we have had an unprecedented 12 months in the history of the Scottish legal profession. It has been a year of argument for the hearts and minds - a battle for the very soul - of the Scottish solicitors’ profession. The Law Award judges were unanimous that it would be disingenuous – perverse even - to look beyond the furore over ABS to find the Legal Personality of the Year".

"The publication of the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill in late 2009 reignited a debate that had been dormant since the Law Society’s 2008 AGM. What followed was months of passionate argument – evidence to the Justice Committee, blogs, press releases, newspaper reports, journal articles, road-shows – the whole interspersed with what to many outsiders seemed a baffling succession of Law Society general meetings, alleged general meetings and referenda, with outcomes no more comprehensible than the proceedings themselves. Solicitors truly living up to their reputation for obfuscation".

"The battle lines were drawn between: on the one hand, those urging regulatory change and ABS as commercial and practical necessities for Scottish solicitors to remain competitive and seize the opportunities of globalisation and technology, and on the other, those urging caution and the maintenance of the traditional model of independence as both more in keeping with Scottish legal values and a better competitive bet in the long-term".

"Both sides had one thing in common: both saw themselves as the true defenders of the values, traditions and ambitions of Scottish solicitors. Both sides also had in common some of the most articulate, and entertainingly trenchant, debaters in the profession today. Two personalities from opposite sides of the argument stand out amidst the swirling smoke and gun fire of the battlefield".

"Both have in common tenacity and stamina. Both can be argumentative and combative. Both have a tendency to hyperbole. Both have the common touch. Both have a sense of humour. Both have engaged us. Both have entertained us. Both share the distinction of debating the future of the Scottish legal profession from the same sofa on national television".

"One found himself cast as what he would see as the improbable advocate of the establishment position and master of political spin. One found himself cast as the rebel outsider, master of the campaigning blog. One is Ian Smart, past President of the Law Society of Scotland. The other is Mike Dailly, Principal Solicitor of Govan Law Centre. The Judges are unanimous in awarding the Legal Personality of the Year award jointly to Ian Smart and Mike Dailly".

Unlawful private sector tenancy charges in Scotland

2010-09-15T14:53:00.000+01:00

GLC's contribution to BBC Newsnight Scotland's story on unlawful tenancy fees (or 'premiums') charged by private sector landlords and letting agents in Scotland is available to watch on BBC iPlayer here (18 min into the show). For more information on how to challenge the charges see GLC's online information here.

Chancellor's further £4bn benefits cuts 'ruthless and reckless'

2010-09-10T15:11:00.000+01:00

GLC believes that the announcement today of an extra £4bn of social security cuts by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in addition to the £11bn of benefit cuts announced in June, is ruthless and reckless behaviour by the UK Coalition Government to vulnerable citizens. Describing unemployment as a 'life-style choice', as Mr Osborne has chosen to do, is the classic language of scapegoating, and GLC believes that such an approach is particulary unhelpful when the future of 10,000 shipbuilding and related jobs in Govan, Rosyth and wider Scotland have been threatened by the UK Government's uncertainty over the construction of the Royal Navy's carrier programme.

GLC fully supports the 'Better Way' campaign led by the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC). The STUC's position is that there is an economic crisis in the UK – a crisis of high unemployment and stagnant growth; and not, as the Government insists, a crisis of the public finances. The Better Way campaign argues that the UK Government has systematically distorted and exaggerated problems with the public finances.

The STUC argues that the UK was never in danger of becoming the next Greece. The rising deficit reflected the collapse in tax revenues and rising cost of unemployment benefits during the recession. It was not caused by out of control public spending. History does not support the Government's assertion that cuts will be good for growth and jobs. But history does support the STUC’s belief that deep and premature cuts will lead to persistently high unemployment. There is a Better Way! (visit the site to find out more).

Property firm tries to evade new Bill

2010-09-09T07:44:00.002+01:00

The Herald reports that a controversial property management firm has tried to exclude itself from a Bill to impose standards on property factors. Glasgow Labour MSP Patricia Ferguson’s Property Factors Bill began its first parliamentary stage yesterday, with factors giving evidence to the Scottish Local Government Committee.

Glasgow-based Greenbelt Group Ltd, which charges owners for land management in developments, claimed it would not be covered in the bill because it is a landowner. The Bill would introduce a compulsory register of property managers to root out rogue factors, and also set up a dispute resolution process to give homeowners right to redress.

Yesterday, Greenbelt’s managing director Alex Middleton was told by MSPs his company was effectively doing the same job as a property factor, and Ms Ferguson said the Bill would cover Greenbelt. Mr Middleton said: “The Bill recognised the need for registration, regulation and resolution. Greenbelt is not a property factor so we don’t feel it applies to us.” Greenbelt owns the land around developments and charges the owners a management fee, billing owners for maintenance.

Conservative MSP David McLetchie said Greenbelt served the same purpose s other factors. He said: “Ultimately, it is no different if land was owned in common and they paid a factor. You bill them for the same services. The issue is not about ownership, but services and costs associated with that.” Ms Ferguson said the Bill was drafted to ensure it also included Greenbelt.

The Property Factors (Scotland) Bill, drafted by Govan Law Centre, expressly includes companies, such as Greenbelt, as the definition of 'property factor' in section 2(1)(c) includes: "a person who owns and manages or maintains land which is available for use by the owners of any adjoining or neighbouring residential properties (but only where the owners of those properties are required by the terms of the title deeds relating to the properties to pay for the cost of the management or maintenance of that land)".

New code will help parents of children with additional support needs

2010-09-07T17:16:00.000+01:00

The Herald reports that parents of children who need extra help in school are now in a better position to demand it, but many councils don’t fully understand the duties imposed on them by a new Government code, according to legal experts. Last month the Scottish Government published a code of practice on supporting children’s learning, which clarifies laws passed in 2005 and updated last year.

Iain Nisbet, of Glasgow’s Govan Law Centre, says the guidance will give parents new rights to take councils to tribunals or courts if their children’s needs are not met. “The code of practice will have a subtle but significant impact,” he said. “We already have duties incumbent on schools, but this gives it a standing in law that previous policies didn’t have.”

The code makes it clear that parents of children with learning disabilities, for instance, can expect schools to help plan what happens when their child leaves school, no less than a year before it happens.

“Transitions to post-school places are supposed to begin not more than 12 months before the child is due to leave school. Such transitions are a really big problem and are still not being done very well,” Mr Nisbet said. “If there is no plan in place, parents will be entitled to ask – why not? And they will have a new right to challenge transitions that aren’t done well.”

The code also clarifies the duty of local authorities to consider the additional needs of children in care, and the right of parents of any child to ask for an assessment of any special needs they may have. The full story is available in The Herald here.

Call for radical Access to Justice (Scotland) Bill

2010-09-02T22:28:00.004+01:00

The new Access to Justice Committee (AJC) of the Law Society of Scotland is calling upon members of the Scottish Parliament to support the introduction of a radical Access to Justice (Scotland) Bill as a top priority in the next session of the Scottish Parliament in 2011.

The AJC agreed at its first meeting in Glasgow yesterday to produce, as a matter of urgency, a detailed framework for a comprehensive and far-reaching Access to Justice (Scotland) Bill, which could immediately address a number of major deficiencies in accessing Scotland's systems of civil and criminal justice.

The Committee also agreed to identify, tackle and address the emerging risks to access to justice in Scotland which would flow from the announced cuts to welfare benefit spending by the UK Government, the forthcoming public sector cuts by the Scottish Government, and from the forthcoming decision of the UK Supreme Court in the case of Cadder v. Her Majesty's Advocate.

The Committee Convener Mike Dailly said:
"Access to civil or criminal justice in Scotland is a constitutional and human right. We believe that Scotland's legal system is a public service, not a commodity, which should deliver that right in the same way that schools deliver education, or the NHS delivers a health service. The courts must therefore be free at the point of use and should never be used as a means of generating income for the state"

"Accordingly, we believe that citizens in Scotland are entitled to access the appropriate legal advice, assistance, and representation, whenever their liberty, life, wellbeing, children, home, work, environment, and community are significantly threatened. We hold these principles to be self-evident".

"We have resolved to identify the key components for a wide ranging, and comprehensive Access to Justice Bill in Scotland, capable of meeting the needs of Scotland's people, its communities, and its legal system in the 21st Century".

"We would urge all MSPs and all Scottish political parties to embrace the need for a radical Access to Justice (Scotland) Bill in the next Parliamentary session, and to have regard to our analysis of the emerging risks to access to justice in Scotland in light of UK and Scottish Government welfare benefit and public sector cuts".

Committee Membership: in addition to the Committee Convener, the legal practitioner members are Patrick McGuire, solicitor advocate with Thompsons, whose career has been seeking compensation for victims of accidents, injury and disease; John McGovern, solicitor advocate with McGovern Solicitors and current President of the Glasgow Bar Association; Robert Sutherland, advocate and convener of the Scottish Legal Action Group; and Frances McCartney, solicitor and board member of the Environmental Law Centre Scotland. The lay members are Dave Moxham, Deputy General Secretary, Scottish Trades Union Congress; Danny Phillips, board member of Child Poverty Action Group; Geraldine Cotter, manager of Money Matters Advice Centre; Bob Hay of Glasgow University Student Representative Council, who has worked with a range of voluntary agencies and organisations on a consultancy basis; and Phyllis Craig, a senior welfare rights officer at Clydeside Action on Asbestos. Full biographical details of members are available here.

Law Society of Scotland's new Access to Justice Committee to meet

2010-09-01T16:32:00.000+01:00

The Law Society of Scotland's new Access to Justice Committee meets tomorrow for the first time (Thursday, 2 September 2010) in Glasgow.

Committee Convener, Mike Dailly said: "It's a great honour to have been appointed by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland to convene its new Access to Justice Committee. We've brought together an outstanding group of Scottish access to justice champions, which includes solicitors, solicitor-advocates, advocates, anti-poverty and social justice campaigners, trade unionists, welfare rights specialists, and experts in rights based advocacy and community empowerment.

"This is a committee of the 'coalface', members with direct experience of the myriad of access to justice problems that many citizens face every day in Scotland. We're going to take a fresh approach. Our job is to identify and demand radical improvements so that Scotland's system of civil and criminal justice is fit for its people, its communities, and the 21st Century".

President of the Law Society visits GLC new offices

2010-08-31T16:17:00.000+01:00

President of the Law Society of Scotland, Jamie Millar, received a warm welcome and tour of Govan Law Centre's new Orkney Street offices today. Mr Millar congratulated Govan Law Centre, its staff and board members, on securing the newly refurbished premises at the Orkney Street Enterprise Centre (OSEC).

The facilities at OSEC provide the local community with access to free legal advice and representation, prevention of homelessness services, money and financial inclusion advice, help and support to get back to work or into further education, and access to social work services.

Mr Millar was in Govan to discuss access to justice issues in Scotland, with the Society's new Access to Justice Committee convener, GLC's Mike Dailly. The Society's new Access to Justice Committee is scheduled to have its first meeting later this week.

GLC's Iain Nisbet to address Belfast conference on education law

2010-08-24T12:28:00.004+01:00

GLC's Education Law Unit Director, Iain Nisbet, solicitor and partner, will address a legal conference on educational additional support needs in Belfast this week (Thursday 26 August 2010).

The conference is being organised by the Special Educational Needs Advice Centre (SENAC) in Northern Ireland, in conjunction with the Queen’s University Centre for Human Rights.

Iain's presentation will include an examination of the Scottish experience of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004. Other conference contributors include Brian Lamb OBE, Philippa Stobbs and Frances Ross-Watt. Further details of the Belfast conference are available online here.

Justice Secretary refuses to consider access to justice problems

2010-08-20T14:18:00.000+01:00

Scotland’s Cabinet Secretary for Justice has refused to review the problems thrown up in Scottish bank charge cases, and denied there is any problem in Scots being able to take their bank to court to try and recover unfair overdraft charges. Recently, Scots using the accessible and consumer friendly small claims system have had their claims remitted to the ordinary sheriff court, at the request of UK banks, where legal expenses are potentially unlimited.

Following access to justice problems identified in the case of Walls v. Santander UK plc the Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Richard Baker MSP, raised concerns over access to justice in such cases with Kenny MacAskill MSP. In a written response, Mr MacAskill said ‘I do not accept the argument that ordinary citizens in Scotland are denied basic rights to access justice’ and refuted any suggestion that there was a problem for Scots trying to recover unfair bank charges through the small claims court.

Mr MacAskill endorsed the sheriff’s conclusion in Walls v. Santander, that Scotland’s current civil court structure and legal aid system provided ‘sufficient’ access to justice from a human rights perspective. Mrs Walls has since lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Mr MacAskill also stated that he was unable to review the small claims rules due to his ongoing consideration of Lord Gill’s Scottish Civil Court Review.

GLC's Mike Dailly said: “The Justice Secretary’s denial is a mantra which makes no sense. It displays an arrogance and failure to grasp some fundamental facts and principles. UK banks are successfully moving small claim bank charge cases to the ordinary sheriff court, and Scottish consumers are faced with dropping their claims for fear of expenses, or trying to get legal aid if they can – and even then, possibly having to pay a contribution to the legal aid board bigger than their claim”.

“What is particularly puzzling is that Mr. MacAskill refuses to accept any concern whatsoever about access to justice, but our client (Mrs Walls) would have had to drop her claim, had we not been able to get her case sisted pending an application to the European Court of Human Rights".

"The whole point of the small claims court is to provide access to justice for citizens without fear of cost: a remedy which is proportionate in cost to the level of the monetary dispute. But that fair principle of proportionality is being knocked out of the ball park by the current practice of UK banks in bank charge litigation. We don’t have class actions in Scotland, so individual consumers are finding it impractical or impossible to challenge bank charges in court”.

“Kenny MacAskill could easily fix this problem by changing the rules on expenses. We’ve suggested the cap on small claims expenses could travel with the case where it is remitted to the ordinary sheriff court. However, the Justice Secretary says he cannot even look at this issue because he is considering the Scottish Civil Courts Review. That is a non-excuse, which sends a very clear message to the 1 in 5 Scots hit with overdraft charges: the Justice Secretary isn’t interested”.

Consumer bank charges in China and the UK

2010-08-17T10:15:00.000+01:00

China Radio International (CRI) reports from Beijing that commercial banks in some parts of China have recently raised the fees charged to customers for withdrawing cash from other banks ATM's.

An online survey conducted by Chinese website Sina.com showed that almost 90 percent of respondents think the increased charge is exploitative, and will have a negative impact on what is known as the cross-bank withdrawal business.

Now China's Banking Regulatory Commission says that to improve customer service it's considering revising the banks service pricing regulations. The issue has also raised concerns about the way banks make their profits and how they charge customers for their services.

CRI's current affairs show, People in the Know, speaks to Professor Zhao Xijun of the School of Finance at Renmin University for the Chinese experience of bank charges, and Govan Law Centre's Mike Dailly for the UK perspective of bank charges.

Today's show is available online here. It can also be heard on smart phones here.

Sheriff reduces property factors bill by 55%

2010-08-13T16:23:00.003+01:00

In the case of Walker Sandford Property Management Ltd v. Mushtaq, Sheriff Ross ruled today that a property factor was not entitled to charge a Glasgow consumer monthly interest at 2.5% (equating to 30% APR) as the consumer had never agreed to the factor's contractual terms and conditions.

Terms and conditions needed to be expressly or impliedly agreed at the outset of the arrangement or adopted by the parties' clear, specific, unequivocal actions. Simply adding the terms and conditions to an invoice was never a way of having conditions adopted. Accordingly, the factor was only entitled to payment in terms of the title deeds, and no interest was chargeable at all in terms of the title deeds. Such charges therefore fell to be deleted.

Sheriff Ross also reduced the sum charged for second and subsequent monthly reminder/demand letters by one-third from £12 to £8. Overall the sum sued of £2,678.55, was reduced to £1,213.13, resulting in a 55% reduction in the customer's bill. The action was dismissed with no expenses due to or by either party. The defender was represented by GLC's Iain Nisbet, solicitor and partner, and the pursuer's by Messrs Peacock Johnson Solicitors.

In cases highlighted by BBC Scotland last year, Sheriff Rae expressed concern at the amount of penalties levied by Walker Sandford Property Management Ltd, and in the end the company agreed to drop all penalty charges and interest. In the past, Walker Sandford had previously issued remider/demand letters on a weekly basis, but now do so on a monthly basis for customers in arrears.

Dodgy figures and poor service: Govanhill evidence to Property Factors bill

2010-08-13T14:54:00.001+01:00

Govanhill Law Centre (GhLC) has submitted evidence to the Scottish Parliament's Local Government Committee on the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill.

The evidence compiled by GhLC's Lindsay Paterson is available here, and includes an example of alleged overcharging, mismanagement and misapplication of VAT by a large Glasgow property factor, as well as a survey of local property factors, carried out jointly with the local Govanhill Residents Group.

85% of those surveyed supported the statutory regulation of property factors in Scotland, while over two-thirds of respondents said that they did not believe their factoring service was good value for money.

GLC tackles bank charges on Chinese state radio

2010-08-13T12:39:00.001+01:00

GLC has participated in a radio discussion on overdraft charges on 'People in the Know', a current affairs programme on China Radio International in Beijing.

GLC's Mike Dailly was invited to talk to the show's host, Nigel Ballard, about campaign work in the UK, and developments around the world, on challenging bank charges. Bank fees is an issue of growing interest in China. China Radio International, (CRI) is the only overseas broadcaster in the People's Republic of China.

CRI is one of the "three central media organizations in China" owned by the state along with China National Radio (CNR) and China Central Television (CCTV). People In the Know is China's only English-language current affairs program. PIK covers events that shape not only China, but the world as well.

Originally known as 'Ask The Minister,' People In the Know is designed to give CRI listeners the views of experts and 'people in the know.' Foreign guests, including world leaders, have taken part in People In the Know to tackle tough issues, such as economics, diplomacy and national and international politics. CRI broadcasts across China, and the station is relayed around the world as an international service.

The show goes out next Monday, and can also be heard online.

US bank charges: Wells Fargo loses ruling on overdraft fees

2010-08-12T09:03:00.002+01:00

The New York Times reports this week that a federal judge ordered Wells Fargo to pay California customers $203 million in restitution for claims that it had manipulated transactions to maximize the overdraft fees it charged.
Instead of processing transactions in the order in which they were received, Wells Fargo put through the largest to smallest, a judge in San Francisco found. In a stinging 90-page opinion, United States District Judge William Alsup wrote that the practice was unfair and deceptive.

“The bank’s dominant, indeed sole, motive was to maximize the number of overdrafts and squeeze as much as possible” out of customers who spent more than they had in their accounts, the judge wrote. The ruling comes after a two-week trial in the spring heard by the judge. Wells Fargo, which collected nearly $1.8 billion in overdraft fees in California alone from 2005 to 2007, said it would appeal.

The judge’s ruling could portend problems for other banks that are defendants in similar cases. Other federal lawsuits regarding overdraft fees have been consolidated into one class-action suit in Florida, which also claim that Wells Fargo and other banks manipulated transactions to maximize overdraft fees.

Ruben Honik, one of the lawyers representing plaintiffs in the Florida case, said the judge’s ruling would provide a “road map. It was a litmus test for our theory and the whole approach we took.”. Overdraft fees have become an important source of revenue for banks and credit unions in the last decade, particularly as debit cards have risen in popularity.

GLC's Principal appointed Convener of Access to Justice Committee

2010-08-06T16:40:00.000+01:00

GLC's Principal Solicitor has been appointed Convener of the Access to Justice Committee (AJC) today by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland. The AJC is responsible for promoting access to justice for the public in Scotland; monitoring the supply of publicly funded legal assistance across Scotland, encouraging greater co-ordination of services and liaising and negotiating with external organisations such as the Scottish Government, the voluntary advice sector and others bodies. The AJC also collaborates with other Law Society of Scotland committees, including Civil Justice, the Civil Legal Aid negotiating team, Mental Health and Disability, Equality and Diversity and Human Rights and Discrimination.

GLC welcomes £2m rescue plan for Govanhill

2010-08-02T18:28:00.001+01:00

Glasgow's Evening Times reports that nearly £2million of Scottish Government money has been set aside to help transform Govanhill. The South Side community has long struggled to cope with cowboy landlords, poor housing, overcrowding and fly-tipping.

Campaigners, supported by Govanhill Law Centre, have been pleading for years for help to address the area’s complicated problems. Now, backed by local councillors, MSPs and Govanhill Housing Association (GHHA), locals have been given £1.8m to start tidying the area.

Part of that plan includes the creation of an enforcement squad – made up of council staff, police and fire officers – with an "armoury" of powers to crack down on slum landlords. The team will have an annual budget of £300,000 with funding guaranteed for two years. And lawyers from Govanhill Law Centre, led by Lorraine Barrie, will also be closely involved. Operating from a base in Coplaw Street, it will be the first time all the agencies have been brought together.

Lorraine said: "This new strategy is fantastic. What will really help is if we get the public involved and work on information they give us so we can target problem areas." The new hit squad will track down unregistered landlords and enforce environmental health laws. Currently, any landlord running a house of multiple occupation without a licence can be fined up to £5,000. As part of the new measures, the maximum fine will next year rise to £20,000.

The Housing Bill currently going through Parliament is intended to strengthen powers for councils to ensure owners look after their property. The Government will review the current landlord registration system later this year, with the aim of helping councils ensure all private landlords sign up. Lorraine added: "The new measures will give us a powerful armoury and help us take the power back from people who are breaking the law."

The full story from the Evening Times (which is running a series of reports from Govanhill all of this week) is available online here.

Tickets still available for GLC classical concert

2010-07-28T08:12:00.002+01:00

Jacob Shaw, Suyeon Kang, and CharLi have arrived in Edinburgh to begin rehersals for GLC's Classical Concert, which takes place in Glasgow this Friday, 30 July 2010. The concert is to raise funds for our new Schools Trust and tickets are still available.

The concert is in Adelaides Auditorium on the evening of Friday, 30 July 2010, 209 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 4HZ. Ticket prices are £10 for adults and £5 for children. A draft programme is here. To buy or reserve tickets, or for further information, please contact GLC on 0141 440 2503 or e-mail m @govanlc.com; or fax us on 0141 445 3934. Please note that 100% of the ticket price will go to help school children in Glasgow Govan; everyone involved in this event is kindly donating their time without charge to support our trust fund.

GLC will be setting up a stand-alone charitable trust which will provide funds to help local school children in Glasgow Govan. The new trust will help pay for additional school materials, educational visits and school trips for kids who otherwise couldn't afford to enjoy such opportunities, as well as providing a number of specific educational bursaries to help local Govan kids progress with their studies.

Call for consultation on Law Society of Scotland's governance reform to start again

2010-07-23T19:39:00.003+01:00

In response to the Law Society of Scotland's consultation on the reform of its constitution and standing orders (CSO), Govan Law Centre has expressed concern that very few firms or solicitors appeared to have engaged in the consultation process.

GLC has suggested that the consultation process should be commenced afresh as a two-stage process. Firstly, to allow members to identify the 'high level principles' that a 21st century governance structure should aim to achieve; and secondly, to then take those high level principles as a framework, and draft a new CSO from them, and thereafter consult on that draft CSO. We believe this would be an inclusive and constructive approach to delivering effective governance reform.

Furthermore GLC believes that any consultation on changes to the governance structure of the Law Society of Scotland (‘LSS’) must take place after Stage 3 of the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill; given this Bill has a direct impact on the subject matter of any such consultation. Our summary consultation response is available online here.

Time for banks and big business to err on the side of good, not greed

2010-07-20T18:45:00.000+01:00

GLC has assisted Glasgow MP, Anas Sarwar, in the drafting of his Common Good (Directors Duty) Bill. The proposed Bill would amend section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 to place a new legal duty on all directors of UK companies with 250 employees or more, to contribute to the common good of the communities or localities where the company operates or provides a service.

Section 172(1) of the 2006 Act requires a director to promote the success of the company and in so doing 'have regard' to a number of other factors. However, there is no explicit obligation to consider the impact of corporate decisions on wider society, and the proposed Bill would remedy this clear imbalance in UK company law.

Where the likely consequence of a director's decision would cause significant detriment to consumers, or particular groups of consumers, or the environment, the Bill requires the duty to contribute to the common good to take precedence. ‘Common good’ means contributing to the good of communities or localities where the company operates or provides a service.

Anas Sarwar MP said:
"Unacceptable culture within our banks was a major contributor to the UK's financial crisis. It's right that company law requires directors to promote the success of their companies, but that success shouldn't be at the expense of UK taxpayers, our local communities or environment. The balance in law isn't right, and directors of our largest companies need a stronger incentive to recognise their obligation to wider society. I want to amend the Companies Act to make that happen".

"Where the decision of a big company is likely to cause serious harm to our communities or the environment, the common good must prevail and companies should err on the side of good, not greed. A statutory ethical framework would improve corporate behaviour and help prevent future financial disasters and ecological harm. Leading figures in the financial services industry have acknowledged the need for a cultural change, so there is an appetite for change".

GLC's Mike Dailly said:
"Govan Law Centre is delighted to assist a Glasgow Member of Parliament to introduce a progressive law reform proposal which could have a radical impact on the culture and behaviour of the UK's biggest companies. Often ecological disasters are a direct consquence of large companies pursuing profit margins at the expense of common sense, and the common good".

"Within the field of UK banking, it is clear to us that its the bank's business model which causes significant detriment to the most vulnerable group of UK consumers and we believe the time is right for a sea change in the culture of senior directors of major UK financial institutions to address this unacceptable position. Clearly, Anas Sarwar's proposed Bill will require cross-party support to progress, but we are grateful to him for launching this vitally important debate at Westminster".

ECHR application following Walls v. Santander

2010-07-16T16:59:00.001+01:00

An application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has been made following the decision in Walls v. Santander UK plc, a copy of the 15 page judgment is available here (opens as a PDF).

Part of the pursuer's objection to the bank's application to remit from the small claims court to the ordinary sheriff court centered on article 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998, and relevant caselaw from the ECHR. The court was not persuaded on this head of objection, and section 37(3) of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971 prohibits any review of the sheriff's decision.

Accordingly, the pursuer now seeks to bring proceedings against the United Kingdom under article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Scottish Government has responsibility for access to civil justice in Scotland as a devolved matter in terms of the Scotland Act 1998. It is hoped that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice will reconsider his refusal to look at a law reform solution to prevent a class of persons, such as the pursuer, being limited in their ability to determine their civil rights before the Scottish courts.

Priced out of justice?

2010-07-16T09:50:00.002+01:00

The Herald has reported on the GLC case of Walls v. Santander UK plc, where Sheriff Cubie granted the defender's application for a bank charges claim to be remitted from small claims to ordinary cause procedure.

The effect of leaving the small claims system in Scotland, and indeed the UK, is that consumers lose the 'fixed limit' protection against an award of expenses in the event of failure. For example, you can sue for £3,000 and if unsuccessful your opponent would only recover £300 under small claims procedure in Scotland. However, expenses can quickly mount up in the ordinary court and as banks are using counsel to conduct their defences, litigation in the ordinary court will expose consumers to potential levels of expenses many times the value of their claim.

For those on a low income civil legal aid may be available and GLC is in the process of applying for legal aid in some bank charges litigation which is proceeding under ordinary cause procedure. For those of modest means eligible for legal aid there will be a contribution to pay which may exceed the value of the dispute, making the dispute pointless. While for those ineligible for legal aid it may be equally impossible to proceed.

The Herald has called for greater competition in Scotland's banking sector, and we agree that is much needed in the consumer interest. However, the case of Walls illustrates a major flaw at the heart of Scotland's civil justice system. What's the point in having an accessible simplified tier of civil justice for low level claims if any powerful opponent can come along, up the ante, and 'price' you out of justice? There is no right to appeal or review a decision to remit under the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971.

Access to justice requires citizens to be able to access the courts at a cost proportionate to the value of their monetary claim. The small claims system help fulfils our state's article 6(1) requirement under the European Convention on Human Rights. But there is now a 'class of litigants' who are priced out of justice. GLC believes there is an obvious solution. The small claims fixed limit on expenses should 'travel' with the case. This would ensure that the costs of resolving the dispute remained proportionate and fair having regard to the monetary value of the dispute. This could be achieved by a minor statutory amendment.

GLC has made this law reform call in today's The Herald. Unfortunately, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice in Scotland appears to have rejected our call without understanding the current legal position. Kenny MacAskill said: "People are still able to raise bank charge cases in the small-claims court – this ruling does nothing to stop that". Yes, but this ruling makes it crystal clear that all bank charge claims are susceptible to be removed from the small claims court. This has already happened in other cases; in Walls we tried to stop it, and were unable to do so. Unless the Scottish Government acts, many citizens in Scotland will be priced out of justice.

We are reminded of the parable from The Trial: “Before the Law stands a doorkeeper. . . . The doorkeeper sees that the man is nearing his end, and in order to reach his failing hearing, he roars to him: ‘No one else could gain admittance here, because this entrance was meant solely for you. I’m going to go and shut it now.’”

Debate on the future of UK human rights law

2010-07-13T17:39:00.000+01:00

To celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the Cumbria Law Centre a debate on the future of the UK human rights law will take place at the University of Cumbria, Carlisle, at the law centre's AGM on 14 October 2010. Taking part in the debate will be two guest speakers, Professor John Fitzpatrick and campaigning Scottish solicitor, Mike Dailly.

For the last 21 years Professor John Fitzpatrick has been the Director of the award-winning Kent Law Clinic, based at the University of Kent's Law School, as well as having worked in community law centres in London's Brixton and Hammersmith. Also participating will be Mike Dailly, Principal Solicitor of Govan and Govanhill Law Centres. Mike is also chairperson of the Active Learning Centre, a human rights and pro-democracy charity which works in Africa, the Middle East, India and South East Asia.

Further details of the event will be available from Cumbria Law Centre in early course.

Young Scottish opera singer to perform at GLC Schools Trust concert

2010-07-06T12:30:00.000+01:00

Scottish opera soprano CharLi will perform at GLC's Schools Trust concert in Glasgow on Friday 30 July 2010 at 7.30pm, along with cellist Jacob Shaw, and violinist, Suyeon Kang. Although only 15 years old, CharLi is already recognised as an exciting new talent in the world of opera. She first appeared with Scottish Opera in Humperdinck’s Hansel & Gretel at just nine years old and during the last five years, she has been totally consumed by opera which now affects every aspect of her life.

CharLi is a serious musician who left school at eleven years old after becoming the youngest person ever to pass a Scottish Higher Music Exam at Grade 'A', whilst still attending primary school. A bespoke education package was then designed with the help of GLC's Education Law Unit to provide CharLi with the opportunity to develop her passion for music and achieve her full potential. She is extremely proud of her Scottish roots and is a prominent vocal ambassador for Scotland and all things good.

Since commencing her studies at the Royal Scottish Academy of Music in 2008, CharLi has made remarkable progress, being able to further explore her musicality whilst developing good solid technique under the careful direction of the wonderful Mezzo Soprano, Kathleen McKellar-Ferguson.

CharLi is much in demand and performs regularly throughout the UK and Europe. Since 2006 she has performed in Edinburgh, Glasgow, London, Inverness, York and several times in her second home Vienna. In 2010, she will perform in Warsaw, Vienna, Bulgaria, Singapore, Cairo and Alexandria Egypt. She also studies piano with Clare Sutherland at the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama and plays violin for the RSAMD orchestra. In March 2010 CharLi won a prestigious Scottish prize, when she was awarded the "Glasgow Grand Opera Society Trophy" by Helen Lawson.

A draft programme for the concert is available here (opens as PDF). To buy or reserve tickets, or for further information, please contact GLC on 0141 440 2503 or e-mail m @govanlc.com; or fax us on 0141 445 3934. Please note that 100% of the ticket price will go to help school children in Glasgow Govan; everyone involved in this event is kindly donating their time without charge to support our trust fund.

World-class concert to kick-start the Govan Law Centre Schools Trust

2010-07-03T15:28:00.002+01:00

GLC is launching a new trust to support local school children in Govan, and we hope to raise funds for this initiative through a classical concert with internationally acclaimed artists, to be held in Glasgow on the evening of Friday, 30 July 2010. Through the kind generosity of clients of our national Education Law Unit, we are delighted to announce a performance which will include some of most gifted young classical musicians on the international stage:

Jacob Shaw, cellist
Jacob Shaw is rapidly establishing himself as one of the most promising cellists of his generation, appearing reguarly across Europe to critical acclaim. Jacob first studied at the prestigious Yehudi Menuhin School in London, before entering into the class of Geneviève Teulières-Sommer, and Devy Erlih at the École Normale de Musique de Paris supported by the Zaleski Fondation and the ASSOPHIE association.

He became the youngest ever cellist in the history of the school to graduate the Diplôme de Concertiste. He has peformed across Europe and the USA, and has recorded his debut album, comprising of Sonatas and shorter works by Brahms, with the renowned Argentinean pianist José Gallardo, due for release this year. Future performances will bring him to Japan, Brazil, Korea and China.

A passionate chamber musician, Jacob is often asked to appear alongside renowned musicians, in recent years bringing him on stage with artists such as Daniel Blumenthal, Andrius Szabys, Pierre-Henri Xureb, Elisabeth Zeuthen-Schneider, Valeriy Sokolov, Mark Gothoni, Sofia Gubaidulina, Kyung-Sun Lee and José Gallardo.

Suyeon Kang, violinist
Born in South Korea, Suyeon Kang began the violin at the age of 6 in Canberra, with Josette Esquedin Morgan. During further studies in Sydney and Melbourne, she was named the Australian Young Performer of the Year 2005, which led to her concerto debut with the Sibelius Violin Concerto. In 2007 Kang moved to Germany to study with Professor Daniel Gaede (ex-concertmaster of the Vienna Philharmonic), and since 2009 has been working as his assistant.

Suyeon has appeared as soloist with the Norwegian Broadcasting Orchestra (KORK), Bayerischer Rundfunk Orchester, the Melbourne, Tasmanian, Queensland, and Canberra Symphony Orchestras, Orchestra Victoria etc. She has performed extensively in recitals in concert venues throughout Europe, Australia and Asia.

A passionate chamber musician, Suyeon has appeared with artists such as Siegfried Jeruselem, Julius Berger, Franz Halasz, and recently formed a duo with the cellist Jacob Shaw. Always keen to push the limit of the capabilities on the violin she has worked with musicians and composers of different musical horizons, ranging from classical to jazz/folk music.

The concert will be held in Adelaides Auditorium on the evening of Friday, 30 July 2010, 209 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 4HZ. The programme will be finalised shortly, and will include an outstanding young classical vocalist. Ticket prices are £10 for adults and £5 for children; no concessions are available as this is a charitable fund raising event.

To buy or reserve tickets, or for further information, please contact GLC on 0141 440 2503 or e-mail m @govanlc.com; or fax us on 0141 445 3934. Please note that 100% of the ticket price will go to help school children in Glasgow Govan; everyone involved in this event is kindly donating their time without charge to support our trust fund.

GLC will be setting up a stand-alone charitable trust which will provide funds to help local school children in Glasgow Govan. The new trust will help pay for additional school materials, educational visits and school trips for kids who otherwise couldn't afford to enjoy such opportunities, as well as providing a number of specific educational bursaries to help local Govan kids progress with their studies.

Bank charges update: remit from small claims to the ordinary court

2010-07-03T09:51:00.000+01:00

One of the current strategies of UK banks in Scotland is to ask the court to remit cases from the small claims procedure (where expenses are capped) to ordinary cause procedure (where expenses are potentially unlimited). Remit between different court procedures, or to a senior court, can be granted where there are difficult questions of law, or exceptionally complicated factual issues.

From the consumer's point of view having a claim removed from the small claims system means either instructing a solicitor in the hope of obtaining civil legal aid, or dropping the claim unless you were prepared to risk court expenses several times the value of your claim in the event of failure. Legal aid is not straight-forward either, one has to pass all of the qualifying hurdles, and for those on a modest to good income, you may have to pay a financial contribution to the legal aid board in excess of the value of your claim; and if you win, it is not necessarily straight-forward that you won't have 'contra' expenses, or be required to pay some of your award back to the legal aid board. Things can get complicated with expenses.

The practical result of remit will be that some consumers will drop their claims as it becomes uneconomical or financially imprudent to pursue a case. If that happens, access to justice will have been thwarted. This raises fundamental questions about the proportionality of our justice system in relation to expenses, and whether bank charge claimants of modest means have the right to a 'fair hearing' before our courts, as guaranteed by Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In the case of Walls v. Santander UK plc, counsel for the defender sought remit from small claims to the ordinary cause. Govan Law Centre opposed this application on behalf of the pursuer. After lengthy submissions, Sheriff Cubie at Glasgow Sheriff Court made 'avizandum' (which means he will reflect upon the issues and provide a written judgment). Sheriff Cubie's Opinion is expected later this month. GLC will provide a further update in due course.

Regulation of property factors in Scotland

2010-06-29T12:38:00.000+01:00

The Local Government Committee of the Scottish Parliament has made a call for evidence on the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill (the Bill and accompanying documents were drafted with assistance from GLC's Parliamentary and Policy Unit); for further details please see here. The Scottish Parliament's Information Centre (SPICe) has published a new research briefing on the Bill, which is available here (opens as a PDF).

The SPICe briefing includes experience from the Republic of Ireland, where the Property Services Regulatory Authority (PRSA) has recently been established on an administrative basis. Legislation, currently before the Oireachtas, is intended to establish the PRSA on a statutory basis and will apply to all Property Services Providers (PSPs). PSPs are defined to include all those involved in the purchase, sale and letting of any land or property as well as those involved in the provision of property management services.

Under the proposed legislation, the functions of the PRSA will include operating a licening system covering all providers of property services; setting and enforcing standards for the grant of licences and provision of services; establishing a system of investigation and adjudication of complaints; promoting increased consumer protection and public awareness; and establishing a compensation fund to compensate parties who lose money as a consequence of the dishonesty of a licensee

The PSRA will have power to sanction a licensee up to and including the revocation of a licence and may also impose fines of up to €250,000 where a PSP is found to have engaged in "improper conduct". The Authority may bring a prosecution against a PSP for failing to comply with his or her statutory obligations or against any person providing a property service without a licence which may result in either a large fine or imprisonment or both. Under the new regulatory regime all PSPs are required to contribute to the "Property Services Compensation Fund". Where a person suffers a loss due to the dishonesty of a PSP the Authority may award compensation from the "Fund".

@Orkney Street Seminars: a new series of legal events from GLC

2010-06-24T19:08:00.002+01:00

GLC has launched an innovative continuing professional development (CPD) programme - entitled 'Govan Law Centre @Orkney Street Seminars' - with 18 events scheduled between October 2010 and January 2011. The theme of the series is to provide a high quality strategic analysis of topical legal subjects, not readily available elsewhere, at an affordable price.

The series includes morning sessions on reclaiming bank charges following the Supreme Court's surprise decision last year; tackling property factor disputes; new lines of defence in mortgage repossession cases; as well as 'what you need to know' events designed for legal practitioners, and money advisors.

Innovative forms of delivery include a series of 'twilight' sessions tailored to suit the specific needs of educational professionals, and 'bite-sized' late afternoon events designed to address the needs of social care and social welfare practitioners. Events within the series will be of interest to solicitors, professional and volunteer advisors, school teachers, social workers and health care professionals, among others.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said:
"It's testimony to the first class legal team at GLC that most of our events will be led by our own award-winning solicitors and social care professionals. Our relocation to the Orkney Street Enterprise Centre has given us purpose built in-house conference facilities, and the transport links to Central Govan and its Helen Street business corridor compare very favourably to other major UK cities. This series of seminars represents the first stage in an ambitious and innovative legal educational programme".

The CPD seminar programme is available here (with links to the seminar booking page. Note: a limited number of ultra low cost seminar places may be made available under a GLC discretionary programme to be announced in due course).

Bank charges update from GLC

2010-06-18T08:28:00.000+01:00

GLC has received lots of e-mails and messages from citizens across the UK asking for an update on our bank charges cases. In Scotland, the banks have deployed the strategy of applying to the court to 'remit' cases from the small claims system to the ordinary court procedure on the grounds of complexity. This can be a powerful tactic in practice. The Royal Bank of Scotland used the remit rules to thwart a claim for negligence last year. Once a case leaves the small claims procedure in Scotland the protection against court expenses flies off, and the claimant would be exposed to unlimited expenses in the event of failure.

In the case of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland, the defender applied to remit the case to the ordinary court procedure. As our client is eligible for civil legal aid this was not a problem (legal aid is not available for small claims in Scotland, but it is for ordinary cause actions). However, we may oppose this in other cases where appropriate, and will disseminate this knowledge if successful. Accordingly, the case of Sharp will proceed to an Options Hearing next month, and it is likely a 'debate' (a court hearing on all of the legal arguments) will take place shortly thereafter. This is necessary because the banks defence to a s.140A Consumer Credit Act (CCA) claim is to argue that the banking contract was not a regulated credit agreement. The banks are also arguing that claims cannot go back before 6 April 2007.

Accordingly, if we can persuade the court that these lines of defence are irrelevant and wrong in law, this would leave claims to be determined on the facts as regards the unfair relationship test and the level of unfairness and consumer detriment. Of course, in many cases the level of unfairness is severe. Because cases depend so much on their own facts under the CCA - whether in terms of the transitional arrangements or the unfair relationship test - there may be little point in cases being sisted or stayed. Each case is different, and under the CCA each case is looked at specifically between the parties, the contract between them and the consequences of the charges on that customer.

GLC will post further updates, but we are unable to make too much detail public at this stage as cases are live, and we cannot prejudice the prospects of our clients.