Rent and Service Charges

Equity and Clean Hands

Avoiding Being Heavy Handed

In early March 2024, I visited Rome for a few days and Naples for a day trip. On the day after my flight, I watched in the morning online the Reshaping Legal Services conference.

I was going to also watch this in the afternoon but wanted to see what was going on in central Rome as two Brighton fans had been stabbed. I was a bit worried but not threatened by this as proud to wear my colours abroad.

In the afternoon, I went to an Irish Bar and up to the late evening watched Roma v Brighton and then Milan v Slavia Prague. There was a heavy Italian Police presence in Rome and usually at places like train stations an Army presence. The seagull fans I saw on my flight from Stansted seemed like a quiet and civil bunch and I could not see why they would look for confrontation especially when these types of European nights don't happen often for them, I've only just got used to them.

The next day I visited the Roman Colosseum. The structure I saw from the inside was amazing. It gave me some flashbacks from the film Gladiator.

This then made me think about recent Gladiators in the UK and three came into my mind. Obviously Lee Castleton along with his fellow Sub Postmasters as I had watched his speech online the previous morning, Dr Chris Day within the NHS who raised concerns about patient safety, and Gabriela Rodriguez who was the subcontracted cleaner at the office of Devonshires’ Solicitors. These three fine people had helped me confirm my strong belief that legal services does require reforming.

In the conference, Mr Castleton's opening line had already gripped me. He said that "everyone in the conference room is a regulator, call bad practice out."

He then explained how the Post Office did not turn up for the original County Court claim against him which then resulted in a High Court claim. The High Court judgement resulted in Mr Castleton being liable for £25,000 plus legal costs of £321,000. The Post Office solicitors had reversed the burden of proof which caused Mr Castleton to have to prove he was not liable for the original £25,000 which was due to the Post Office IT system.

It caused him financial ruin and the Post Office caused problems to his family such as his daughter sadly being picked on at school and her developing an eating disorder. Other Sub Postmasters falsely accused suffered just as bad such as a Sub Postmaster having visible death threats outside his property, others being made homeless and sadly dying. Families had been destroyed with one even having her children taken away and another being perceived in dishounering the family name.

Mr Castleton had done his best to cross examine the Post Office witnesses. He explained it was not realistic to gather evidence to prove the case against him as he had been suspended. It was obvious he had not taken the £25,000. His character showed one of not being defeatist, a proud, fair and ethical man. He said he is an Electrical Engineer by trade which in itself requires self regulation.

The man is a proper professional and I agree with him that unlike the Post Office solicitors, he would not be able to sleep unless he was assured within his trade he did everything right and proper.

He and the other Sub Postmasters were the Arthur Fowlers conned by the Willy Ropers.

At this point, I was thinking surely a N244 form to the County Court by the Post Office instead of High Court. It was unreasonable and unnecessary racking up a lot of costs even at taxpayers expense let alone causing all this awful experience to Mr Castleton. It is no wonder the Post Office adopted this heavy handed route rather than say carry out an independent audit. The Post Office knew they were in the wrong.

The conference then went on to identify themes in the legal profession. Various persons spoke about:

-The Sub Postmasters case not being an isolated one.

-There needing to be a refreshing of legal ethics.

-Profits ahead of legal professionalism.

-Intimidation and that bullies are attracted to the legal sector.

-Little respect for the rule of law.

-Client before public interest.

There was also talk in how the Judges blamed the Post Office, not the courts. In my view, the Judges should have asked for evidence of an independent audit and could've made directions for this.

Mr Castleton's wish of self-regulation could be achieved if the culture in the legal profession changes. The recent tragic suicide of a solicitor confirmed what I thought about some of the things I've heard and seen in the legal sector.

A podcast by a former legal professional highlighted his own experiences which caused his mental health and wellbeing to very seriously and scaringly deteriorate when he was working in the city. These included heavy reliance on coffee and alcohol, drugs use to help with the long hours with his belief that a sample of 80 of 100 professionals would test positive, bullying such as how a senior partner returned from lunch drunk, shouted at colleagues lower than him and throwing office equipment at others were just the norm.

The former legal professional also spoke about distinguishing between what is happiness compared to fun, there being very little support and how on certain days it was impossible for him to do anything physically with getting out of bed even being a struggle. I was shaking after he said someone spiked his drink with drugs during a weekend away trip as he did not realise where he had got his energy from and the person told him what they did afterwards.

When I then look at what happened to Dr Day, it shows that some solicitors can manoeuvre easily in ruining people as what happened to Mr Castleton and others even with no consideration for the public purse. For example Dr Day has shown how the NHS and their solicitors had spent £700,000 to "crush" him as a Junior Doctor.

All he did was do his job in raising serious concerns about patient safety. Dr Day was in a no win situation as in my view had he not raised the issues of patient safety, he would've been the one facing negligence claims from the patients.

Dr Day gives examples of thousands of important emails being deleted which were needed at disclosure stage and allegations of litigation cost threats made against him which the other sides deny. Also Dr Day's case shows how there may have been much earlier intervention by the solicitors at disciplinary stage and as I would describe "allowable interference" as well as to other NHS staff.

Dr Day must have studied and trained hard for years to become a medical professional and his licence to practice what he is clearly skilled and good at has been taken away from him.

Dr Day like the Sub Postmasters are pillars and the foundations of community. Their roles contribute massively towards the health and wellbeing of the public and especially to those who are vulnerable.

There's a shortage within the NHS of good professionals. A book by Allyson Pollack gives some insight about changes that have taken place throughout the years in the NHS. Dr Day should've been listened to and treated as an asset.

Likewise with Ms Rodriguez, she was dismissed over a leftover Tesco Tuna Sandwich. On top of easy manoeuvre, although this was the contractor that was her employer, I agree in what she said about how she perceived that this would not have happened because of her personal background.

There was definitely a "looking down" mentality against people like her and unsurprisingly her fellow cleaners along with the United Voices of the World Trade Union protested outside Devonshires’ Offices. I cannot understand why her former employer Total Clean waited for one week from the allegation that was made against her and that Devonshires’ Buildings Manager must've been approached by someone in Devonshires’ to grass on her.

In Central London, it would not be easy to find someone like her willing to do this type of role at £13 per hour. Especially post covid where we are more conscious about things like eating surfaces needing regular wiping down and disposal of food so as to avoid rodent infestation. I used to be a cleaner for a couple of years.

In the social housing sector, the Housing Ombudsman service in the past year has used the phrase "heavy handed" on many occasions. When you look at the above Gladiators, there has clearly been a heavy handed approach which has similarly on some occasions been experienced unnecessarily by customer residents.

With a recent Upper Tribunal case which was about service charges for a tenant, it is amazing the tenant achieved what she did. Not only for her service charge to be set what's seen as reasonable but to also resist an appeal.

In reading the full case, it shows how there could've been easier access to this dispute and away from legal persons with instead say an independent expert surveyor mediating between the two parties to agree what would be a reasonable service charge in conjunction with relevant documents. Such heavy litigation most likely would have attracted a lot of costs and time. We will wait and see if this is appealed further but at Upper Tribunal, the appeal was rejected because the service charges couldn't be explained by the reps that attended.

In my younger days, I was fascinated by Employment Law. I studied this as a module at University and visited the Bury St Edmunds Legal Centre on a few occasions to watch hearings and read through judgments. This was well before the judgments being made available online as they were only available in Suffolk. Later on in my union rep days, I completed a diploma and was glad to help not just employees but within the ACAS code of practice where appropriate make employers see sense tactfully.

My interest in Employment Law has also helped me massively personally as well.

I believe Ms Rodriguez's case will be dependent on contemporary evidence. It is important she discloses this at the earliest opportunity if she has this. A subject access request can show timings as and when documents were exchanged whilst agreeing documents to include during disclosure. Ms Rodriguez may wish to ensure she has free time at weekends and if she gets to a final hearing, be ready for any last minute surprises.

There is manipulation at disclosure stage and different to what the Respondent can get away with compared to civil procedure. For example, in the civil courts, a party can be obliged to complete a disclosure certificate of compliance confirming where they've searched, what they've searched, what they've searched for, confirming they've disclosure all relevant documents.

That's not necessarily done at a Tribunal. There is an obligation on the parties to perform a reasonable search and to disclose any documents that are relevant, irrespective of whether they are favourable or adverse to a party's case.

There has been some talk about a chocolate bar case justifying Ms Rodriguez's dismissal. I cannot agree with this as I believe a case of a diabetic lorry driver for a supermarket that urinated in a spot which he should not have is the right and proper comparison and it was found the lorry driver was unfairly dismissed even as far as appeal stage.

Nevertheless, common sense should have prevailed as in my view, a simple discussion about what to do if seeing any food going forward was appropriate especially after her loyal and dedicated service. Her dismissal rightly caused national and international outrage.

It's well beyond time where heavy handed actions are eliminated within legal and disputed processes. Better ways in handling situations are important and in the Post Office case, there was no point setting up innocent community people, eventually the truth is discovered.

One great maxim (or for these Maximus guys) that stays with me since college is "he who seeks equity must come with clean hands.”

Here's the clip of Ms Rodriguez's cleaning union along with her colleagues having some happiness over fun.

Former Sub Postmaster Lee Castleton impressive presentation at Reshaping Legal Services conference.