High Court orders solicitor slagging site to close for good...

Bitterwallet-Len-Dastard-featuredIn what may be seen as a win for the legal profession and a loss for the general public, the High Court have finally decided to order the closure of the legal review website Solicitors from Hell. Site owner Rock Kordowski was labelled a "public nuisance" by Judge Tugendhat who rejected Kordowski's claim that he provided a "public service".

For those who have not been following our coverage of this long running saga, the site owned by Kordowski allowed members of the public to submit "reviews" of their instructed solicitor and share their experience with anyone wishing to search the site. As with any review site there are bound to be advantages and some disadvantages. It is pretty straightforward to understand the advantages - you get to know a little bit about who you are going to be paying to undertake a service for you.  As for disadvantages, to my mind there are plenty.

One of the biggest being the fact that (after having read MANY submitted reviews) some of the reviews appeared to be left in revenge to being on the wrong side of a decision made by the courts. Some reviews didn't appear to question the conduct throughout the matter of the solicitor but it ultimately centred around the fact that the courts decided against them in their case. Unless the instructed legal representative was negligent in his work (which unfortunately is not uncommon) then the outcome was entirely down to the courts. Is it fair that a review is left against the solicitor when they have essentially performed their obligation to represent you and your best interests? There is always a winner and a loser in litigation. It did not seem as if these reviews were regulated in a way that they probably should have been. How was the site ensuring that any reviews being left were with merit? This is partly where Kordowski failed - he was not able to demonstrate that the comments being left on his site were justified which is a defence to defamation.

When solicitors realised that their details were on the site unfairly, Kordowski allowed the solicitor to request the data to be removed but would charge £299 per listing removal. When questioned about why he would allow what he believed to be genuine reviews to be removed, he called it a publicity stunt to draw attention to his site. Shortly after, Kordowski no longer accepted payment to remove reviews.

Judge Tugendhat was concerned that those easily influenced would be put off by some of the vexatious reviews.  "Discouraging people in need of legal advice from instructing good lawyers is as much against the public interest as encouraging them to instruct bad lawyers. At worst it may lead to miscarriages of justice ... At the least it will lead to restrictions on the consumers' freedom of choice, and to distortion of the free market in legal services,".

I have never personally been against any type of review website. In fact, I probably use a fair few myself. However, I don't think that a legal review site would ever work. I would welcome any suggestions as to how it would. Not even if a site was run in such a way that every single review was scrutinised to ensure it was close to being "fair". The way that the legal system works just wouldn't ensure that all reviews being left are impartial. Don't get me wrong, there are many solicitors that would deserve to be named and shamed. Complaints to the Law Society and then the Legal Ombudsman ensure that this can happen after a thorough investigation but obviously many unscrupulous solicitors don't "get caught".

Do you see the closure as good or bad news? Can you see a legal review site ever working?

If you have anything that you would like me to consider please get in touch - [email protected]


  • joey
    when ya think about it, it's all nonsense
  • Harry
    They're all a pack of useless, lazy, money-grabbing cunts who'll be shot first when the revolution comes.
  • Nick T.
    ^ What he said.
  • tin
    Not a loss for the general public. What are the real chances of seeing anything informative, realistic and balanced on that site?- no matter what side you're coming from it's likely to be one persons (probably) distorted or misunderstood view against the other.
  • Len D.
    Exactly, tin. As it was always billed as a review site, many people wouldn't understand the reasons for the Law Society bringing the action. Many would think they are throwing their weight around and putting an end to something which they probably think is in the best interests of the general public when quite clearly it isn't. As I say, I would welcome suggestions as to how this kind of review site would work as I am convinced that it wouldn't be possible.
  • Ironside
    Perhaps the 'reviews' could go to the Solicitors one week before they are to be displayed and they are allowed time to take full advantage of the libel laws they know so well before the review is posted. The solicitors can also have exactly the same number of words to post a reply (both pieces of text appearing at the same time), This would give time for the other side of any story and gives the angry posters time to reconsider if they have gone too far. On the other hand just fuck the lawyers - they are all evil and you should be able to say waht you want about them; just like the Nazis.
  • Ironside
    After a period of reflection I would like to withdraw my previous statement likening lawyers to Nazis.
  • T
    How is this any different than the ratemyprofessors webpage? I dunno I would allow rebuttals from the lawyers at no cost then. Also hold those who are posting fake or evil reviews responsible (get proof of their ID). Or a disclaimer on the webpage saying all reviews posted are the opinions of the poster and does NOT reflect the views of this webpage.
  • l
    I agree with Ironside, it would only be fair for a solicitor to defend what is being published about them, and given the chance to also publish they reply to the complaint put forward. That way the person complaining can see how they respond to the argument, because usually when you make a complaint to a firm of solicitors they never give a clear answer to straight forward question you are complaining about, and they say if you are not happy with the service they have provided, then contact the legal complaints service.

What do you think?

Your comment