Cyprus-Forum.com

[Jack M]

They do not work "in your best interests" but they put in as much work as you pay for them to do!

That has to be the most stupid statement I have ever seen written anywhere.

I suggest you read the Code of Conduct written by the Cyprus Bar Association that all lawyers are supposed to work to, particularly regulation 16.

[Oracle]

They do not work "in your best interests" but they put in as much work as you pay for them to do!

That has to be the most stupid statement I have ever seen written anywhere.

I suggest you read the Code of Conduct written by the Cyprus Bar Association that all lawyers are supposed to work to, particularly regulation 16.

I'm not disputing the fact that they have to stick to a Code of Conduct. No one here is accusing any lawyers of failing to do that, are they?

But Conduct and Agreements for Property selling and purchase are things which are tailored for each individual. It is at this point that you either appoint your lawyer to leave no stone unturned (at a price) or attain a basic conveyancing service which is cheaper. Same in UK!

Your expectations are the stumbling block of many an ignorant person.

[Jack M]

And you don't consider it a basic conveyancing matter to check that no one else has a claim on the property? That is certainly a basic matter in British conveyancing. Every conveyancing I have ever seen in Cyprus costs way more for just a purchase than it does for infinitely superior service in the UK for a sale and a purchase too. I've certainly never seen a conveyancing go through in the UK without a search being done whatever the cost. In fact, it's the first job. If people felt confident to do their own conveyancing they wouldn't need a lawyer and that is why most people employ a professional (and in the case of Cyprus I use that term very loosely).

Nevertheless, that is not what you stated. You specifically said "they do not work in your best interests". Section 16 of the Code of Conduct states:

16. Subject to the rules of law and the code of conduct,
advocates are obliged to always defend their client’s
interests in the best manner possible, even with regard to
their own personal interests, those of their colleagues or
the profession in general.

So yes, I'd say I was accusing many lawyers of failing in that duty. I'd also say I was not alone in that.

[cyprusgrump]

They do not work "in your best interests" but they put in as much work as you pay for them to do!

That has to be the most stupid statement I have ever seen written anywhere.

I suggest you read the Code of Conduct written by the Cyprus Bar Association that all lawyers are supposed to work to, particularly regulation 16.

I'm not disputing the fact that they have to stick to a Code of Conduct. No one here is accusing any lawyers of failing to do that, are they?

But Conduct and Agreements for Property selling and purchase are things which are tailored for each individual. It is at this point that you either appoint your lawyer to leave no stone unturned (at a price) or attain a basic conveyancing service which is cheaper. Same in UK!

Your expectations are the stumbling block of many an ignorant person.

Sorry O....

There are plenty of cases where lawyers have supposedly checked that no charge was on the property only for them to find after the sale that it was heavily mortgaged...

[Oracle]

And you don't consider it a basic conveyancing matter to check that no one else has a claim on the property? That is certainly a basic matter in British conveyancing. Every conveyancing I have ever seen in Cyprus costs way more for just a purchase than it does for infinitely superior service in the UK for a sale and a purchase too. I've certainly never seen a conveyancing go through in the UK without a search being done whatever the cost. In fact, it's the first job. If people felt confident to do their own conveyancing they wouldn't need a lawyer and that is why most people employ a professional (and in the case of Cyprus I use that term very loosely).

Nevertheless, that is not what you stated. You specifically said "they do not work in your best interests". Section 16 of the Code of Conduct states:

16. Subject to the rules of law and the code of conduct,
advocates are obliged to always defend their client’s
interests in the best manner possible, even with regard to
their own personal interests, those of their colleagues or
the profession in general.

So yes, I'd say I was accusing many lawyers of failing in that duty. I'd also say I was not alone in that.

You are free to accuse. What you are not free to do is expect more than you pay for. There are different levels of service even in the UK. Everyone just naturally goes for the cheapest and more often than not it pays off. But occasionally things go wrong; yes, even in the UK too (I know -- not personally as I am super-careful ). A classic is to suddenly be lumbered with paying for the village Church roof due to some ancient, but still active, encumbrance the lawyer failed to check for

But, your gripe now seems to be that Cyprus lawyers are more expensive! ... might that be why some individuals seek cost-cutting conveyancing methods? On your heads be it ....

[Jack M]

Can't say I've ever been offered different levels of service for a conveyancing matter either in the UK or Cyprus.

You can try and squirm out of your cerebrally challenged post as much as you like but the Code of Conduct speaks for itself.

If we were all the cheapskates that you want to believe and always go for the cheapest options, it'd be a poor business proposition for the numerous prestige hotels, car dealerships, etc etc.

Get a brain and try using it!

[Oracle]

Well, I'm sorry the discussions ends there because you were unable to refute anything and hence resorted to personal insults. That seems to sum up the general attitude of the colonialist.

[Jack M]

If you fail to read a whole sentence and absorb what it says you have to expect to be called stupid.

The Code of Conduct specifically states that they have to act in the best manner possible, even with regard to their own personal interests unless of course you think it is your prerogative to re-write the Code to say what you want it to. Nowhere does it mention that you can fail in your duty if you don't think you are charging the client enough money to do your job properly.

After all, there is one lawyer who is now prepared to sue another and he won the case proving another guilty of negligence in regard to a property matter. Pity the pathetic justice system took 10 years to get them there.

I don't see anything I need to refute, it is quite clear what the Code says.

[Oracle]

It is you who expects that to mean that they will lay down their life and all their personal wealth for you.

BTW ... I wrongfully assumed property-buyers in the UK would be automatically covered in conveyancing against some hidden, ancient encumbrances .... Not yet!

" ... the potential for Chancel Repair Liabilities has been passed down to successive owners of the land or buildings. This is the liability of a property owner to contribute to the cost of repair of the chancel (or steeple) of a church.
Although this liability seems archaic the Government has no plans to abolish it. The Government has, however, acted to make the existence of the liability much simpler to discover. From October 2013, chancel repair liability will only bind buyers of registered land if it is referred to on the land register. By that time, virtually all freehold land in England and Wales will be registered. The Government believes that this approach strikes a fair balance between the landowners subject to the liability and its owners who are, in England, generally Parochial Church Councils and, in Wales, the Representative Body of the Church in Wales.


In the past, the stiff-upper lipped Brits endured these "surprises" but now that the countryside is dotted with Muslims, we're hearing a lot more noise against being encumbered with re-roofing the village Church

Look after your Churches ....

[bsharpish]

Well, I'm sorry the discussions ends there because you were unable to refute anything and hence resorted to personal insults. That seems to sum up the general attitude of the colonialist.

Pot, Kettle and Black springs to mind here................ you really are full of the proverbial are'nt you.

YOU made a statement that was soo blatantly wrong ,especially, when you consider that the bulk of lawyers here proudly display there ENGLISH law degree's (where they will have been told of there professional duty to a client) and was even in contravention with the cyprus bar's own charter.

Throw in a spattering of your usual insults and racism -

"Your expectations are the stumbling block of many an ignorant person"

"That seems to sum up the general attitude of the colonialist"

He did actually refute your completely foolish comment and then you spit out your dummy

To sum up -

Go crawl back under the compost heap you emerged from you ignorant harpy