Will Blasphemy Laws Be Reintroduced?
News1 min ago
No best answer has yet been selected by {Dakota}. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I can confirm that, january_bug. About 10 years ago I was doing some investigation work for a solicitor. I charged him �20 and he charged his customers �260 for the work that I did.
And about 1950 I received a reply from Father Christmas, with a photograph of his home. It was Greenland. (It was a promotion by the Danish post office, but I wrote from England).
I can confirm that my boss charges �46.25 per unit (1 unit = 15 mins) so �185/hr, i.e., 7.4 times the amount that TCL seemed to imply he thought was a rip off rate!
So, it does appear that even the most intelligent and clued up people DO need to check the charge rates.... so the quiz wasn't so crazy after all!!!
jb trust me I was not patronising anyone let alone you. Why do you think I am belittling you? I was TRYING to point out that it seems odd that future citizens are encouraged to check out the rates rather than qualifications. If they WERE to ring me and I said I charged �125 per hour they would think it a bargain and employ me. What do I know about legal matters?
Well the implication to me was that you thought that anything and everything I know/will ever know about legal matters comes from a Ladybird book(i.e., 20 small pages, with pictures) that any Tom, Dick or Harry could pick up for 20pin any charity shop in the country. As such, it was HIGHLY insulting and patronising.
If it wasn't meant that way, then fine, I'll believe you and we'll forget it. But please be reminded that whilst I'm not always right on legal matters, I've worked darned hard for my legal education and I'm giving every fibre I've got to succeed in a profession that, whilst many think is full of over charging arrogant wuan kurrs, I have a lot of respect for, and ambition to succeed in. As such, I get a bit sensitive to people making out that it's all just something so simple that a 4 year old's Ladybird book would cover it all.
jb I assure you that I was not having a pop at you or the legal profession. The impression given by the Quiz is that it is cost rather than experience or qualifications which is most important. I used the "Ladybird" remark to justify MY reason for increasing ma rates fae �25 to �125 an hour. You have taken this to be a "pop" at you and the profession in general. I have NEVER made any comments on yir expertise even though some others have (wrongly in my opinion) This may be the reason why you thought ma joke was a dig at you but it was not.
It's cool, I understand now that it wasn't a pop. :-) The reason why I thought it was, was that Grunty and I used information from our professional experience to make comments about fees, and your response to that was that you used a kids' book to make comments. I wrongly interpreted that to imply that a kids' is all that one would need.
Anyway, it was a misunderstanding and it's cleared up now! :-)
I agree that the quiz question was strange, although I suspect that may be down to the BBC. They wrote the quiz based on info in "the book". The book may clearly explain that you should check that a lawyer is qualified, but that there is not lega requirement to prove a qualfication in any one specialism. Therefore "check that he or she is qualified in that area of law" IS technically less important than checking the fees, although I totally see what you mean TCL and others! :-)
jb thank God that's sorted
If we can't get the answers right how are the "future Citizens" meant to get them right? It seems to be a test of memory rather than knowledge. There are folk who make money out of the quiz machines in pubs not because they are clever but because of a good memory. If the questions and answers were re-phrased they'd not have a clue.