註冊 登入



打印

投訴濫收或不當收費

投訴濫收或不當收費 E-mail 此主題給朋友

[隱藏]
有無得投訴?

較早前搵左律師,之後幫忙轉介到大律師,但好多野比左錢但又做唔到野,而家轉左另一間律師樓,中間亦問過幾間律師行,都覺得較早前間律師行做唔野,但收費比其他律師行多出一倍有多,現在已經終止左個間律師行,但間律師樓不停說還欠一大舊律師費,當然我朋友要佢列清楚出黎收費準則,但到目前為止都沒有收過。

這間律師樓由頭到尾都是有個所謂師爺去接洽。



精選樓盤
引用:
原帖由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 09:45 AM 發表

有無得投訴?

較早前搵左律師,之後幫忙轉介到大律師,但好多野比左錢但又做唔到野,而家轉左另一間律師樓,中間亦問過幾間律師行,都覺得較早前間律師行做唔野,但收費比其他律師行多出一倍有多,現在已經終止左個間律師行,但間律師樓不停說還欠一大舊律師費,當然我朋友要佢列清楚出黎收費準則,但到目前為止都沒有收過。

這間律師樓由頭到尾都是有個所謂師爺去接洽。 ...
「所謂師爺」叫乜名?律師樓叫乜名?



唔會公開住啦。
引用:
原帖由 thespanishlady 於 2019-1-14 10:54 AM 發表


「所謂師爺」叫乜名?律師樓叫乜名?



引用:
原帖由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 10:58 AM 發表

唔會公開住啦。

大律師嗰份就一定要找啦!事務律師唔找或者遲找大律師嘅費用 Professional Misconduct 嚟嗰喎!Tang Ming Fai Joseph 都俾 Law So Discipline 啦! 事務律師自己嗰份就不予置評啦!

http://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/tang-ming-fai-joseph-respondent

December 2012 - Disciplinary Decisions
Tang Ming Fai, Joseph (the Respondent)

• Principles 6.04, 12.04 and 12.05 of the Hong Kong Solicitors’ Guide to Professional Conduct Volume 1 (“the Guide”)

Hearing dates: 19 April 2012 and 20 August 2012

Order: 20 August 2012

Reasons for Decision: 11 October 2012

On 20 August 2012, the Tribunal found the following ten charges as in the Amended Complaint Sheet dated 23 December 2011 proven against the Respondent:

1st Charge

Breaches of Principles 12.04 and 12.05 of the Guide in that the Respondent had failed to settle the outstanding fee of counsel, Mr. Lawrence Lok, S.C. (“Mr. Lok”).

2nd Charge

Breach of Principle 6.04 of the Guide in that the Respondent had failed to answer letters sent by the Law Society requiring him to provide his explanation on his failure to settle the outstanding fee of Mr. Lok.

3rd Charge

Breaches in Principles 12.04 and 12.05 of the Guide in that the Respondent had failed to settle the outstanding fee of counsel Mr. Wilson W. S. Lau (“Mr. Lau”).

4th Charge

Breach of Principle 6.04 of the Guide in that the Respondent had failed to answer letters sent by the Law Society requiring him to provide his explanation on his failure to settle the outstanding fee of Mr. Lau...

... 10th Charge

The Respondent had engaged in conduct unbefitting of a solicitor in that he had failed to settle the outstanding counsel’s fees, failed to submit the Employees Returns of the Firm within the stipulated time and persistently failed to answer enquiries from the Law Society concerning his professional conduct or to explain his conduct when required to do so. These conduct amounted to breaches of Rule 2(d) and (e) of the SPR.

The Tribunal ordered that:

a) in relation to the 1st to 9th Charges, the Respondent be suspended from practising as a solicitor for a period of nine months, being one month suspension for each charge under section 10(2)(b) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance Cap. 159 (“the LPO”);

b) in relation to the 10th Charge, the Respondent be suspended from practising as a solicitor for a period of three months under section 10(2)(b) of the LPO;

c) the total period that the Respondent be suspended from practising as a solicitor in relation to the 1st to 10th Charges is twelve months; and

d) the Respondent shall pay the costs of the Applicant, the Prosecutor and the Clerk to the Tribunal on a party-to-party basis assessed at the High Court scale to be taxed if not agreed.



[隱藏]
引用:
原帖由 thespanishlady 於 2019-1-14 11:04 AM 發表


大律師嗰份就一定要找啦!事務律師唔找或者遲找大律師嘅費用 Professional Misconduct 嚟嗰喎!Tang Ming Fai Joseph 都俾 Law So Discipline 啦! 事務律師自己嗰份就不予置評啦!
http://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/tang-ming-fai-joseph-respondent

December 2012 ...
香港事務律師唔找數俾大律師會俾香港律師會釘牌同罰錢。

http://www.hk-lawyer.org/tc/content/pang-cho-lun-janly

PANG CHO LUN JANLY | Hong Kong Lawyer
一月 2000

Breach of Principles 12.04 and 12.05 of the Hong Kong Solicitors' Guide to Professional Conduct, Volume 1, 1st Edition, and Rules of 2(a) and 2(d) of the Solicitors' Practice Rules

Hearing date: 4 May 2000
Tribunal Decision: 4 May 2000

In 1997 and 1998, the Respondent instructed a barrister to attend various hearings in magistracies, the District Court and High Court in connection with a number of criminal cases. 12 fee notes totalling $79,000 were issued by the barrister to the Respondent and they were unpaid.

On 4 May 2000, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the following complaint against the Respondent was proved on her own admission:

Breach of Principles 12.04 and 12.05 of the Hong Kong Solicitors' Guide to Professional Conduct, Volume 1, 1st Edition, and of Rules 2(a) and 2(d) of the Solicitors'Practice Rules.
The Respondent advanced no explanation whatsoever as to the non-payment of the counsel's fees. The Tribunal found that the Respondent had committed a very blatant breach of the rules in question.

The Tribunal ordered that the Respondent:

Be censured;

Pay on or before 12 May 2000 the barrister the fees due to him, failing which she be suspended from practice for three months from 13 May 2000 to 12 August 2000, and should the said fees not be paid on or before 12 August 2000 she be further suspended from practice until the day the said fees are paid in full;

Pay a fine of $100,000;

Pay the costs of and incidental to the proceedings and the costs of the prior inquiries or investigations in relation to the matters before the Tribunal, to be taxed on a full indemnity basis.



回覆 引用 TOP

比佢d律師費應該包埋大律師費用,咁佢點計我唔知。


最不知所謂係,個大律師上到庭乜都唔講,又唔辯駁,法官問佢野又唔做定功課,比個法官鬧

d文件亂到比個法官及律政署鬧。

[ 本帖最後由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 11:35 AM 編輯 ]



引用:
原帖由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 11:17 AM 發表

比佢d律師費應該包埋大律師費用,咁佢點計我唔知。
你權攞張itemized 嘅帳單



引用:
原帖由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 11:33 AM 發表

最不知所謂係,個大律師上到庭乜都唔講,又唔辯駁,法官問佢野又唔做定功課,比個法官鬧

d文件亂到比個法官及律政署鬧。
律師係咁啦, 你最好去(大)律師公會投訴,

你係咪講野太串得罪佢, 所以佢玩9你?



[隱藏]
現時個律師都有建議過,但佢都無單據比到我地。
引用:
原帖由 今天懷舊的水樽 於 2019-1-14 11:40 AM 發表


你權攞張itemized 嘅帳單



回覆 引用 TOP

不嬲對佢都好好,只係覺得佢做唔到野,我朋友又無投訴佢,之後覺得唔對路先搵其他律師意見。
引用:
原帖由 今天懷舊的水樽 於 2019-1-14 11:42 AM 發表


律師係咁啦, 你最好去(大)律師公會投訴,

你係咪講野太串得罪佢, 所以佢玩9你?



引用:
原帖由 fung_chun 於 2019-1-14 11:51 AM 發表

不嬲對佢都好好,只係覺得佢做唔到野,我朋友又無投訴佢,之後覺得唔對路先搵其他律師意見。
啲律師互相之間其實非常相熟, 唔會咁易去得罪同行, 小心講野免得比人玩9.



明白,所以都係whatsapp講多,白字黑字。
引用:
原帖由 今天懷舊的水樽 於 2019-1-14 12:41 PM 發表


啲律師互相之間其實非常相熟, 唔會咁易去得罪同行, 小心講野免得比人玩9.



回覆 引用 TOP

對律師/大律師有投訴
當然可去各自的公會
亦可要求有詳細的收費單
至於做唔做到嘢, 公平啲講, 有好多因素影響的
俾官鬧, 亦要了解係 因乜



回覆 引用 TOP

[隱藏]
近排都經常接觸要搵律師既人傾下計,原來發現搵一個真正既律師係好難,有好多律師只識收錢,收完錢又唔做野,好多人比左錢間律師樓,到上庭前一小時先做野,又唔會入監獄見下個被告,錢唔係比得小,講緊幾十萬都有。
試過有律師當日要出庭,夠鐘都唔見人,要花左成粒鐘先搵到佢,然後佢話病左。
搵法援都一樣,如果覺得價錢小咪鬼接,接得就要盡力呀啦。
唔好以為睇得電視劇多,律師上到庭會雄辯滔滔,其實好多律師上到庭乜都唔講,唔知驚個法官乜野咁



 16 12
 提示:支持鍵盤翻頁 ←左 右→
[按此隱藏 Google 建議的相符內容]






重要聲明:本討論區是以即時上載留言的方式運作,香港討論區對所有留言的真實性、完整性及立場等,不負任何法律責任。而一切留言之言論只代表留言者個人意 見,並非本網站之立場,讀者及用戶不應信賴內容,並應自行判斷內容之真實性。於有關情形下,讀者及用戶應尋求專業意見(如涉及醫療、法律或投資等問題)。 由於本討論區受到「即時上載留言」運作方式所規限,故不能完全監察所有留言,若讀者及用戶發現有留言出現問題,請聯絡我們。香港討論區有權刪除任何留言及拒絕任何人士上載留言 (刪除前或不會作事先警告及通知 ), 同時亦有不刪除留言的權利,如有任何爭議,管理員擁有最終的詮釋權 。用戶切勿撰寫粗言穢語、誹謗、渲染色情暴力或人身攻擊的言論,敬請自律。本網站保留一切法律權利。


Copyright©2003- Discuss.com.hk Limited. All Right Reserved.
版權所有,不得轉載。