Law Societ 113 Chancery Lane WC2A 1PL
"Whatsoever a man soweth, so that shall he reap"
Dog Des' the Law Society's Chief Executive would make a hungry 6m
alligator look like the family pet Pussy Cat
2003 I wrote a "Preface"
on the 'Solicitors from Hell .com' website, under the heading of:
"History repeating itself" . A solicitor's client, Rick kordowski, marched onto Chancery Lane, London, and the Law Society's 'Lord Mayor' Mad Dog Des Hudson stabbed him while King John Wotton, Law society's President, looked on. The 'Complainant's Revolt' was savagely put down, the Law Society's rule book was abolished, Mad Dog Des became the Legal Fraternity's Folk Hero and 113 Chancery Lane in now renamed 'Ye Old Mad Dog Des Hudson' and is still in business today.
us look at 'King John' and Mad 'Dog Des's'
us take a look at the content of Mad Dog Des's
email, to read the full email Click
email by Mad Dog Des states in parts; "...for
pursuing personal grudges and vendettas..." a further
"...for pursuing personal grudges and vendettas..." as any Pit Bull will do with no 'Rhyme-or-reason', Mad Dog Des decided on a "vendetta" against all Law Society 'Protest' websites on the Internet, with little or no attention to their content, he decided to show these 'Protest' websites the 'errors-of-their-ways' and he thought, with King John's backing, he would start by making an example of Rick Kordowski and his website 'SolicitorsFromHell'.- Mad Dog Des was "pursuing personal grudges and vendetta" and dragged Rick Kordowski into the High Court.
From Mad Dog Des's 'trawling' of the Internet he was aware of a number of protest websites with the 'SolicitorsFromHell' titles and Domain names with different prospectus also the Law Society, from as early as 2003, was aware of the SfH.com website which he must also have been aware of. What Mad Dog Des did was to make a "...blanket characterisation of all..." of these websites the exact offence Rick Kordowski was accused of doing to Solicitors/law firms by the Law Society's Pit Bulls. The 'careless' wording or deliberate failure to identify the correct website by Mad Dog Des in his email he had sent to a Journalist to solely gain media coverage to support his "vendetta" caused my website to be named in error - or was it deliberate? Let me again quote Mr Vassall-Adams QC who said in Court "...appeared to be willing to publish very serious defamatory allegations without any prior check to establish their truth or accuracy" what else would be expected from a respected Pit Bull.
As Mad Dog Des stated "...exclusion appears simply a matter of whether the firm has been prepared to pay the fee demanded..." because of his incompetence, negligence and carelessness he caused my website to be mistakenly or deliberately named, this was a clear accusation I was 'Extorting' money from law firms, as was quoted by some of the news media.
Mad Dog Des states "they should complain to the Legal Ombudsman..." he knows that all the websites and Rick Kordowski's comments were posted and live before the current Legal Ombudsman came to office. He also knows the previous self regulated legal complaints procedures were not working and for that reason every few years there was a change of direction with a 'New Broom' put in place but which the Law Society never managed to get right.
Mad Dog Des states near the end "Reporting this will help no-one but Kordowski" giving the impression he did not want his comments reported, that is absolute rubbish. If you read the said email Mad Dog's office asks the journalist on 22 Mar at 17:04 "Can you confirm your deadline for this," the Journalist replied at 17:08 "3pm tomorrow. I'll file by close of play" a reply was made at 09:49 on the 23rd and the article was published by the Guardian on the 25 Mar 2011. Mad Dog Des had every intention of having his comment published to give support to his up-coming High Cout Action against Rick Kordowski, if not, why would he send them to a Journalist and meet the Journalist's deadline?