Why Would A Solicitor Pretend Not To Act For A Client ?

[carolinem99]

Hi,

My STBXH has had a solicitor acting for him for the last six months in respect of divorce/child contact issues. I am currently self-representing. The solicitor (based in Rotherham) has emailed me advising "after this letter we will no longer be instructed by Mr X and therefore please do not attempt to communicate with us directly".

I read this and thought ok, makes sense as the STBXH is now residing in Scotland so presumably he is changing solicitor.

I then receive an email from STBXH which is copied into the Rotherham solicitor advising that the Rotherham solicitor is still acting for him "just refusing to deal with you".

I've no idea why the solicitor would refuse to deal with me as all communications have been professional and polite. I have emailed the Rotherham solicitor asking them to confirm whether they are acting for STBXH or not in light of the two contradictory emails but have not received any response.

Any idea what is going on here?! I wondered if STBXH has instructed them to say this in order to try and keep his costs down ? Would a solicitor pretend not to be acting for a client ? And if so, why ?

Grateful for any thoughts.

[GretchenWiener]

solicitors arent acting for him as he hasnt paid.

[nomoretether]

Could it be both? Could they still be advising him but no longer representing him for divorce/child issues?

[springdrinks]

They're binning him as a client. He's pretending not to notice.

[carolinem99]

I did wonder if it was due to him not paying the bill, but the email from the solicitor then went onto mention other matters (personal possessions, intention to launch court proceedings, etc) which presumably they wouldn't have mentioned in the letter if he hadn't paid for them to do so ?

I wonder whether they don't wish to deal with me as I am self-representing and whether this is some sort of bullying tactic to force me into getting a solicitor, which presumably they can't do ?

Or, it could just be my STBX playing his usual games!

[traviata]

it will be your STBXH. There is absolutely no purpose or reason for a solicitor to pretend.

The letter presumably included all the points he asked them to mention, but they will have given him an ultimatum (probably for paying their bill) and have decided they won't do any more work for him after the letter. He perhaps thinks he can string them along a bit more.

[CrocsAreJustPlainUgly]

my son's father's solicitor did this. He couldn't afford them any more

[privetandpetunias]

The solicitor won't reply to an email asking them if they are working for a particular person as they are not allowed it would be a breach of the client confidentiality rules in their code of conduct.

[carolinem99]

Thanks for the responses everyone. Looks like I will just have to wait and see whether the STBXH instructs a new solicitor. I was just concerned that the Rotherham solicitor were being deceitful and trying to stop me from dealing with them directly.

[JaneParker]

I would believe the solicitor, not the ex husband. They would have no reason to lie. I would never say I was not acting if I were. I am pretty sure they are no longer acting for him so you should address all communications to your ex until he appoints someone else. Also if court proceedings have started a solicitor has to file a "notice of acting" or "notice of change of solicitor". You could try calling the court if legal action has started to see if they have a notice of solicitor ceasing to act on the court file.

[carolinem99]

I will do, that should clear the matter up. Thanks for the advice.