Serving Sheriff’s law firm drafted in to defend Desmond Cheyne QC over French home work dispute, allegations builders ‘were threatened’ by Police

A currently serving Sheriff, Paul Reid, who was appointed to the bench by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill in 2009 and may be better known to some as one of the many ‘Fiscals’ for the Law Society of Scotland whose job it is to prosecute crooked lawyers (HaHa – Ed) before the courts or the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal, has been drafted in by Advocate Desmond Cheyne QC to represent him against claims reported in the media of money owed to two builders on work carried out on Mr Cheyne’s French holiday home.

The Sunday Mail newspaper recently reported that “A plumber and joiner are chasing a leading lawyer for £22,000 for work they did on his French holiday home. George Thomson and Scott Johnstone spent 12 days renovating the farmhouse of advocate Desmond Cheyne.”

In pursuit of money owed to the pair of builders, complaints were filed at the Faculty of Advocates regarding Mr Cheyne although the Faculty dismissed the complaints, as it normally does against its members when a complaint is made.

A letter was subsequently sent from Sheriff Reid’s law firm, Flemming & Reid, of Glasgow, threatening an interdict and action for “non-harassment” if the builders continued to ask for monies claimed to be due to them.

It appears after the two builders pressed their point they should be paid for their work, a letter was sent from Sheriff Paul Reid’s law firm, Flemming & Reid, of Glasgow, threatening an interdict and action for “non-harassment” if the builders continued to ask for monies claimed to be due to them.

The two builders were then contacted by a Police Officer from Gorbals Police station in Glasgow, who had evidently been provided with copies of exchanges of letters between Mr Cheyne, the Faculty & the builders. The Police Constable, apparently a probationer then went onto threaten the builders with arrest if they contacted Mr Cheyne again, claiming they would be charged with extortion.

In communications seen by the media, Carole Fergusson Walker, a solicitor for the Faculty of Advocates was told by the builders : "Mr Cheyne decided to involve a Solicitor who sent us a letter using words like Harassment, Extortion and will start proceedings if we persist with our "vendetta". He also instructed a third party to contacted Strathclyde Police regarding the content of an email. (letters & email attached) PC [name redacted] contacted us on Sunday 17/4/11 and repeated these words to us. We decided to visit Gorbals Police Station on Tuesday 19/4/11 and speak to PC [name redacted]. Due to him being off duty we spoke to Sergeant [name redacted] for over an hour. He was alarmed his PC had used these words and would deal with the matter. We also discussed the police's involvement, he said it was a civil matter, and there has to "criminal intent in order for a crime to be committed" he did not see any intent. If you read Mr Cheyne's letters over the last couple of years, you will see he has changed his story again, named Victor McGinley as his "main contractor" but more importantly admits he never gave Mr McGinley any monies for us."

A legal insider said it sounded like the Police officer had overstepped the mark as it was clearly a civil case, and should face an investigation over his comments and or links to persons in this case. He said : “The Police did not exist as a service to scare off creditors.”

The two builders are currently considering whether to pursue the matter in court. The report from the Sunday Mail and a copy of Mr Cheyne’s letter to the builders, follows below :

Workmen chase advocate after carrying out £22k renovations to holiday home

Apr 3 2011 Russell Findlay, Sunday Mail

A PLUMBER and joiner are chasing a leading lawyer for £22,000 for work they did on his French holiday home. George Thomson and Scott Johnstone spent 12 days renovating the farmhouse of advocate Desmond Cheyne.

They drove the 2300-mile round trip from Scotland to Agen and toiled for 10-hour days in the summer heat on the luxury home, which has its own swimming pool. But when they asked for payment, Cheyne referred them to painter Vic McGinlay who he said was the "main contractor". Now two years on, George and Scott, from Torrance, near Glasgow, have still not been paid for their work.

Before taking the job, George met the lawyer at his home in Pollokshields, Glasgow, to discuss the work. And despite later telling them to seek payment from McGinlay, Cheyne paid the pair over £10,000 directly for materials.

George, 53, said: "If McGinlay was the main contractor, why did he need me present at the meetings with Cheyne? Also, why did Cheyne pay money for materials into my account and Scott's account and not via McGinlay? We were led to believe we were working for Cheyne as self-employed businesses and therefore should have been paid direct by him."

The pair returned to Scotland towards the end of the job to attend George's brother's wedding. While away, they were told by McGinlay not to return and were later accused of walking off the job and threatening Cheyne.

Scott, 47, said: "I resent his accusation that he was threatened. I believe George did swear at him but, in his defence, being spoken to in an arrogant manner by Cheyne would make a saint swear."

George and Scott complained about Cheyne to the Faculty of Advocates but their case was kicked out after they ruled it was a personal matter.They have also enlisted the help of their MSP David Whitton. He said: "I contacted the Faculty of Advocates and I have to say I was very disappointed at their attitude.

"Mr Cheyne is a professional man and he knows the work has been done by my constituents and he knows they haven't been paid for that work. Unfortunately he has made no effort to try to resolve this situation and I would hope he would attempt to do so."

When contacted by the Sunday Mail, Cheyne said: "Were these two wearing cowboy hats when they spoke to you?"

He earlier told the faculty: "They were employed by the contractor. His account was paid in full. "I believe I have dealt with the complainers in as helpful a manner as possible. But they have sworn at me and threatened me."

Vic McGinlay, from Townhead, Glasgow, was unavailable for comment.

Law Society of Scotland and Fiscal accused of deliberate exclusion of witness evidence in Court of Session appeal

More From A Diary of Injustice in Scotland which reports further on the amazing events of the Michael G Robson appeal in the Court of Session against being struck off by the SSDT.

Released documents show serious problems with the prosecuting Fiscal, Paul Reid of Fleming & Reid, and an apparent deliberate attempt by the Law Society of Scotland to exclude evidence and witness testimony in the actual court case.

Revelations in Court of Session appeal show Law Society & Fiscal deliberately failed to take witness affidavit and excluded crucial evidence

Taking a long time, but about three years later, I finally have the Legal Services Ombudsman's report into the Law Society of Scotland's handling of my complaint against Michael Robson - the now infamous 'tennis playing lawyer', which you can read more about here :Lawyer who took on Law Society for clients ended up as dishonest as those he challenged

Sunday Mail - Michael Robson, an untrustworthy solicitor who did nothing for his clients

The report basically shows the Law Society of Scotland handled my complaint against former lawyer Michael Robson, with the utmost prejudice against me, and that the Council of the Law Society of Scotland deliberately excluded the details of Michael Robsons conduct in the medical negligence case relating to my mum, just to deny me a fair hearing, deny me the chance to give an input into the case, and deny me any justice - just as they do with everyone else.

Legal Services Ombudsman's report on the Law Society of Scotland & Court of Session case involving Michael Robson

Perhaps more importantly, the Legal Services Ombudsman's report shows that the Law Society of Scotland and even Law Society Fiscal in the case, Mr David Reid of Messrs Flemming & Reid, failed to the point of deliberately seeking to deny me the chance to make a formal affidavit that I was entitled to input into the Court of Session hearings.

From the LSO report into Michael Robson

"In his response of 17 December, the Fiscal expressed his surprise. He said that he had understood that you were „very interested in the prosecution’. He suggested that enquiries should be made as to your whereabouts when you were required as a witness. However, I cannot see that any such enquiries were made. On 21 March 2005, the Law Society provided the Fiscal with your e-mail address. I can only assume that it was at that point they realised that they had a contact e-mail address for you on another file.

Here follow a couple of sample emails from the Law Society Fiscal Paul Reid to myself, showing firstly, his intention to take statements from me, then silence, after no doubt the Law Society decided I should again be denied access to justice or given a chance to speak.

Law Society Fiscal Paul Reid writes to contact me for a statement - on a hearing which was to take place the very next day early in the morning ....

From: "Fleming & Reid" <flemingreid@btconnect.com>
To: <petercherbi>
Subject: Council of the Law Society of Scotland - Michael G Robson
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:24:16

FLEMING & REID, SOLICITORS, 180 HOPE STREET, GLASGOW, G2 2UE

TELEPHONE: 0141 331 1144

Our ref: PR/GP

Dear Mr Cherbi,

Council of the Law Society of Scotland

Michael G Robson

I write further to my recent correspondence in connection with the above to which I have not heard from you in response.

In the course of discussions with representatives from the Law Society I was advised that you were now communicating with them by way of e-mail. I am therefore taking the liberty of presenting this message to you by way of e-mail.

A hearing in connection with the prosecution of Michael G Robson is to take place tomorrow within the Scotsman Hotel, 20 Northbridge, Edinburgh, before the Discipline Tribunal at 10am. I had written to you previously asking that you contact me in order that I may obtain from you a statement which would then be encapsulated within the form of an Affidavit of your evidence. I have not heard from you in response. I would be grateful if you would telephone me upon receipt of this e-mail to indicate whether or not it is your intention to attend tomorrow to give evidence on behalf of the Complaint.

I look forward to hearing from you in early course.

Yours sincerely

P A Reid, LLB (Hons) Dip.LP.NP.

SOLICITOR ADVOCATE

My reply :

From: "PC" <petercherbi>
To: "Fleming & Reid" <flemingreid@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: Council of the Law Society of Scotland - Michael G Robson
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:50:07

Dear Mr Reid,
Thanks for your email.
I'm sorry it seems that the Law Society haven't kept you informed of my
whereabouts or my health, but in any case, I am not currently in the Uk
and wont be able to return until sometime before June.
I certainly could not attend tomorrows hearing
However, I would like to attend the hearing, or give evidence, I cannot advance you
a statement by tomorrow - 10am
I would suggest, given the importance of my testimony, and the fact that
you were not made aware that I was not at my address to which you were
writing (which was actually 47 Bongate), you try to obtain a postponement
or adjournment of the hearing on these grounds, as I would very much like
to input into this hearing, given Mr Robson's conduct as per his
representation of my affairs.

Fiscal Paul Reid replies :

Reply-To: "Fleming & Reid" <flemingreid@btconnect.com>
From: "Fleming & Reid" <flemingreid@btconnect.com>
To: <petercherbi>
Subject: Council of the Law Societry of Scotland - Michael Robson
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:03:2
Dear Mr Cherbi,

Council of the Law Society of Scotland

Michael G Robson

I write further to your e-mail of 12th April in connection with the above.

I have yet to be made aware as to whether Mr Robson intends to appeal the judgement. A period of 21 days following release of the written Findings is allowed for either party to mark an appeal.

I suspect the indication that an appeal will be forthcoming is based upon previous history insofar as Mr Robson is concerned.

From my own part I would consider that any appeal at his instance is bound to fail. However if an appeal is so marked then it would be my intention to counter-appeal the decision of the Tribunal in relation to your evidence.

When that is determined, at that stage it would be my intention to meet with you, if possible, and obtain from you a statement in relation to your involvement with Mr Robson and the manner in which you were let down. I trust this will not cause you a difficulty. If there is any further information which you require from me, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

P A Reid, LLB (Hons) Dip.LP.NP.

SOLICITOR ADVOCATE

A further chaser from me, a year later, asking about my statement, after silence from the Fiscal ...

From: <petercherbi>
To: "Fleming & Reid" <flemingreid@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: Michael Robson
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:21:56

Mr Reid
I am informed that the prosecution of Michael Robson is to be in May, but I have not heard from you as to the matter of whether I am giving a statement or not.
It seems I have also been contacted by elements of a lobby group who are volunteering to be in touch with Mr Robson, to ensure that all his rights to cross examine witnesses or cases in the prosecution, are adhered to.
It seems therefore if I am not going to testify for you, I will be testifying for someone else, which is very odd to me, because I am the complainer of course

Clearly I was still waiting on giving a statement a year after .. but the Law Society were determined to see I had no chance in having access to the court on this one ...

A catalogue of obvious delay, denial of access to justice and prejudice seems to be the course of the day in the Law Society's determination to prevent me from speaking in court against their lawyer Michael Robson.

Even worse revelations in the Legal Services Ombudsman's report show the Law Society Fiscal made an attempt to delete references to my complaint so they could be heard at a later date - supposedly, and that was unsurprisingly denied, simply because no one in the court, even Mr Robson, wanted me to be able to speak about how he treated the case of my mum's death at the Borders General Hospital.

From the Legal Services Ombudsman's report :

"On 20 February 2004, the Law Society lodged a complaint of professional misconduct with the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal (the Tribunal). That complaint included details of your allegations against Mr Robson. A hearing took place before the Tribunal on 23 March 2005. You were unable to give evidence as you were only made aware of the hearing the day before.

The Fiscal made an application to delete reference to your complaints which would allow them to be held over to a later date. That application was denied. No finding of professional misconduct was made in relation to your complaint. However, Mr Robson was found guilty of professional misconduct in relation to another matter before the Tribunal."

Quite convenient for both the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal and the Court of Session that I wasn't allowed to make any affidavit or statement about how Michael Robson had treated me as a client - and with my complaint being one of the principle complaints against Mr Robson which the Law Society had investigated, that is an incredible denial of access to justice, which the court itself became part of. Mr Robson was happy too of course, as he didn't have to answer for why he lied the whole time he said he was handling the medical negligence case involving the death of my mum.

The conclusion of the Legal Services Ombudsman's report finds the Law Society guilty of wrongdoing, so to speak, and offers a paltry 100 pounds for their actions. Quite disgusting that in our society, an ombudsman has such limited power, but this is just another good example of how crooked lawyers get away with it, time and again, with everyone, not just myself.

Legal Services Ombudsman's conclusion :

"I have considered the handling of your case by the Law Society and in my opinion they failed to take reasonable steps to keep in contact with you between February 2004 and March 2005. I am also of the view that they failed to give you adequate notice of the hearing of 23 March 2005 and you were therefore unable to give evidence. I recommend that the Law Society compensate you in the sum of £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to you as a result"

Ultimately, the Law Society gets off the hook again, and if anything this case simply shows the present structures of prosecuting crooked lawyers and recovering damages in Scotland is a complete and utter failure.

So can I find a lawyer to represent me in a case to sue the Law Society and Mr Robson for what happened ? I doubt it, as all lawyers are members of the Law Society of Scotland and wont want to do anything to upset the powers that be.

Offers of legal representation to clear up this mess will be gratefully received ...

This is all a good example of how our glorious Scottish legal system is geared to self protecting lawyers and the legal profession against any member of the public who may have a valid claim against a solicitor. That in itself is a good enough argument to ensure that any regulation involving the legal profession must be fully independent, transparent and have no connection whatsoever with the present systems the legal profession has put in place over the years to constantly save itself from any harm.

Reform these injustices now, and bring fully independent regulation for the legal services market, which must be fully opened up to break the Law Society's monopoly on access to justice - as they have so well demonstrated against myself and so many others.

Tennis fan ex lawyer holds up Court of Session with tennis elbow

Lawyers have been known to come up with some rather unbelievable excuses not to attend SSDT disciplinary hearings, or avoid court appearances, but playing tennis does stretch the credulity of ones position a little far.

However, for one fairly well known ex lawyer, Michael G Robson, stretching the credulity of the Court of Session itself has become a sport, playing backhand after backhand in beating off appearances & the inevitable in the case of Michael Robson V SSDT LAW 82/195.

Here are excerpts from the excuses given to m'lordships, who must have definitely been out to lunch allowing this to go on for several years !

"Mr Robson was unable to attend as his employers were contracted to provide his services as a LTA tennis coach to West Lothian Council."

"Mr Robson had a tennis training course in the North of England from 15th - 17th May."

"Mr Robson was unable to attend this hearing as he was attending a tennis leaders course. It was the first course to be run in Scotland and he had been committed since June."

Bizarrely, the English Legal Services Ombudsman has become involved in the case on behalf of clients dissatisfied with the way the Law Society of Scotland handled the original investigations into Mr Robson's conduct.Apparently the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman felt it was not able to investigate the complaint properly, some four plus hears ago and nothing has been done since.

PA Reid, 'Solicitor Advocate' of Messrs Fleming & Reid, 180 Hope Street, Glasgow, is known to be the Law Society's 'prosecuting fiscal' in this case .... *ahem*

Roll of Court Appearances of Michael G Robson before the Court of Session - not pretty reading, but definitely a lesson in stalling :

More can be read on Mr Robson's downfall as a solicitor HERE

The Sunday Mail reports

Shamed Lawyer In Tennis Racket

Oct 21 2007 By Russell Findlay

Exclusive Brief Accused Of Stringing Along Court With Excuses

A SHAMED lawyer missed a string of dates to defend himself against complaints - because he was too busy playing tennis.

Michael Robson gave the crazy excuse to Scotland's highest court after appealing against a punishment for ignoring clients' wishes.

He was disciplined by legal watchdogs in 2005 but the ruling remained secret because he appealed to the Court of Session.

Robson, 55, missed a court date in April last year as he was working as a Lawn Tennis Association coach.

In May 2006, he went on a two-day tennis training course in England and that September he was at a tennis "leaders course".

Client Peter Cherbi plans to sue Robson for failing to act in a medical negligence claim over the death of his mother in 2000.

Mr Cherbi claims Robson's delays may be a tactic to avoid a court case.

He said: "The deadline for my action against Mr Robson is next year when it will become time barred.

"I suspect he is cynically playing for time. It is extraordinary judges should accept a tennis match is more important than a court appearance." In 2001 the Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal found Robson had ignored 50 letters from the Law Society, criticised his "cavalier attitude" and ordered that he work under supervision for three years.

In 2002 he was struck off but that was reduced to five-years of supervision on appeal.

He is banned from working as a solicitor as result of the 2005 ruling.

When we called Robson, of Ratho, Edinburgh, he said he would phone back but failed to do so.