Under U.K. law, clients have the legal right to express their opinions and experiences with law firms. This review is spoken from true events and as a former client of Payne Hicks Beach. It is known as the right to freedom of expression, which is protected under Article 10 of Human Rights. This is a review about a real former client of Fiona Shackleton, Dominic Crossley, and their partners- during their divorce and libel proceedings.
Review of Fiona Shackleton:
The client stated that instead of prioritizing their needs, Fiona Shackleton seemed more interested in financial gain. They received constant rants and emails with excessive and unnecessary fees, demonstrating a lack of professionalism and ethics and a disregard for their commitment to their clients. The client found Shackleton's unsolicited advice unhelpful and not worth the exorbitant fees charged (Pound 65k+ for a short period of months), perceiving her condescending and self-righteous rants as indicative of classism and racism. Despite being paid a significant amount, Shackleton displayed an air of entitlement and haughtiness, leading the client to question why she accepted them as a client if she wasn't willing to invest the necessary time, interest, and effort to support them through their divorce.
The client emphasizes the importance of empathy and understanding during a difficult time such as divorce. They felt that Shackleton lacked these qualities and was uninterested in people's feelings. The client would constantly receive rants from Shackleton.
In addition to their lack of commitment, the client warns prospective clients to be cautious when working with Fiona Shackleton due to her tendency to breach confidentiality. The client experienced immense frustration and stress when their sensitive case details were shared with others without their consent. This breach of confidentiality is a cause for concern for any prospective clients.
To make matters worst, Shackleton abruptly quit during a critical juncture in their divorce proceedings without providing any justification, therefore weakening their case against their estranged partner. Having one firm start and a new firm continue, their unexpected resignation compelled them to start over and seek alternative legal representation at a crucial time, adding more new fees. The client never received an apology, refund or farewell from Shackleton. Goes to show her lack of empathy. Ultimately, they were fortunate enough to find Lady Helen from Stewart's Law, who offered unwavering support and tenaciously advocated for their rights until the conclusion of the proceedings.
As a result:
1. Lack of commitment and professionalism demonstrated by Fiona Shackleton's and her legal team.
2. Breach of confidentiality by Fiona Shackleton.
3. Unsolicited advice and exorbitant fees charged by Fiona Shackleton.
4. Lack of empathy and understanding demonstrated by Fiona Shackleton.
5. Abrupt withdrawal by Fiona Shackleton's legal team during a critical moment in divorce proceedings.
Review of Dominic Crossley:
The client had a disappointing experience with Mr. Dominic Crossley, who served as their libel legal representative at PHB. The client felt that Mr. Crossley's legal advice was insufficient and his professionalism was questionable. The client believed that Mr. Crossley was ill-equipped to handle their case, which received global media attention.
During the client's time with Mr. Crossley, they experienced frustration. Despite paying huge amounts of money for Mr. Crossley's services, the client went through unnecessary hoops to obtain proceedings and letters that proved to be useless. Furthermore, Mr. Crossley quit on the client during a crucial point, leaving the client to find new representation.
Mr. Crossley's explanation to quitting was baseless with no supporting evidence, despite having a complete file of who he was representing prior. Despite attempts to contact Mr. Crossley about their dissatisfaction, the client received no response or refund. This left the client feeling disillusioned and disappointed.
The client eventually sought representation from Carter Ruck's law firm and was able to win their case.
As a result:
1. Disappointing experience with Mr. Dominic Crossley as their libel legal representative.
2. Insufficient legal advice and questionable professionalism from Mr. Crossley despite his bio stating otherwise.
3. Frustration and sense of betrayal experienced by the client despite paying huge amounts of money for Mr. Crossley's services.
4. Mr. Crossley quitting on the client during a crucial point in their case.
5. Lack of concern or care for providing quality service demonstrated by Mr. Crossley.