Legal Force of a Solicitor's letter

danash

I was wondering of the legal force of a solicitor's letter. Is it to paraphrase the Carlsberg ad merely ' a strongly worded letter' or does the content have any greater legal force than one written from one individual to another with the same content ?

seamus

I don't know what you mean by "legal force"?

But if it's what I think you're asking, the answer is "no". If you are demanding money from someone, it makes no odds whether the demand is written by you or your solicitor - the existence of a solicitor doesn't somehow impose any obligations on the recipients.

However, what it does is make it clear to the recipient that the other party has taken legal consultation on the matter, and lays out the case more clearly than if the other party had written it themselves.

The primary aim is to make the other party realise that you're being serious and hope to get them to pay up or to do whatever it is that you want them to do. The vast of majority of solicitor's letters come to nothing whatsoever.

It does provide some protection to the sender though too - if they wrote it themselves they could inadvertently say something which could be used against them in court. A solicitor would be expected to not make this mistake.

danash

seamus wrote: »

I don't know what you mean by "legal force"?

But if it's what I think you're asking, the answer is "no". If you are demanding money from someone, it makes no odds whether the demand is written by you or your solicitor - the existence of a solicitor doesn't somehow impose any obligations on the recipients.

However, what it does is make it clear to the recipient that the other party has taken legal consultation on the matter, and lays out the case more clearly than if the other party had written it themselves.

The primary aim is to make the other party realise that you're being serious and hope to get them to pay up or to do whatever it is that you want them to do. The vast of majority of solicitor's letters come to nothing whatsoever.

It does provide some protection to the sender though too - if they wrote it themselves they could inadvertently say something which could be used against them in court. A solicitor would be expected to not make this mistake.

That was my view - I was thinking back to Old Ireand where the use of a solicitor would instill fear - but wanted to be sure that the 'officer of the court' line held no import.

seamus

danash wrote: »

That was my view - I was thinking back to Old Ireand where the use of a solicitor would instill fear - but wanted to be sure that the 'officer of the court' line held no import.

Well that might be a little bit different. I'm way outside of my comfort zone here, but afaik there are circumstances where a judge will rule against someone and order them to deal with the plaintiff's solicitor i resolving the matter - in that case a direction from the plaintiff's solicitor would have more weight than a direction from the plaintiff themselves.

As I say though, I'm way out there.

pwd

seamus wrote: »

I don't know what you mean by "legal force"?

But if it's what I think you're asking, the answer is "no". If you are demanding money from someone, it makes no odds whether the demand is written by you or your solicitor - the existence of a solicitor doesn't somehow impose any obligations on the recipients.

However, what it does is make it clear to the recipient that the other party has taken legal consultation on the matter, and lays out the case more clearly than if the other party had written it themselves.

The primary aim is to make the other party realise that you're being serious and hope to get them to pay up or to do whatever it is that you want them to do. The vast of majority of solicitor's letters come to nothing whatsoever.

It does provide some protection to the sender though too - if they wrote it themselves they could inadvertently say something which could be used against them in court. A solicitor would be expected to not make this mistake.

not only that, but because it is the solicitor is saying it, then they can say things that maybe wouldn't be good coming from the client themselves, but the client can just say it was the solicitor when it comes from the solicitor, if I've made that clear at all

danash

seamus wrote: »

Well that might be a little bit different. I'm way outside of my comfort zone here, but afaik there are circumstances where a judge will rule against someone and order them to deal with the plaintiff's solicitor i resolving the matter - in that case a direction from the plaintiff's solicitor would have more weight than a direction from the plaintiff themselves.

As I say though, I'm way out there.

If it got to court I think you would have to engage. The context is that in a family separation I am threatened regularly by my ex wife with a solicitors letter for daring to communicate with her regarding my children. So far we have managed to deal with things without a solicitor but she seems to think that a letter to me would have dire consequences for me. Recent friends she has taken up with have seem to have brought on this new departure and she seems bent on involving solicitors to change what has been a functioning situation for 3 years now.

I think I will just read any letter and take it with a pinch of salt and let her spend 100 euro a time.

( for info I am compliant with maintenance, access and there is no safety order involved)

servicecharge

The only danger from a solicitors letter might be that you might have costs awarded against you.

wolfpawnat

seamus wrote: »

However, what it does is make it clear to the recipient that the other party has taken legal consultation on the matter, and lays out the case more clearly than if the other party had written it themselves.

The primary aim is to make the other party realise that you're being serious and hope to get them to pay up or to do whatever it is that you want them to do. The vast of majority of solicitor's letters come to nothing whatsoever.

It does provide some protection to the sender though too - if they wrote it themselves they could inadvertently say something which could be used against them in court. A solicitor would be expected to not make this mistake.

Can I ask, if a person sends a letter through a solicitor stating they only want contact through solicitors or else they will apply for a safety/restraining order, and the receipient ignores this request, what legal standing does the sender have then?

Our man in Havana

No more if they hadn't sent a solicitors letter.

I had a situation where I requested a person not to contact me expect via my solicitor and they ignored the letter. There is nothing that I could do except to refer their communications to my solicitor.

maidhc

danash wrote: »

If it got to court I think you would have to engage. The context is that in a family separation I am threatened regularly by my ex wife with a solicitors letter for daring to communicate with her regarding my children. So far we have managed to deal with things without a solicitor but she seems to think that a letter to me would have dire consequences for me. Recent friends she has taken up with have seem to have brought on this new departure and she seems bent on involving solicitors to change what has been a functioning situation for 3 years now.

I think I will just read any letter and take it with a pinch of salt and let her spend 100 euro a time.

( for info I am compliant with maintenance, access and there is no safety order involved)

For what it is worth, I don't there are many solicitors who will write a letter for €100. Certainly in a family law situtation no self respecting office will fire off a letter unless they a) have definate instructions to achieve a particular aim, and b) accept their client has a viable argument.

danash

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Can I ask, if a person sends a letter through a solicitor stating they only want contact through solicitors or else they will apply for a safety/restraining order, and the receipient ignores this request, what legal standing does the sender have then?

I'm not sure you could be dragged to a court for a safety order for 'refusing' to engage a solicitor and the inherent cost just because you sent me a letter with a spurious request. My right not to spend money and not take legal advice would be paramount to your desire to have me write via a solicitor.


I do understand the necessity sometime of legal advice/using solicitors but not just because you/someone say I have to.

wolfpawnat

Well I suppose I should also mention there is also garda involvement due to physical assault, and deformation of character problems also. Its a messy affair but the letter was the last resort threathening the receiptient with a restraining order if they contact me outside of these methods.

partyguinness

Depending in the situation, if the matter goes to Court and you havent replied to the original letter or contradicted it then that will be made an issue of when the letter is opend to the Court...ie...it can be inferred that the facts in the letter are correct plus it shows that the other side warned you but you ignored it..which doesnt look good for you..

Fundamentally the letter has no binding obligation as such but as said earlier it is to show seriousness and yes a lot of times it comes to nothing...it can come back to haunt you if it is ignore....but it really depends on the context it was written.

seamus

Right, I'm going to close this now because we're getting into legal advice territory.

For both of you, the same fundamental things apply - you're under no compulsion to follow their solicitor's directions and you're not breaking any criminal or civil laws by ignoring their solictor's letters.

However, that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Ask your own solictors for advice on it, they will know the background more than you can explain to us here. The €50/hour or whatever they charge you for their consultation will be worth the peace of mind they'll give you.