I recently stumbled upon a reference to Ben Whelan as H. M. Coroner. It would seem it is TRUE (here) - according to FDC Liar's Website...
[Ben Whelan] "...is a member of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers. In addition, he is also the Deputy H.M. Coroner for East Somerset."
Goodness! Does THAT put a whole new slant on the SRA's "decision" ... on Zahida Manzoor's "report" and on the willing blindness of Regional Costs Judge, District Judge R James?
FACT: In June 2008 Ben Whelan signed a false declaration on a bill of costs. He falsely claimed £1,000's MORE in costs than FDC Law was entitled to under the law.
FACT: Ben Whelan was in court in March 2008 and heard his former Senior Partner (Wayman) admit under oath that SHE should NOT have made a similar FALSE DECLARATION in 2004 in the SAME case. Whelan would seem to have no excuses - all of the "rules" were refreshed in his mind while he took notes.
FACT: When Whelan was discovered (read: caught out in a lie which has all that hallmarks of deliberate criminal fraud) D J James simply turned a blind eye - despite the fact that Henry L J had determined that FALSE DECLARATIONS such as this are a BREACH OF TRUST and "a most serious disciplinary offence" (see below)
FACT: In October 2008 the Association of Law Costs Draughtsman (ALCD) fined FDC Law's costs draughtsman, Nigel Long, for HIS part in this deception. The SRA, however, and later the Legal Services Ombudsman (Zahida Manzoor) refused to take action against Whelan - the SRA's "excuse" requires a belief in time-travel and Manzoor's "report" ignores all the FACTS and actually LIES in order to come down on the side of the SRA.
FACT: Patricia Wayman, FDC Law's former Senior Partner, who finally admitted her OWN false declaration in 2008 was not Whelan's only mentor. Predecessor Tony Williams was ALSO of FDC Law. I had dealings with Williams in 2004 - I am happy to take oath and swear that Tony Williams lied to me. I have also received emails from THREE separate people all of whom believe Tony Williams to be dishonest. It seems FDC Law is a breeding-ground.
Well, it would seem there is no will within the legal community to do ANYTHING about people like Ben Whelan - indeed (my opinion) there is an active cover-up, . At least SFH, this site and others like it associate key words like "Tony Williams" and "Ben Whelan" and "Coroner" with words like "False Declaration", "Lies" and "Dishonesty" - in the "minds" (bellies?) of major search engines like Google and Yahoo. Maybe that will help someone?
Do YOU find it odd that a firm of solicitors is unable to prevent publication of something which would be defanatory were it not also TRUE?
It would seem you can't fight "city hall" ... but we CAN issue WARNINGS! Beware!
You will find a somewhat out-of-date list of H M Coroners here... well done Heather Brooke.
SOMERSET (EASTERN) CORONER'S DISTRICT
AREA COMPRISING THE CORONER’S JURISDICTION: The districts of Mendip and South Somerset.
Tony Williams
Faulkners Solicitors
Argyll House, Bath Street
Frome
Somerset
BA11 1DP
Telephone: 01761 411030
Beware... not ALL of H M Coroners are honest.
Further Reading... Whelan ... More Whelan ... Even More Whelan ... Williams ... Solicitors to Avoid
Henry LJ (at 575–576) also highlighted the importance of the signature by the solicitor to the bill of costs:
'In so signing he certifies that the contents of the bill are correct. That signature is no empty formality. The bill specifies the hourly rates applied, and the care and attention uplift claimed. If an agreement between the receiving solicitor and his client … restricted (say) the hourly rate payable by the client, that hourly rate is the most that can be claimed or recovered on [assessment] … The signature of the bill of costs under the rules is effectively the certificate by an officer of the court that the receiving party's solicitors are not seeking to recover in relation to any item more than they have agreed to charge their client … For the avoidance of doubt, I also agree that the [costs] officer may and should seek further information where some feature of the case raises suspicions that the whole truth may not have been told. And the other side of a presumption of trust afforded to the signature of an officer of the court must be that breach of that trust should be treated as a most serious disciplinary offence.'"
The above precedent was cited during these proceedings – as was the Indemnity Principle, which was central to the case. Also during these proceedings FDC Law’s former Senior Partner admitted under oath that she should NOT have signed an earlier bill BECAUSE of the Indemnity Principle. Ben Whelan was present. Like Nigel Long, he has absolutely NO EXCUSE whatsoever for this under these circumstances.
[Home]