Lewis Hymanson Small Solicitors LLP News

Hairdressers Journal International: Don't Let Their Cup Runneth Over!

Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

First non lawyer made partner at Lewis Hymanson Small

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Brian has been operations director and head of risk and compliance at Lewis Hymanson Small since the firm�s formation in 2007. He has more than 20 years experience within the legal profession.

Prior to joining the legal profession, Brian served in the Royal Air Force for 12 years spending most of his career working within NATO headquarters and the RAF recruitment service.

Graham Small, partner at Lewis Hymanson Small said: �Brian has played an integral role in the management and long term strategy of the firm and we wanted to acknowledge his hard work and dedication by awarding him partner status. He is involved in all aspects of running Lewis Hymanson Small, from HR, business planning and marketing to project management, finance, IT and risk and compliance.�

Brian is a speaker for a number of law societies and professional services groups across the country presenting seminars on topics including money laundering, the Solicitors' Code of Conduct and referral arrangements. He also acts as a consultant to law firms and claims management companies on their referral arrangements and regulatory and compliance issues.

Brian is a member of the Institute of Administrative Management, Chartered Institute of Personnel Development, Chartered Management Institute, British Institute of Facilities Management, Recruitment and Employment Confederation and HR in Law Group.

Fakes and the City

Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

So I got to wondering�why has the new Sex and the City film seen such an upsurge in fake designer goods flooding the market?

The launch of Sex and the City 2 has seen record numbers of women rushing to the flicks to watch their favourite female characters and drool over their designer wardrobes.

However, fans trying to emulate Carrie�s clothes and Samantha�s style have seen the black market flooded with fake designer copies of Chanel jackets, Halston dresses, and Christian Louboutin shoes.

The surge in forged goods means that spotting a fake is harder today. Counterfeit items must be destroyed to stop the black market which contributes to wider criminal activity and presents consumers with poor quality items.

Jim Watson, managing director of Shred Easy, the UK�s leading counterfeit shredding company, said:

�Female fans trying to emulate their fashion idols should know how to spot fakes online and in the street. Look out for faded logos, cheap material, badly stitched labels, the age of the item, where it was made and distinct patterns like the official Louis Vuitton print.

�These items must be shredded to protect trade marks and to refrain from devaluing exclusive brands.�

Ian Lewis, a fraud partner at Manchester based Lewis Hymanson Small solicitors, said:

�The recession has meant more consumers are being targeted by fraudsters. Counterfeiting has far reaching effects, exposing consumers to poor quality goods, stopping local businesses from competing and helping increase criminality.

�If you have bought a fake item under the impression that it�s an original, you will have rights against the seller and should contact Trading Standards immediately. Your statutory rights may allow you to claim for false advertising.

�If you�re caught selling forged goods Trading Standards could punish you for fraud.�

Managing Information: Confidential Data Breaches Could Cost Businesses �500,000

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

Insider (North West Business): Internal Workings

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

Company Clothing: Don't get caught out on Data Protection

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

The Independent: Employers have nothing to fear from faith

Thu, 27 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

Lewis Hymanson Small helps Hair Solved grow

Tue, 25 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Law firm Lewis Hymanson Small solicitors has completed a lease for a Manchester based hair loss specialist that is expanding into London.

Hair Solved is a hair loss solutions company that specialises in treatments for alopecia, genetic thinning, trichotillomania and chemotherapy hair loss, and was recently featured on Channel 4�s Embarrassing Bodies.

The company has a new studio in Barnet, North London to add to their Whitefield head office.

The company specialises in an advanced hair integration system called the Enhancer which conceals all types of hair loss. This non surgical bespoke system combines hair extensions and mesh attached to existing hair to conceal any form of baldness.

Adele Librae, corporate partner at Lewis Hymanson Small Solicitors, said:

�I completed the lease for Hair Solved�s new London studio quickly because they are keen to make their treatments available to hair loss sufferers in the South East. I have enjoyed advising this worthwhile business and watching it grow since it was established in 2007. They now have studios in Manchester and London and plan to open one in Scotland later in the year.�

Lucas Sojka, one of the managing directors of Hair Solved, said:

�We needed a law firm that could deliver fast and effective results as we wanted to open a London studio without any delay and we knew we could rely on Ad�le as she has been advising the business since day one. My partner Laurence and I offer a specialist service for our clients that no one else can provide. Our business is built on my extensive experience as one of the UK's top hair loss solutions specialists, who has performed thousands of procedures involving hair systems design and maintenance.�

supplymanagement.com: Time out for the World Cup

Sun, 23 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Neeta Laing, head of employment at Lewis Hymanson Small offers advice to managers on how to handle employee absence during the World Cup.

Football crazy

The UK is a nation of football fanatics. Football fans spend 800 hours a year backing their team and this figure is even higher during a global football event like the World Cup.

As World Cup fever builds ahead of England�s first game on Saturday 12 June against the USA, managers need to have an agreed HR policy in place in order to handle potential absences from work.

The average length of absence from work in the private sector is 6.4 days per year, whilst public sector employees clock up 9.8 days.[1] However, every two years when either the European championships or the World Cup come around, the levels of unauthorised absence soars.

The legal implications

Employers must manage employee expectations during this global sporting event. As World Cup fever hits your office, you may have to balance employee enjoyment with business output. It is important to create a culture of trust in your workplace so staff feel morally obligated to be truthful. You don�t want to be seen as a killjoy so you could consider introducing flexible working hours for staff, reorganising the shift rota, agreeing to annual leave and even screening matches in your office.

Affects on the bottom line

The consequences for employees, if found to be lying about legitimate absence, can be career damaging. If a member of staff is found to have taken sick leave but it transpires they are suffering with an alcohol-related hangover you may need to take disciplinary procedures. Unauthorised time off can affect the success of a business overall profits and customer service.

To effectively manage short-term absence consult an employment solicitor if an ongoing problem arises. There are several ways to determine if an employee has been truthful about their absence, these include return-to-work interviews, disciplinary procedures for unacceptable absence levels, training line managers in absence management, restricting sick pay and involving occupational health professionals.

CLAIMS MANAGEMENT - THE HIDDEN STORY

Wed, 28 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Brian Rogers, operations director at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small in Manchester, is an expert on referrals arrangements and advises law firms and claims management companies in this area, he also advises law firms facing action by their regulator for breaching the referral rules and presents seminars on the subject to Law Societies around the country. Here, he explains why the claims management sector has hit the headlines and how claims management companies and law firms can avoid disciplinary action.

The claims management industry is synonymous with low budget day time TV adverts asking �if you�ve tripped up lately� or �have you been miss-sold protection insurance�.

Claims management companies

In broad terms claims management companies let the public know what sort of things can be subject to a claim, including road traffic accidents, accidents at work and consumer credit problems. They then collect cases from members of the public that respond to their advertising and, where appropriate, pass them to law firms so they can be processed through the legal system with a view to obtaining compensation. It is normal practice for law firms to pay a fee to the claims management companies for passing the cases to them; this is what is known as a �referral fee�.

The claims management industry was established after the government withdrew legal aid for many types of cases in 1999; the sector now has about 3,500 claims firms operating in it. The industry is regulated by the Ministry of Justice (Claims Management Regulator) and is bound by the Claims Management Regulations. All companies that provide a regulated claims management service need MoJ authorisation.

Where do law firms fit in?

In the majority of cases handled by claims companies legal action is required in some form and at present, this can only be carried out by law firms. Law firms are governed by strict rules known as the Solicitors Code of Conduct.

Regulation

As previously mentioned claims management companies are regulated by the Claims Management Regulator but the law firms accepting cases from them are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Breaches of the rules and regulations could lead to the withdrawal of a claims company�s licence and severe penalties, including closure, being imposed on law firms

Cartel Client Review

Recently, one claims management company has been the focus of a lot of media attention - Cartel Client Review (CCR). This claims management company has had its licence withdrawn and the law firms that dealt with the claims referred to them, have been closed down by their regulator. Both regulators have announced that they are unable to do anything to assist clients in recouping their fees, therefore leaving them millions of pounds out of pocket.

This case demonstrates that the sector is, and will remain, under extreme scrutiny and both CMCs and law firms need to ensure they have complied with all relevant rules and regulations. Law firms in particular need to ensure their referral arrangements with CMCs can stand up to close scrutiny by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Referral problems

Many referral arrangements would not stand up to close scrutiny by the SRA leaving law firms liable for disciplinary action for breach of Rule 9 of the Solicitors Code of Conduct. This rule applies when a firm receives referrals of business from, or makes referrals to, third parties. Its purpose is to protect clients by ensuring law firms remain independent and act in the clients� best interests. Many referral problems are caused by CMCs not understanding or complying with their obligations under the Code of Conduct. Too many law firms do not realise they are responsible for ensuring CMCs comply with the relevant referral rules, in effect they take on the role of regulator when they enter into a referral arrangement. If they find fault with an arrangement they must either get the claims management company to make it compliant or walk away, not an easy thing to do in either scenario!

Law firms must have a clear understanding of the relevant rules to ensure they protect themselves when getting involved in referral arrangements. It is imperative the best interests of clients are served.

Questions about claims

If a member of the public has a claim of any sort and approaches a claims management company to handle it, they must ensure it will be dealt with in accordance with the appropriate rules and regulations. There are some key questions that should be asked of the claims company and the law firm:

Ask claims management companies:
- Is the firm appropriately authorised by the Ministry of Justice (and the Office for Fair Trading if it is a financial claim)?
- Is there a referral arrangement in place between the claims company and the law firm and have you been given details of it before your case is sent to the law firm (including the name of the law firm and the fee it will pay to the claims company)?
- Has the firm given an assurance to the law firm that they will comply with the rules laid down in the Solicitors Code of Conduct (Rule 9)?
Ask law firms:
- Has the firm provided me with details about the referral arrangement it has with the claims company (see above)?
- Is the firm happy that you have not been subject to cold calling by the claims company?
- Has the firm obtained an assurance from the claims company that it will comply with the Solicitors Code of Conduct (Rule 9)?
- Is the firm happy that the claims company will not have influence over its independence, its duty of confidentiality and its ability to act in your best interests?

If the answer to any of these questions in �no� then query this with the firm concerned as they are required to comply with these areas.

Claims management companies and law firms need to be more aware of their obligations in this area; the Cartel Client Review case should stand as a warning for all solicitors to prepare for possible investigations in the future. If in doubt, speak to a professional advisor to ensure your business is complying with all rules and regulations. Where there is a MoJ investigation into a claims management company there is likely to be a SRA investigation into the law firms associated with it.

Check out covenants before painting your home pink

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT

AUCTION experts are urging property investors to research covenants in place on a property before making a bid.

Covenants dictate how a property can and can not be used and are registered at the Land Registry. Restrictive covenants are private agreements between land owners which may restrict the way land may be used and developed.

If the land or property is subject to a covenant, this will appear within the deeds of the property. Covenants are passed from one new owner to another.

In a recent case, the Jolly Anglers pub in Reading was sold with a restrictive covenant which meant its license was surrendered. The building was restricted from operating as a pub when it closed in June last year.

Auction Finance Limited reveals eight of the most unusual/strange covenants seen in auction houses in the past year:

No unchained pets allowed
Cars/caravans must not be parked at the property
A satellite dish can not be put on the property
The property can not be painted pink
Rubbish bins must be hidden from street view
Cars can only be repaired behind a screen
Only one dog allowed per property
You can not run a business without the permission of the developer

Chris Baguley, director at Auction Finance Limited, said:

�Covenants are imposed on the use of land or property by a former owner. Some of the restrictive covenants we see on properties are extremely unusual and make you wonder why they were put in place. However, even if they seem ridiculous, they are legally binding and must be followed. Many restrictive covenants have an expiry date so you may be able to secure a bargain at auction and then hold on to the property and carry out the renovations you want when the covenant expires.

�Similarly, if a covenant was put in place many years ago for a good reason, but this reason no longer exists, it may be possible to have the covenant removed or modified. Get all the facts about a property early on so that you can make an informed decision.�

Claire Egerton, property partner at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�It�s important to check out any covenants on a property at the earliest stage. Many investors, who have gone ahead despite covenants, have been taken to court for breach. It may well be the case that you can modify the covenant but every case is different so check before you buy.

�Always ask your legal representative if you�re unsure what is in place. It may be possible for your solicitor to obtain an indemnity policy which will cover liability for the future breach of a covenant, so ask about this option�.

Managing Partner: Managing your reputation

Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Brian Rogers, operations director at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small in Manchester, discusses how social media can effect the reputation of a firm.

Benjamin Franklin once said �it takes many good deeds to build a good reputation, and only one bad one to lose it�. A firm�s name and standing in the market place is essential for generating new business leads, retaining clients, attracting talent and giving employees confidence. A professional reputation is achieved through word of mouth and positive PR coverage in the press, on the radio and now more than ever, online.

The great majority of law firms have eagerly embraced information technology. They have harnessed the power of computing and on-line communication to make their businesses more reactive and efficient. It�s safe to say that the profession has been irreversibly changed by these developments.

Twitter bomb hoax

Firms must remember cyberspace is a lawless place. The infamous Twitter bomb hoax case, demonstrated this - Paul Chambers was alleged to have posted a message on Twitter in January this year, threatening to blow an airport "sky high" and is now facing trial.

Chambers is accused of posting the message in January after snow forced Robin Hood Airport in Doncaster, South Yorkshire, to close.

This case raises serious issues for anyone interested in social media and the role of criminal law. It seems you can�t joke about serious subjects and not be punished for it. This is a warning for bloggers, twitterers and commenters all over the internet.

Risks for employers

Every time an employer takes on a new employee they are taking a risk and are working on references and a large element of trust. Corporate reputation and corporate identity are two relatively new strategic issues facing firms today. Today employees must understand corporate reputation and image, corporate identity and corporate communications, and the interrelationships amongst these components. A firm�s ultimate survival may well depend on developing and maintaining a recognisable image and favorable reputation. Most employees appear to understand the potential for reputational damage that stems from spreading negative rumours about their boss or the firm. Unfortunately, some don�t, and alarmingly these include partners and others in senior positions!

A major stumbling block in the use of online technology in an office can occur when firms don't have an official policy or clear direction on what websites are or aren't allowed to be accessed or used during work hours.

Advice for your boss

Employers should introduce an official technology policy in the office, including when and how the firm�s name should be used in any communications (in and outside working hours). Workers need a clear direction on the uses of social media in the workplace, especially if it plays an important role in an overall business strategy. Social media sites make it easy for opinions, ideas or data about your business to be posted online and can expose a firm to unnecessary risks. These risks can include breaches of confidentiality and should be closely monitored. Policies should be expanded to include guidelines which prevent breaches from occurring and raise risk awareness within a workplace culture.

Tips for employees

Ensure employees are well-informed about any new firm policies that relate to posting ideas or opinions on blogs, social media sites, or using any free online utilities which help manage email, firm documents, spreadsheets or other forms of firm data, and which may expose you to unnecessary risk.

While we ruminate, the �information superhighway� is an open forum for any thoughts, ideas or gossip about your business. Employers must implement policies to police employees and to safe guard the firm�s reputation. Investing in your employees, who are advocates for your firm, will lift your reputation and create a positive buzz.

Criminal Law and Justice: Between the police and the law

Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Ian Lewis, one of the founding partners of Manchester law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small has grown the serious fraud department to become a team of 14 with extensive experience in a wide range of cases. Ian specialises in both serious fraud and regulatory matters. As a firm, LHS represents the Police Superintendents� Association and has acted in many high profile, landmark cases including the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry , the Ali Dizaei investigation by the Metropolitan Police and the Ray Mallon (Mayor of Middlesbrough) �zero tolerance� investigation. Here, Ian explains more about the work of his team...

The Police Superintendents� Association is the representative for members of the police force with the rank of Superintendent and Chief Superintendent of England and Wales.

In addition to being a social, political and professional body, this organisation exists to give its members guidance based on collective knowledge and experience. It is often asked to advice on government policy.

I�m proud to say that I have acted as this Association�s sole legal adviser for the past seventeen years, defending some of the highest-ranking police officers in the country against crime and regulatory allegations.

As the responsible partner, I am called upon to advise on general matters such as misconduct and the members� regular execution of their duties. Whilst we advise the Association as a whole, my firm also acts for the individual members on the full range of all their legal requirements. Typically, this might involve participation in police misconduct investigations or representing an individual Superintendent at crime interviews and in hearings.

As can be imagined, having this organisation as a client brings certain unusual responsibilities and challenges for a legal practitioner. The proper management of the police and the conduct of its ranked officers is, quite rightly, the subject of significant official scrutiny and public interest. With power should come responsibility and accountability. It does. When investigations into misconduct or irregularity by a member of the PSA lead to legal proceedings these cases, by their very nature, quite rightly attract huge public and media interest.

Exemplary conduct

Police officers are given extraordinary privileges and powers. We place great trust in them to undertake an often difficult and dangerous job. The obverse of this position is that they are rightly accountable and therefore society takes a very dim view of police officers who don�t meet public expectations. When those who carry high rank are suspected of falling short of the mark, they are often subject to the most rigorous and determined examination.

Their legal representative�s job is to ensure that the internal and public appetite for transparency and propriety doesn�t overwhelm the fairness and proportionality of the investigation and the whole weight of the legal process.

Whilst every endeavour is made to achieve this aim, a body this size can never be perfect. The path which any police officer must tread is criss-crossed with blurred ethical, moral and legal stumbling blocks. We expect them to exercise exemplary judgement at all times, to act with wisdom, judgement, and unfortunately the benefit of hindsight. The Courts will readily dispenser long sentences to senior police officers who fail to do so. Their own internal hearings are no less sympathetic.

Balance

As a practice, we joined the VHCC panel. The experience of dealing with large scale police investigations and enquiries has prepared the team for the requirements of cases with voluminous paperwork and detail. MFIC, vat fraud, advanced fee and property frauds fit the bill perfectly.

The LHS Serious Fraud and Regulatory team is currently advising in over eight such VHCC, very high cost cases. Unlike many criminal practices, most of our defendants are men or women of middle age and have no previous convictions. For a criminal department this is extremely unusual and means we are dealing with people completely new to this forum, and its associated pressures. For them, the stakes are much higher. Like the police officers we represent, not only will they lose their livelihood and reputation but also, possibly their liberty. These individuals often attract both local and national media interest. Consequently these cases need different handling and support compared to the usual career criminals.

The department is presently working on a case defending an alleged �1.7 billion conspiracy to supply cocaine and a multi million pound property fraud. It has another file open - a highly complex investigation (in conjunction with the FSA) into a provider of After the Event Insurance to the City of London Police. One of its police cases involves representing a retired Chief Superintendent in a case before the Old Bailey arising out of an investigation into a murder in 1988. This case is presently estimated to take over a year to get to trial.

Working simultaneously on investigations by the Financial Services Authority, HM Revenue and Customs, the Serious Organised Crime Agency and the Police Economic Crimes Unit helps us to adopt a balanced stance. Our professional judgment is continuously honed by getting a real insight into the day-to-day workings of law enforcement and regulatory agencies.

At the risk of labouring this point, the list also includes The Gangmasters Licensing Authority, G4S Securicor representing their staff association members, the UK TV Licensing Agency and The Heath and Safety Executive.

LHS is also active in defending solicitors facing investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Growing fields

As you might imagine, with this volume of major cases in hand, Lewis Hymanson Small�s Serious Fraud and Regulatory team has grown dramatically.

The team originally consisted of three fee-earners but has now reached 14.

Early in 2008, with the economy declining, many firms were more concerned about matching their base of fee-earners to a shrinking caseload. Conversely, I felt strongly that the downturn would give rise to an increase in fraud prosecutions and took the decision to expand the department.

Mike Hymanson and I recruited Daniel Berke, a solicitor who specialises in fraud as a partner in 2008. He has acted in a number of national and international multi-million pound fraud cases. Along with Daniel, Deidre Scott, adds her extensive experience of representing Superintendents and Chief Superintendents within our growing team. I believe that having the right quality and experience within the department is the real future of the firm.

Although I head up the expanding fraud team, on a day-to-day basis, my role involves handling both serious fraud cases and regulatory police matters from the outset.

High profile cases

Over the years I have acted in many fascinating, landmark cases representing The Police Superintendents� Association. These include;

The Inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales.
The Stephen Lawrence inquiry, where I represented three Superintendents and assisted in changing the way the entire police force operates. Having reviewed their policies recommendations were made to prevent the acceptance and spread of institutional racism.
The shooting of a barrister by firearms officers on London�s famous King�s Road.
The original successful defence of Superintendent Ali Dizaei. This standout case dates from 2003. LHS represented Superintendent Ali Dizaei when he was being investigated by the Metropolitan Police. This was a criminal advance fee fraud which after several months of trial resulted in an acquittal at the Old Bailey. The case cost �7 million. Covert surveillance was used to support the criminal allegations. Supt. Dizaei was accused of perverting the course of justice. With the help of LHS, Dizaei was acquitted twice. Having been found not guilty of the alleged crimes and expense fraud, he returned to his duties at the Metropolitan Police. Ironically, after we successfully represented Ali Dizaei, he was promoted to Chief Officer and therefore became a member of ACPO. This means we couldn�t represent him in his most recent case, which he didn�t win. Although he came to us to represent him, he no longer fell within the PSA.
The inquiry into the death of Stuart Lubbock in Michael Barrymore�s swimming pool.
The death of four young soldiers at Deepcut Barracks in Surrey.

The Serious Fraud Team

What sets Lewis Hymanson Small apart from many firms working in this area of law is that we are not a general criminal law practice. There is a very clear distinction between general criminal defence work, serious fraud, very high value serious crime and the regulatory cases that we accept.

As we also have a commercial property team, a lending team, a corporate and commercial department, we are able when necessary to bring their highly-specialised knowledge to bear in defending allegations of property, financial and commercial fraud.

Other examples of high-profile cases undertaken by LHS include:

Acting for the officers who originally arrested the notorious, controversial multi-millionaire slum property tycoon, Nicholas Van Hoogstraten. Van Hoogstaten used death threats, extreme violence and gangster tactics to amass a fortune in Britain and Zimbabwe. Who could forget his chilling remark describing a family who died in a fire at one of his properties as �scum� and for saying, "The only purpose in creating great wealth like mine is to separate oneself from the riffraff. � He used his wealth to obstruct the law at every opportunity and was arrested and prosecuted on numerous occasions.
Acting in the Harrods safety deposit emerald case, involving the late Tiny Rowland and Mohammed Al-Fayed. This case caught the nation�s imagination with a chain of events more akin to an Agatha Christie plot than reality.
Officers accused of being ill prepared and negligent in the protection of Stephen Oak, a Greater Manchester Police officer, who was killed by alleged terrorists in the Cheetham Hill area of the city.
Representing the present Mayor of Middlesbrough, Ray Mallon, who faced various allegations of misconduct when he was a Superintendant in Cleveland. Many believed that this was a political investigation motivated by the fact he was the champion of the controversial �zero tolerance� policing.

Recognition

Very few people go into law with the express purpose of becoming well known, but like most lawyers (politicians aside) I�m happy with media exposure as long as it�s appropriate.

One of the inevitable outcomes of handling so many high-profile cases, with the inherent national media interest, is that my own profile has been raised in the process and I have always been aware that this public interest ultimately adds value to the firm as a whole.

Fortunately, being in the public eye means more than merely trying to dodge the TV cameras and paparazzi on the steps of the Old Bailey. I have received some recognition for my professional achievements elsewhere, not all of it serious.

For example, I was listed in the Chambers & Partners Directory under �Professional Discipline National Leaders�. Chambers states that I am �on all the ritzy police cases� and refers to me as a �classy operator with a clever practice.�

It was flattering to be selected as The Times Solicitor of The Week, and I also featured in the Law Society as their Solicitor in the News, a while ago. Although we out-of-town firms don�t like to admit it, we resent inferences that the most able professionals operate from the capital; a supposition that we hotly deny and often prove is incorrect.

The firm features regularly in the legal, regional and national press. Our high profile means we are frequently asked to act as spokespeople for the profession. We like to make our voice heard on the issues of the day, particularly those within our specialist ambit. Members of the team have been interviewed by, among many others, Hugh Pym, Chief Economics Editor of the BBC, The Times and by BBC Radio 4.

I am, unsurprisingly, a member of The Law Society, The British Legal Association and The Muslim - Jewish Forum, but less predictably the local amateur boxing club.

Ian Lewis can be contacted at: ian.lewis@lhs-solicitors.com

Lewis Hymanson Small expand Regulatory services

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

LHS have extended their Regulatory services by setting up a team specialising in cases involving The Gangmasters Licensing Authority.

Read the article here.

Lewis Hymanson Small advise on lease of new premises for Hair Solved

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

smallbusiness.co.uk: Fit Notes

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Fit notes are set to replace sick notes next month despite concerns that this will not allow time for small businesses to familiarise themselves with the new system. Fit notes give GPs the option to declare a patient able to work, subject to temporary changes being made to the work environment. Here, Neeta Laing, head of employment law at firm Lewis Hymanson Small explains how the new system will work...

The new rules are intended to reduce Britain�s huge incapacity benefits bill by helping people with health conditions make an early, phased return to work with the aim of reducing the cost of sickness leave. If a patient is considered fit, their doctor is obliged to recommend a course of action for a return to work, which can cover altered hours and adaptations to the work environment.

Employers will be given a list of changes which could be made to an employee�s work environment or job role to help facilitate their return to work. If a doctor feels that a new role would be more appropriate, they can state this in a comments section.

Fit for work

There will no longer be a �fit for work� option as doctors were felt not to have the knowledge about an individual�s role and the risks involved. This will be replaced with �you may be fit for work taking account of the following advice�. This means that it has been decided that you, as the employer are best placed to make the decision in conjunction with an employee as to whether you can accommodate the changes to enable a return to work. If you are unable to facilitate a change or adjustment, then you will not need a revised statement, the existing statement is evidence that the employee has a condition that prevents them from carrying out the role.

The advice written on the medical statement is intended to be used as the beginning of your discussions with an employee. If you are unsure or need more advice, you can contact the GP to ask for further details but this could incur a cost and busy GPs may be unable to respond immediately to any enquiries.

The true diagnosis

Employers should be aware that the rules allow GPs to legally refrain from giving a true diagnosis of a patient if they feel it is not in their patient's interest to do so. One of these times could be where a doctor may believe it would harm their patient if the real reason were disclosed to the patient's employer. This loophole in the system could set doctors and employers against each other when they should be working together. If the true reason is legally allowed to be withheld, then the system falls apart.

In one case an employee was signed off with �work- related stress'. When they were called into a meeting to discuss what the business could do to help, the employee stated that this in fact was not the true reason for their absence. In fact, it was the doctor's suggestion to quote this but in reality they had signed the employee off to give them time to deal with the domestic problems that had really caused the stress.

There is also concern amongst business leaders that there may be dispute as to what is deemed suitable work. It will be worthwhile speaking to an occupational health professional to get advice as to what adjustments can be made.

Time will tell how the system will work in practice but it is clear that more training and a change in culture will be needed for GPs to ensure fit notes are beneficial to the patient and the employer. The system will only work if employers can be confident in what the doctors are telling them. If an employer is in any doubt about how to treat a staff member who has been off work with sickness, they should take legal advice.

Ian successfully defends top detective over secret evidence claims

Sat, 13 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Ian Lewis, Regulatory and Police Discipline Partner here at LHS has successfully defended Det Supt Steve Hassall of Greater Manchester Police over allegations he kept evidence secret at a fraud trial 8 years ago.

Read the article here.

Lewis Hymanson Small launches niche team

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Lewis Hymanson Small solicitors has opened a niche regulatory team specialising in Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA) cases, a government agency set up to stop the exploitation of manual workers.

The firm acts for clients involved with the GLA in relation to cases when businesses have their licenses revoked.

The regulatory team which has 11 members was recently short listed for the Manchester Legal Awards 2010 Crime Regulatory Team of the Year.

Deborah Britstone, regulatory solicitor at Lewis Hymanson Small Solicitors, said:

�We�ve noticed an increase in the amount of regulatory work recently and this has reflected a sector wide development of regulatory prosecution. Our work with various regulators such as the Health and Safety Executive, the Security Industry Authority and the Crown Prosecution Service, means we have the expertise to flourish in this specialist area.�

The department has also been advising and representing law firms facing investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and hearings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), as well as working with claims management companies to regulate their referral arrangements.

The Gangmaster�s Licensing Authority was established in the wake of the death of 18 cockle pickers in Morecombe Bay in February 2004 to stop the exploitation of workers in the agriculture, horticulture, shellfish gathering and associated processing and packaging industries. The Authority works to safeguard the welfare and interests of workers by regulating license holders so that employees working hours and minimum wages are legal and fair.

LHS take centre stage at The Manchester Legal Awards 2010

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

Daniel Berke commenting on the impact of the Blue Sphere Global

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Read the article here.

Manchester Evening News: Adele Librae on Women In Business

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Adele Librae, Corporate Partner here at Lewis Hymansons Small has been interviewed by the Manchester Evening News on the subject of women who reach the top in business, giving her opinions on why women are able to equal men in the workplace.

Read the article here.

Radio Tircoed and The Scotsman: Bullies At Work

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Compliance and Operations Director, Brian Rogers, has been interviewed for Radio Tircoed and The Scotsman about the recent allegations of bullying at 10 Downing St.

Brian provides an insight as to why this may happen in the modern workplace and also gives handy tips for employees who feel they are the victim of bullying in the workplace.

Read The Scotsman article here.

Listen to the Radio Tircoed interview here.

Lewis Hymanson Small�s steady expansion

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT

The increase in fraud due to the recession has meant that Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small has bolstered its serious fraud, corporate and commercial teams with the appointment of nine new members of staff.

The firm has seen a 50% rise in the fraud cases it handles. This includes mortgage fraud, VAT fraud and serious fraud. Fraud costs the UK over �30 billion a year damaging businesses, individuals and reputations.

The newly boosted fraud team has employed Deborah Britstone, a serious fraud and regulatory solicitor who moved across from Osborn, Abas, Hunt; Tara Boyle, Helia Asadi both fraud solicitors from Carter Moore and Amanda Walshaw a fraud solicitor from Goddard Smith. Andre Zarneh and Kirk Kent have also joined the department as paralegals.

Victoria Crook, a commercial litigation solicitor from Ralli has added to the litigation team.

In spite of the recession and the fact that many firms are no longer recruiting trainees LHS has also appointed two trainee solicitors, Adam Rasul and Lauren Basger.

Ian Lewis, head of the serious fraud team, said:

�In the aftermath of the recession we�ve bolstered the team with experienced and enthusiastic new recruits. We have a number of new high profile cases that they�ve already started working on.�

Graham Small, head of the corporate and commercial team, said:

�This significant clutch of new employees means we are a leading player in the Manchester law community with strengthened serious fraud, corporate and commercial departments. We now have a group of new recruits that bring experience, talent, and new blood to the table. We look forward to further expansion in 2010.�

These new recruits add to the appointment of Adele Librae the new corporate partner last month.

Manchester Evening News: LHS Bulks Up Serious Fraud Unit

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT

We have gained coverage in the Manchester Evening News for the growth of our Serious Fraud Department during the recent credit crunch.

Read the article here.

The People Bulletin: The Use and Abuse of Information

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Daniel Berke, Partner at Lewis Hymanson Small recently gave advice on employers' use of employee data and the Data Protection Act.

Read the article here.

Money Marketing Magazine: Confidence Tricks

Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Daniel Berke, Partner at Lewis Hymanson Small, has been interviewed for Money Marketing Magazine giving adive for IFAs on how to avoid becoming the victims of fraud.

Read the article here.

Government housing scheme appoints Lewis Hymanson Small

Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT

The Mortgage Rescue Fast Track, a government scheme designed to help struggling homeowners, has selected Lewis Hymanson Small, to act for all owners who are selling under the Mortgage Rescue Scheme.

As a result of the recession, the Council of Mortgage Lenders suggests around 48,000 Britons will have their homes repossessed during 2009.

The Mortgage Rescue Fast Track Scheme is aimed at the most vulnerable households, those with dependant children, elderly, disabled or long-term ill members, who are at risk of having their home repossessed. The scheme allows homeowners to remain in their home by, selling all or part of their house to a registered social landlord so they are able to reduce their mortgage payments.

Paul Robinson, Mortgage Rescue Fast Track co coordinator, said:

�We decided to work with LHS because of their experience and expertise in the social housing sector. They already work with Plumlife, a not-for-profit Manchester company specialising in shared home equity and tendered to work with Great Places, a North West housing association.�

Claire Egerton, residential property partner at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�It�s wonderful to be part of such major national housing scheme. Handling the potential repossession cases for Mortgage Rescue Fast Track is a great opportunity to showcase our residential property specialism�s and grow our portfolio.

�We apply a different approach to each case we work on to ensure we find the best possible solution for the families living in the property. The Mortgage Rescue Fast Track scheme provides help to ensure families stay in their homes.�

Lewis Hymanson Small appoints partner to Corporate Team

Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT

MANCHESTER law firm Lewis Hymanson Small has expanded its corporate and commercial team with the appointment of a new partner, Ad�le Librae.

Ad�le specialises in private company transactional work including acquisitions, disposals, funding, restructuring and joint ventures. She also advises businesses on commercial contracts.

Ad�le previously worked at Halliwells and Pinsent Masons in Manchester and has acted for a wide range of regional and national clients.

She acted on the acquisition of Bredbury Hall Hotel and Leisure complex with a transaction value of �17 million and recently led the team at LHS in acting as the UK lawyer for the Mansion Group in its setting up of the Guernsey listed fund for the acquisition of student accommodation. She said:-

�I spent a year as a consultant at Lewis Hymanson Small so both sides had the opportunity of having a good look at one another. We both must have liked what we saw as here I am!�

Partner, Graham Small heads the corporate and commercial team. He said:

�This appointment demonstrates our commitment to attract top legal talent. Ad�le has tremendous experience and expertise as well as a proven track record having worked on a broad spectrum of corporate deals. LHS is a firm that genuinely listens to its clients and we responded to the consistently excellent feedback we received about Ad�le. She is a great addition to the team.�

Beware of latest will writing scam

Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT

LAWYERS are urging people to beware of a will writing scam that cons them into paying for their wills to be rewritten. Letters have been sent, by an unregulated group of will writers, to a number of people across the UK saying that a rule change means their will is now invalid. It states that all wills need to be page numbered and signed by the testator and witness on every page. However, there has been no rule change and the false claims are being used to con people into paying for their wills to be rewritten. The Probate Registry has confirmed that the letters are inaccurate and wills only need to be signed and witnessed at the back.

The warning comes in the wake of a rise in adverts and cold calls from unregulated will companies, promising cut price wills.

Howard Burns, head of wills and probate at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�This is one of a number of scams aimed at taking advantage of the most vulnerable. No new rules on the signing of wills so people should not be concerned.

�There are a number of bogus companies offering cheap wills that aren�t legally accurate. These can cause costly issues when an estate is divided. It�s not surprising that people respond to the scams as they want to ensure their financial affairs are in order. My advice is to always seek advice from a qualified solicitor.�

Sexist Secret Santa

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Office workers must think twice before buying gifts that could be deemed �sexist� or �offensive� for the traditional Secret Santa exchange at work, warns a Manchester law firm.

Humorous presents such as underwear, aprons, hair dye, diet books, breath freshener, alcohol and deodorant should be avoided as they can cause religious and moral offence to some office workers and could result in a harassment case.

Neeta Laing, head of employment law at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains:

�As employees up and down the country gear up to give each other Christmas gifts, workers should think carefully before buying their colleague a present that could be viewed as offensive. Use your common sense, for example, don�t give religious colleagues alcohol or offensive magazines or female workers kitchenalia.�

Harassment, in general terms, is unwanted conduct affecting the dignity of men and women in the workplace. It may be related to age, sex, race, disability, religion, sexual orientation, nationality or any personal characteristic of the individual, and may be persistent or an isolated incident. This constitutes actions or comments that are viewed as demeaning and unacceptable to the recipient.

Laing continues:

�If an employee does receive, for example, a pair of lacy knickers and finds the gift offensive and wishes to pursue a harassment case, this must be taken seriously. There are certain steps an employer and the organisation must follow.

�A well-designed policy is essential in addressing harassment. Policies should be agreed with union or employee representatives and should:

Explain the damaging effects of harassment and why it will not be tolerated
State that it will be treated as a disciplinary offence
Clarify the legal implications and outline the costs associated with personal liability
Describe how to get help and make a complaint, formally and informally
Promise that allegations will be treated speedily, seriously and confidentially and that you prevent victimisation
Emphasise that every employee carries responsibility for their behaviour.�

Financial Times Adviser Article: Industry due for influx of 'phoney payslips'

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Link: http://www.ftadviser.com/FinancialAdviser/Mortgages/Lenders/News/article/20091119/c7e43df0-d2d1-11de-8eea-00144f2af8e8/Industry-due-for-influx-of-phoney-payslips.jsp

MP proposals could open floodgates for unfair dismissal claims

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT

PROPOSALS to make MPs sack their relatives could result in a raft of claims for unfair dismissal, say legal experts.

The proposals are part of a report on changes to the way MPs use public funds. The report's author, Sir Christopher Kelly � tasked by Gordon Brown to carry out his review � said the practice of MPs employing relatives was unacceptable.

Although MPs would have until 2015 to adjust to the changes, many spouses and family members are leaving their roles now.

Brian Rogers, head of compliance at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�Some MPs have had relatives working for them for a number of years and they have employment rights.

If they don�t want to leave the role, there are legal implications. Some couples have already indicated that they will be taking their cases to tribunals to prove the move is wrong.

�This brings up a raft of employment and discrimination law issues, for example, could the new arrangements be justified as �some other substantial reason�? This is one of the ways of justifying a dismissal but would a tribunal see it this way? Another example is that of indirect discrimination.

If it could be shown that in the main, wives fulfill these roles, then they are being subject to unfavourable treatment due to their sex. The report needs to give clarification on how exactly family members will be ousted.�

Sir Christopher said employment practices in politics needed to be brought into line with other sectors where hiring family members may go against regulation.

The recommendations will now be handed to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority who will decide how to implement them in coming weeks, though Sir Christopher said he expected the bulk to be in place after the next election.

HR Zone Article: MP proposals could open floodgates for unfair dismissal claims

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Proposals to axe relatives of MPs from being on the payroll, forms part of a report on changes to the way MPs use public funds. The report's author, Sir Christopher Kelly � tasked by Gordon Brown to carry out his review � said the practice of MPs employing relatives was unacceptable. Sir Christopher believes challenging reforms are needed in order to restore public faith. Although MPs would have until 2015 to adjust to the changes, the proposals could lead to a flood of resignations. 201 MPs employ family members putting an average �33,000 a year into the family coffers.

MP outcry

The proposals have caused outcry from MPs across the UK with Commons leader Harriet Harman saying that it is not fair to make MPs axe relatives.

Eve Burt, wife of Tory MP Alistair, has been an office manager for her husband for 15 years, she said: �it would appear they are looking for scapegoats.�

The wives of some MPs are already hatching plans to defy the ban by swapping jobs with one another.

It�s clear there are many legal and HR implications and the controversy surrounding the announcement shows the process has clearly not been explained.

Many MPs have had relatives working for them for a number of years and these employees have employment rights.

If they don�t want to leave the role, there are legal implications of this. Some couples have already indicated that they will be taking their cases to tribunals to prove the move is wrong.

For businesses across the UK, the proposals bring up a raft of employment and discrimination law issues, for example, could the new arrangements be justified as �some other substantial reason�? This is one of the ways of justifying a dismissal but would a tribunal see it this way? Another example is that of indirect discrimination.

If it could be shown that in the main, wives fulfill these roles, then it is possible they are being subjected to unfavourable treatment due to their sex. The report needs to give clarification on how exactly family members will be ousted.

Do not follow suit

Small businesses in the UK must not be tempted to follow suit if they want to dismiss a family member.

Before doing anything, the employment contract must be examined to see if there are any rules written down.

If nothing is documented, it can be assumed that bother parties were happy with the working arrangement.

If an employer becomes unhappy with a member of staff they must give verbal and written warnings before taking any action.

Obviously in the case of the MPs this has not occurred and therefore questions have to be raised about the legality of the proposed sackings.

If there is no prior indication that the performance has not been up to scratch, it could end up in an expensive legal wrangle.

Clarification about how the changes will be implemented must be made along with any future announcements.

Fleet World Article: Shrinking your fleet

Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Lawyers are receiving instructions from commercial clients giving a variety of reasons why they are considering reducing the size of their fleet.

For some, volume downturn during the recession or switching production overseas has resulted in both staff cuts and reduced demand on their logistic capability.
Some organisations are finding that technological advances are impacting on their need to move people and materials around in the way they did previously. They are re-positioning themselves in the internet age.
The transport industry has serious overcapacity, with small transport firms going out of business almost daily. Some companies have discovered a more cost-efficient alternative to running a truck and van fleet by out-sourcing or sub-contracting.
Another group find themselves locked into uncompetitive, seemingly inflexible, lease funding contracts and are looking to escape by the least expensive route.

The question remains the same; �What�s the most cost-effective way to reduce the size of my fleet?�

There are usually three legal elements:

Reaching agreement with the banks and finance houses about lease termination
Disposal of surplus vehicles
Making drivers (and possibly support staff) redundant

This process will not be a simple or painless.

It will have to be done carefully and be well thought through. Having a meeting with your HR colleagues and legal advisers experienced in vehicle lease and contractual matters should be the first port of call.

In effect, a lessee will be asking the leasor to voluntarily re-possess used cars or other vehicles before the expiry of the contracted term.

When doing so, finance houses have a single objective; to optimise the amount they can derive from the contracts. Their argument will rest on the steepness of the �depreciation curve� that affects the value of all vehicles from the moment they leave the production line. In today�s conditions, banks will find themselves having to auction-off this stock in a stagnant and seriously saturated used vehicle market and will therefore propose extremely low residual valuations against which to calculate terminations.

They will try to force fleet mangers to keep to the letter of the lease agreements regarding penalties for premature cessation, through litigation if necessary.

The value of leases

The value they put on the leases, probably entered into in a rosier climate, is likely to seem very high in relation to the residual prices achievable at the bottom of the re-sale market.

Bear in mind, once a car is taken out on lease interest is added straight away and this could become more than the value of the car.

In some circumstances, under the Consumer Credit Act, after half the payments have been made, it may be possible to hand the car back over and avoid these escalated costs.

Seek legal advice to find out if this could be an option for you.

Unfortunately, the costs of litigation incurred in challenging large financial institutions (particularly those already under huge internal pressures) are likely to be punitive and are to be avoided if at all possible.

With the unit cost of each vehicle being high, it won�t take many multiples to find yourself with a major (even critical) cash flow dilemma on your hands.

Legal advisors will examine the contracts in place and detailed scrutiny of the precise terms of the leases might expose some clause or detail which offers the opportunity to enter into a dialogue with the financiers.

Try to avoid the automatic default procedures of these large, unapproachable institutions at all costs.

Once triggered, the legal debt collection processes are remorseless and difficult to reverse.

For example, a householder who is no longer in a position to honour mortgage payments will find it infinitely preferable to engage in a businesslike dialogue with the building society rather than sit back and await the inevitable repossession.

Ultimately, financial institutions would rather have funds owed to them paid back slowly and systematically, by agreement, than not at all.

The larger the sums involved, the more likely they are to reach a pragmatic decision.

With interest rates remaining very low, it might serve your company�s interest to re-finance or restructure the debt at a lower rate under a more manageable timescale.

The value of vehicles

When you send cars back to the leasing company, make sure the vehicle is professionally cleaned and any minor repairs carried out.

Although it seems a somewhat obvious point, it is often overlooked. Having a small scratch repaired yourself, could save hundreds of pounds compared to leaving it to the leasing company.

Financial institutions tend to shunt lease default vehicles off to the nearest auction, unseen, and therefore value them significantly below even the lowest trade estimate to cover commission, interest, administration and other costs.

In the course of a negotiation, it might emerge that the leasee�s skill and knowledge of used vehicle disposal exceeds that of the banks.

The financiers might be prepared to allow you to repay the debt and sell the vehicles through trade or other channels.

The difference could be substantial.

Again, with interest rates low, it might be in your organisation�s interest to acquire title to the vehicles and dispose of them over time in an improving market.

In short, take HR, legal and financial advice and prepare fully before entering into any negotiations.

Fraud Watch Article: Authorities chasing billions lost in the 'blind eye' boom years

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT

As many MP�s have found to their cost, financial reins that have worked loose during a feast have a very nasty habit of tightening once the famine sets in.

During the economic feast we experienced in the decade or so before October 2007, practices that were less than entirely honest somehow became downgraded from corrupt or dishonourable to acceptable with a nod and a wink.

Phrases like, �not strictly above board�, and �it�s a bit of a grey area�, become euphemisms for widespread malpractice.

As with other forms of workplace malpractice, the justification was usually that if it all ends well, someone makes a few quid, fees are earned, there�s no victim and you don�t get found out, what could possibly be wrong with it.

Everyone�s a winner.

Many people were exaggerating their perks and expenses; the City, the banks, the media, the corporate executives, the football agents, the international salesmen, the quangos. The lines between �legitimate� and �fiddle� became very blurred.

Inspecting and Investigating

Nobody was being upbraided because nobody was doing any serious looking. As long as residential and commercial property prices rose inexorably, year after year, to prop up the whole fa�ade, there was no end to the party in sight.

Everyone now realises that the party is well and truly over. The pyramid of prosperity turned out to be a monumental mirage and the strings are indeed tightening. What was cheerfully regarded as �slightly suspect� practice only a couple of years ago, like fraudulently misrepresenting the size of your income in order to get a buy-to-let mortgage, or three, is being regarded as criminal deception.

With literally millions of mortgagees in negative equity and property prices bumping along the bottom of the graph, there�s no rainbow and no pot of gold.

Increasing numbers of professionals - solicitors, accountants, brokers and bank employees are being called to account for their actions during the heady boom years. Unfortunately for them, �famine� rules apply. The contention that everyone was doing it carries no weight in law.

Now the investigators are being overwhelmed by the plethora of cases of fraudulent mortgage applications that illegally parted lenders from their money.

Borrowers could inflate their earnings when applying for loans using fake documents bought online. Websites offered duplicate bank statements, pay-slips, utility bills and P60s for as little as �20 and made no attempt to verify any of the information provided.

For their professional advisors, the fee income from these deals was a terrific temptation. �Blind eyes� were turned on a massive scale. There was widespread deliberate and accidental deception.

Massive losses

As a crude indication of the extent of the problem, try typing �mortgage fraud� into Google UK. It produces 577,000 hits.

Last year, Chelsea Building Society and the Bradford and Bingley (now part of Santander) made mortgage fraud provisions of �41m and �271m respectively after claims they had been the target of organised criminal gangs.

The B&B Society said gangs with the support of professional advisers were behind fraudulent buy-to-let loans made between 2006 and 2008 on hundreds of properties in Manchester, Leeds and several other northern cities. There are forecasts that billions may have to be written off across the industry as thousands more cases come to light.

In 2008, total reported fraud in the UK stood at �1.19bn.

The real figure is likely to be much higher as this doesn�t include fraud that could yet be uncovered in the commercial loan sector.

The banks themselves must take much of the blame. They should have been carrying out checks, but they wanted to lend. Short term profits and bonuses were too tempting to let checks and caution get in the way.

If the banks did not realise they were being provided with incorrect information, they were incompetent, if they did know, they were dishonest. I don�t know which is more worrying.

False valuation

The other key to mortgage fraud is valuation.

By simply gauging property prices by the value of neighbouring properties, surveyors and valuers have become embroiled in the mess. Buy-to-let fraud has been exacerbated by the inflated valuations of new build properties.

With the collusion of valuers, developers would sell to an investor who, in turn, was insufficiently scrupulous about the veracity of the end customer�s financial arrangements.

Everyone was a winner - until prices crashed.

In January last year, a High Court judge ruled that a former head of valuations at a subsidiary company of the troubled property services company Erinaceous was liable for an �11.5 million mortgage fraud after he overvalued a property.

Disreputable brokers This month the City watchdog said that it was considering levying fines and penalties on more than 70 mortgage brokers as part of a plan to tackle organised home-loan fraud. More than 200 brokers have been referred to the Financial Services Authority by lenders suspicious that they might be involved in fraudulent activity.

Statistics produced by the Solicitors Regulation Authority show reports of suspected mortgage fraud rose by more than 400% in the four years from 2005 to 2008, from 85 to 350 cases.

Police activity In September 2008, the City of London police reported a 72% increase in cases of financial fraud largely driven by a jump in mortgage scams over the previous year.

The force said allegations of mortgage fraud had reached double figures and were one of the largest areas of activity for its officers. The number of investigations is expected to increase over the next year as more fraud came to light and lenders seek to recover their losses. Detective chief superintendent Steve Head, the chief of the City of London's economic crime directorate, said mortgage fraud "has happened all over the country" and "has jumped from nothing to being one of the biggest areas of investigation".

So, for those in the financial and professional consultation sector, as well as politicians, the dividing line between slack practice and recognised crime, which became blurred during the boom years, is being brought into very sharp focus indeed by massive losses.

The House of Commons is in a legal position to regulate itself. Those drawn into collusion in misdeeds in the mortgage application process either by intent or negligence would be well advised to take immediate appropriate legal advice as many more financial professionals are likely to end up in court.

Daniel Berke is a partner at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small.

Mortgage Fraud

Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Daniel Berke, Partner at Lewis Hymanson Small, has been interviewed for Radio 4 regarding Mortgage Fraud. Listen to the interview here.

Understand clients, know what they want and find a solution

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Daniel Berke, Partner at Lewis Hymanson Small, has provided a piece to The Times regarding the Legal Services Act, and "Tesco Law". See the article here.

North West law firms warned to get in gear for mortgage fraud

Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

North West lawyers are bracing themselves for a surge in commercial lending fraud cases. The latest Fraud Track report revealed the rate of fraud growth almost doubled last year with mortgage and commercial fraud rocketing to a staggering �1.2bn. Examples of mortgage fraud include the failure to declare a credit card balance or car loan that would affect the assessment of applicant�s ability to afford the loan. Manchester law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small set up a dedicated mortgage fraud department six months ago to cope with the influx of mortgage fraud cases. Daniel Berke, who heads up the mortgage fraud team, is warning law firms to brace themselves for even more cases. He said: �The cases we�ve seen so far are just the tip of the iceberg and it�s highly likely more and more will come to light over the next year. There�s no sugar coating it, lenders have lost a huge amount of money and will be looking to place the blame elsewhere wherever they can. �Lenders are still struggling and are clamping down and reviewing existing mortgage applications. More accusations, sometimes unfounded are being made. In particular independent financial advisors and mortgage brokers are being targeted, as are developers. We have been consulted by a number of people who are facing investigation. Many feel that the police are doing the bidding of the banks so be prepared for this and seek advice. �The most common cases of mortgage fraud we�ve seen is the over valuation of properties and also cases of IFAs including inflated salaries on mortgage applications. The slide in property prices due to the recession has exposed these phenomena.� The LHS mortgage fraud team is made up of five lawyers plus support staff who defend those accused of mortgage fraud.

Construction sites failing health and safety checks

Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

ONE in five construction firms are putting lives at risk after failing recent health and safety checks, say legal experts.

Employers are being urged to prepare for future inspections, following the latest national inspection initiative carried out by the Health and Safety Executive. 1759 refurbishment sites were visited and 2145 contractors were checked to see whether they were complying with health and safety regulations.

On 348 sites, it was found that sufficiently serious risks were being taken to warrant enforcement action; either work was stopped immediately or improvements ordered.

Around 500 enforcement notices were issued.

Neeta Laing, head of employment law at Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�The most common concern for HSE when visiting sites was unsafe work at height practices.

To avoid falling foul, construction bosses must ensure they take more care and attention when planning jobs at height.

�Employers must ensure equipment is checked and maintained regularly and walkways and stairs should always be free from obstructions. In the future, HSE inspectors could give harsh penalties for those that don�t comply.

All employers should now be carrying out a health and safety audit of their site to make sure it�s safe and that they�re fully prepared for the inspections.�

The aim of the Health and Safety Executive is to prevent death, injury and ill health to those at work and those affected by work activities.

Jewish Chronicle Article; Serious Fraud

Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Sir Gerald Kaufman felt it necessary to claim �28,834 for work on his fashionable Regent�s Park second home, complaining he was �living in a slum�. I wonder if he has seen Slumdog Millionaire. He could have watched it on the �8,865 television he tried to claim for on expenses. Fortunately that was rejected but it did not stop him claiming �1,262 for a gas bill which was �1,055 in credit!

You�d have to have been hiding under a rock for the past few months for the MPs expenses scandal to have passed you by. Most of the MPs in question have gone out of their way to say all claims were legitimate and were made within the rules laid down by the Green Book.

The Green Book is the official guide to Members� allowances, and states claims should be above reproach, must only be for expenses necessarily incurred in the performance of parliamentary duties such as staffing, travel, and communication costs. It also gives guidelines regarding the Personal Additional Accommodation Expenditure (PAAE) known as the second home allowance.

Despite the media attention, little has written about the punishment these MPs face if they are found to have committed an offence.

Offences The cases will all be looked at on their own merit. It may be that some or all MPs have a defence to any allegations which may be put to them. The issues will be different in each case, as may the charges.

The claims could constitute a criminal offence under the Fraud Act 2006 or under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968. Offences committed before the 2006 Act came into force on 15 Jan 2007 may fall under legislation which has been repealed by the Fraud Act, such as Obtaining Property/Services by Deception.

The Fraud Act defines the criminal offence of fraud in three classes � fraud by false representation (Section 2), fraud by failing to disclose information (Section 3), and fraud by abuse of position (Section 4).

Section 2 of the Act is the most realistic potential fraud offence for the guilty MPs. Fraud by false representation is defined by Section 2 as a case where a person makes �any representation as to fact or law�express or implied� which they know to be untrue or misleading.

At the heart of each fraud is the concept of making a gain for oneself or another, with the critical element of dishonesty, usually determined by a jury. The jury must decide whether what was done was dishonest, and if it was, whether the defendant must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest. A defendant faces a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine if found guilty.

The most likely alternative would be to prosecute for false accounting under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968.

False accounting is an indictable offence where a person commits an offence by destroying, concealing, or falsifying an account, or providing information which is false, misleading or deceptive with a view to cause loss to another.

The maximum sentence for this offence is seven years in prison.

It is likely that if an MP is tried and convicted, they will face a lengthy sentence in particular to reflect the public outcry and the abuse of a public position.

The issue as to whether or not to prosecute certain MPs is no doubt being considered as we speak. In some cases there will certainly be a case to answer. If an MP is prosecuted however it will not be where they have acted in the rules but not in the spirit of the rules, but rather where there is an allegation of dishonesty which, invariably, will be a question to be considered by a jury.

Trial One feels that the outcry against politicians is comparable to that of the people during Mark Anthony�s oration after the death of Julius Caesar!

for �Sir Kaufman� is an honorable man, So are they all, all honorable men!

It may be that a trial is the only way, in the face of heavy media criticism, that an MP would be able to put across their case fairly and in their own words. Certainly MPs are busy people. How much time do they really have to check accounts? How much guidance were they given if any? did they receive advice from a financial advisor to, for example, �flip� a second home on sale?

Perhaps Sir Kaufman was so busy visiting real slums in the Middle East that he did not have time to check the gas bill was in credit not debit. Such questions may, or may not, in due course be a question for a jury to consider.

MPs that have hit the national headlines are just the tip of the iceberg. This has highlighted the expenses issue to bosses from both councils and businesses across the UK who are now clamping down on employees abusing the system. It�s likely we�ll see an influx of fraud cases as a result of this over the coming months.

Messenger Article July 2009; Referral Fees from CMC's

Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

The last 12 months has seen many solicitors investigated by the Solicitors� Regulation Authority (SRA), for not complying with rules that apply to referrals of business.

Referral fees have been the subject of debate for many years and law firms have been disciplined for breaching the rules relating to them, either through a lack of understanding of the regulations or the inability to get definitive advice from their regulator.

Many of the current problems arise from CMCs providing law firms with referral agreements that do not comply with the Solicitors Code of Conduct even though they undertake with the Ministry of Justice not to place firms in a position where they would breach the Code.

CMCs are not necessarily setting out to provide non-compliant agreements but are not always aware of the regulatory position that law firms are in and rely on them to pick up any problems relating to their Code of Conduct.

Problem I have witnessed first hand the scale of the problem; law firms want to stay in business but to do so need to take work from CMCs, however, they may not have the time or in-depth knowledge, to question certain terms in agreements that may breach the rules.

CMCs that have approached me to take referrals have been told their arrangements are in breach, and having been unwilling to discuss how they can make them compliant they have been turned away.

One approach CMCs have used to try and persuade me to take referrals from them is to name other law firms that take work from them; the assumption being that if these firms are happy with the arrangement then so should I. One CMC recently gave me permission to contact some of their panel law firms, which I duly did, and when I pointed out the issues I had found said they would immediately review their positions with the CMC concerned.

I have worked with a number of more enlightened CMCs and after advising them on their arrangements, they have now changed their terms to ensure compliance.

Managing the process There are a number of ways in which the process could be made easier for everyone involved. Referral arrangements could be approved by the SRA when a CMC initially applies for approval to practice; once the approval process had been successfully completed a �stamp of approval� could then be issued, alternatively, the SRA could issue a model referral agreement and standard letters to be used by CMCs and law firms.

Currently, the SRA says that law firms must work out for themselves whether agreements comply with the rules, and say they are unable to check questionable arrangements; their view is that it is not practical to produce a standard agreement due to the number of agreements already in existence. In my view regulators should help the regulated stay out of trouble in the first place rather than watch them fall foul and then go after them.

The SRA has recently said it will be changing its approach to regulation in general, but no one knows when, or if, this will lead to much needed change in its approach to the highly emotive subject of referrals.

Where do MP's stand legally?

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Daniel Berke, partner at Lewis Hymanson Small, has provided a new piece on MP's expenses for The Messenger North West Law Magazine.

Read the article here.

Regulator needs to start helping law firms

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Solicitors are being punished by the Solicitors� Regulation Authority (SRA), for not complying with rules applying to referral fees. Referral fees have been subject to debate for many years not only because some solicitors see them as unethical but also because the rules governing them have been unclear. Although efforts have been made to make referral rules simpler and easier to understand, legal experts say they are still unclear and open to misinterpretation. Claims management companies (CMCs) are frequently providing law firms with referral agreements that do not comply with the Solicitors Code of Conduct even though the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) obliges them not to place law firms in a position where they would breach the Code. CMCs are not necessarily setting out to provide non-compliant agreements but they are not always aware of the regulatory position that law firms are in and therefore rely on law firms to pick up any problems relating to their Code of Conduct. Brian Rogers, operations director and head of risk and compliance at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small believes not enough is being done to help law firms and claims management companies comply. He said: �There are a number of ways in which the process could be made easier. Referral arrangements could be approved by the SRA when a CMC initially applies for approval to practice. In addition, a model referral agreement and standard letters could be provided. Once the approval process had been successfully completed a �stamp of approval� could then be issued. Currently, the SRA says law firms must work out for themselves whether agreements comply with the rules and are unable to check the validity of questionable arrangements. Rogers continues: �After working with a number of law firms and CMCs and advising them on their arrangements, many have now changed their terms when I pointed out that they were likely to be found in breach. �There are many in the legal profession that want and need help from the SRA, and although the SRA has said it will be changing its approach to regulation in general, no one knows when, or if, this will lead to a change in the way it operates in the area of referrals.�

Expenses; the rules for the rest of us

Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT

The national outrage over MP�s expenses has concentrated many people�s minds on exactly what constitutes �the rules� for the rest of us. There isn�t a universal HR Green Book that ordinary workers, teachers, local councillors, public servants, business people and professionals can refer to.

So what exactly is a legitimate expense?

The answer, of course, is that there isn�t a definitive legal line drawn in the sand.

Expenses are a moveable feast.

What would be considered a reasonable formula for calculating the out-of-pocket expenses of a retail salesperson attending a training conference would be entirely unreasonable if used to judge a diplomat on an international mission or a multi-millionaire film producer attending an award ceremony.

There are some yardsticks, however.

What�s allowable?

HMRC has some fairly clear views about which expenses are allowable against tax but that is an entirely different matter.

The inspectors would probably consider that half a dozen �750 bottles of champagne over lunch excessive in the extreme, even in the context of a business deal worth billions.

The actual parties concerned might take the view that it was a reasonable corporate investment in the circumstances.

It could be chargeable to the expense account of the company or organisation concerned even if HMRC don�t allow it as a tax deductible expense.

It would be simply be an exceptional expense.

The unexceptional position that most companies in business and industry adopt is a lot simpler.

Directors or other employees who are entertaining or travelling away from home in the course of business should stick to parameters of expenditure that reflect the nature of their task and their normal lifestyle.

That is to say, a company director on a six-figure salary who finds him or herself abroad on business would reasonably be expected to use a four or five star hotel, fly business class and enjoy some reasonable style and comfort.

A welder working on a project away from home, earning twice the national average wage would not.

Decent comfortable lodgings would be considered to more closely reflect his lifestyle.

Many companies, particularly the large ones, have their own precise guidelines strictly enforced.

Where management tiers are clearly defined, these limits are usually on the written record.

To avoid confusion, HR managers should write an expenses policy which details the documentation required to support a claim.

It should also specify which expenses will be reimbursed and whether the employee needs approval before incurring an expenditure and backed up by receipts. The key is to have a written expenses policy and ensure that employees are aware of the policy and its operation.

Such a policy should also require specific prior consent if expenses incurred are not within the parameters set by the employer or are unusual.

Pockets

The unwritten golden rule is that if you dig more extravagantly into the company�s pocket than you would into your own, you�re asking for trouble. Future aspirations don�t come into the equation. If you�re a manger you�re not justified in acting like a senior manager. Employees must stick to the rules and guidelines issued by the employer in relation to the incurring of expenses.

That�s why so many Members of Parliament are in such bad odour with the public.

(Outside of Parliament, the great majority of the offenders may have been subjected to disciplinary proceedings and even dismissed for abusing their expense system so blatantly).

These rules are often stretched in situations where a demonstration of corporate largesse is called for. Although wining and dining clients, prospective clients, colleagues and networking connections has fallen out of fashion to some degree in recent years, this kind of expenditure still tends to be viewed in light of the potential gain to the business involved and whether or not the effort was successful.

In privately run businesses, the owner-managers or shareholders are usually capable of calculating how much of an impact their business expenses will make on the bottom line.

This is fairly clear cut in the commercial world, too.

Someone chasing a �10m contract is unlikely to be expected to count the cost of landing it, to the nearest few thousand pounds. The benchmark is much clearer and restrictive in the pubic sector. Meeting over an extravagant lunch, to discuss similar expenditure of public funds would be frowned upon.

In public life the spectre of corruption peers over everyone�s shoulder.

In some business sectors, though entertainment, banking, fund management, property, for example, the gloves have been off during the boom years. Wild excesses have been widely reported in the press, notably the �27,000 celebration lunch enjoyed by a group of four young stock market traders. To people trading in billions and guaranteed bonuses measured in millions, no extravagance seems too great.

A closer inspection

Turning our attention away from Canary Wharf to the consequent atmosphere of contraction and constraint under which the majority of us are working.

It is safe to say that financial directors and controllers are rightly taking a closer look at expense claims.

With borrowing restricted, cash flow under pressure, margins tight and shareholders apprehensive, largesse is being seen simply as an unnecessary burden.

When tens of thousands of people are losing their jobs, executive waste incenses the pubic mood.

The huge outpouring of public anger at the greedy antics of the banking fraternity and parliamentarians has set the acceptable expense bar much lower than in recent years and this can be reflected in stricter internal policies.

Employees can be told to expect much closer scrutiny of their expenses and to be asked for more detailed explanations to justify their claims. They should be clear that helping oneself to the company�s money will be viewed at best as reprehensible dishonest practice and at worst, criminal deception.

Tightening belts

All extraneous rechargeable expenditure incurred in the course of work or employment must be justified in terms of necessity or the benefit (or expected benefit) it will bring to the enterprise. Very often, expenses will be passed on to a third party, a client or customer who is also likely to look more keenly at its justification than has been the case hitherto.

HMRC is seeking every opportunity to make good the income shortfalls brought about by a slowing economy and tougher trading conditions.

Broadly speaking, the majority of organisational expenses are only available to cover the cost of travel, subsistence and the direct out-of-pocket costs of getting on with the job.

All such expenses incurred in the course of employment should reflect the normal lifestyle of the spender and should only be expended with a clear business justification.

If a claim is suspicious, the payment should be withheld pending an investigation.

A full investigation should be carried out and legal advice sought if the case is not straightforward.

Disciplinary proceedings may need to be initiated but always following a fair procedure. If the employee has left the company, it may be possible to sue them for breach of contract if the sums involved are very large.

By having proper policies and by monitoring and analysing employee spending, HR managers can get a complete picture of company expenditure and begin to negotiate better deals with suppliers, as well as well as stamping out any unauthorised spending before the situation escalates.

Thousands of will beneficiaries out of pocket

Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

THOUSANDS of people could be leaving less than they intended to their loved ones in their will due to falling property prices.

Many people leave specific amounts to named individuals in their will and then leave the remainder of their estate to their partner. However, the remainder could be much less than intended due to the recession.

Legal experts are urging people to amend their wills to reflect this. House prices in England and Wales have fallen by 10.3 per cent since this time last year, according to property data company Hometrack. Financial experts are predicting prices could fall by as much as 15-20% by 2010.

Howard Burns, wills and probate partner at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�Many people try to balance entitlements between beneficiaries, for example, they may leave a house to one person and money to another. They may well find that if they want to give equal amounts, they will have to lower the amount of money so that it�s in line with the property value.

�I always recommend that people reassess their wills whenever circumstances change.

The rapid decline in house price value means everyone should look at their wills, especially if it was written a number of years ago.

"Thousands of wills are based on out of date property valuations. Small changes to a will can often be done quickly by creating an addition to the will called a codicil - there is not always the need for the whole document to be written again.�

Oldham captain avoids drink-drive conviction

Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Oldham Athletic's captain Sean Gregan has avoided a charge for drink-driving after a key witness failed to turn up to court.

More information - http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1105295_soccer_star_beats_ban

And also - http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/community-news/22145/oldham-captain-avoids-drinkdrive-rap

Jail text-messaging death drivers, judges told

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Motorists who read or write text messages on a mobile phone could face jail sentences of up to seven years if they cause a death, under new guidelines from a sentencing watchdog today.

The new, tougher penalties will be imposed by judges and magistrates in England and Wales under guidelines issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC), which is chaired by the Lord Chief Justice.

The most serious cases where drink, drugs, or persistent bad driving are factors could be liable for jail terms up to the maximum of 14 years, the council said.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: �Ensuring drivers who cause death on our roads through bad driving are suitably punished is essential if justice is to be done and people maintain their support for the criminal justice system."

He added that ministers were also keen to see the two proposed new offences of Causing Death by Careless Driving and Causing Death by Driving while Unlicensed, Disqualified or Uninsured, come into force "at the earliest opportunity".

The two new offences were introduced by the Road Safety Act 2006 and will come into force on or after August 4. The new sentencing guidelines will be applied from that date.

The SGC said it was sending out a �clear message� that driving offences that result in death are serious offences and should receive appropriate sentences.

It recommends lengthy custodial sentences for cases involving �prolonged, persistent and deliberate� bad driving or where drivers are drunk or under the influence of drugs.

The use of mobile phones is also treated �robustly� the SGC said, with advice that if an offender is distracted by a hand-held mobile phone when the offence is committed, it will be treated as �particularly� serious.

The guidelines state that reading or composing text messages over a period of time while at the wheel will be likely to result in an offence being in the �higher level of seriousness� and offenders should serve up to seven years in prison.

Advice on driving bans is also given, reminding magistrates and judges that disqualifications are effective from the day that they are imposed and so only have a practical impact if they go beyond the period that will be served in prison.

The guidelines cover four offences: causing death by dangerous driving, causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, causing death by careless driving and causing death by driving while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured.

For the first three offences, judges and magistrates are being advised that they will need to assess how bad the driving was, and the degree of danger created, when determining sentence. Other features, chiefly to do with the offender�s behaviour, are treated as �aggravating� factors.

The SGC said it recommended that �prolonged, persistent and deliberate bad driving� and consumption of �substantial� amounts of drugs or alcohol should put offenders into the most serious category of causing death by dangerous driving and be given jail terms of at least seven years.

A combination of these features of dangerous driving - particularly if accompanied by aggravating factors, failing to stop or a very bad driving record - should attract sentences towards the maximum of 14 years.

The SGC said it recommended that, where death followed careless driving, a custodial sentence of up to three years was likely, with higher sentences where there is a combination of aggravating factors.

But where the driving involved �momentary inattention� and there were no aggravating factors, an offender should be given a community sentence, which could include a curfew requirement.

If death results from an offence involving driving unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured, the maximum sentence possible is two years.

The chairman of the SGC, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, said: �Sentencing in cases where death results from the misuse of a car on the road are among the most difficult for judges and magistrates.

�The harm is the greatest anyone can inflict - the death of a victim - but the level of culpability can range from a flagrant disregard of the safety of other road users to a terrible moment of inattention.

�This guideline is designed to support sentencers in making the very difficult decisions that face them in these cases.�

A another SGC member, Chief Constable Peter Neyroud, said: �The new offence of causing death by careless driving recognises the enormous level of harm caused by the offence.

�This has been welcomed by those representing the families and friends of victims.

�The impact of the guideline we have drawn up is that there will be more custodial sentences and community sentences where in the past offenders would almost certainly have received a fine for the same driving behaviour.�

When the new guidelines take effect, a driver with no previous convictions who causes an accident leading to death because they were using a mobile phone can expect a prison sentence of 15 months or more, while someone responsible for death due to prolonged bad driving after drinking alcohol would be facing eight years or more behind bars, the guidelines say.

Asked if anyone using a mobile phone at the wheel could expect a prison sentence if found guilty of causing an accident which results in death, he replied: �Pretty much straightforwardly, yes.�

Mr Neyroud went on: �What we are talking about is shifting the balance here to recognising the harm to the victim and the victim�s family, recognising the fact that when you are driving a car it is a privilege and not a right and you should drive it carefully at all times.�

He added: �The numbers will be relatively small because the number of people causing death by dangerous driving is relatively small, but there is a strong likelihood of more offenders in these cases going to prison.�

Mary Williams, the chief executive of road safety charity Brake, said: �Obviously, we are delighted that there are going to be more people going to prison for the new charge of causing death by careless driving. But what is fundamental still is that the charge structure is inadequate.

�We have got this difference between careless driving and dangerous driving which is a very, very tiny difference and yet the guidelines today are saying that somebody convicted of death by careless driving would be jailed for up to three years, compared to the maximum sentence for death by dangerous driving of 14 years.

�The penalty for the new charge of killing while unlicensed or disqualified is only two years, compared to a mandatory minimum of five years for possessing an illegal firearm. There is no charge for seriously injuring somebody by driving dangerously or carelessly.�

Road Peace, the charity for road traffic victims, said that the new guidelines did not alter the legal maximum penalties but would increase the length of jail terms, especially for the most dangerous drivers who kill.

Amy Aerson-Thomas, RoadPeace director, said: �This should help tackle the misperception that culpable death on the roads is less serious than other homicides.�

At present it was rare for such drivers to receive more than nine years� jail, she added. But the group stressed that the guidelines were a step in the right direction, rather than the �major change� needed. �Few drivers go to prison and this will not change.�

The AA president, Edmund King, broadly welcomed the new guidelines. "To avoid facing the prospect of a 7 year prison spell motorists must stop using hand-held mobiles at the wheel. It is better to wait 7 minutes to stop safely and make that call, rather than spending 7 years regretting the consequences of your actions," he said.

Lotus Elise driver clocked by police at 173mph avoids jail as speed 'was impossible'

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

A man clocked by police driving at 173mph in a 50mph zone avoided jail after his defence team said his sports car was incapable of travelling that fast. Officers recorded the remarkable speed for Tex O'Reilly's Lotus Elise as he drove along a country lane in Derbyshire last July, Derby Crown Court was told. It was a recording that would usually have landed the 36-year-old father of three in jail, the court heard. But, despite prosecutors insisting the officers' device was reliable, defence lawyers successfully argued their client's unmodified car had a top speed of 127mph. The prosecution failed to disprove the defence claims and accepted O'Reilly's basis of plea. The builder from Canal Bridge in Willington, Derbys, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving on the basis that he had driven at just 105mph. Handing him a �5,000 fine and two-year driving ban, Judge Andrew Hamilton said: "May I make it absolutely clear that had you been driving at 150mph you would have been going immediately to prison. "However, you were not driving at 150mph, you were driving at 105mph, and for whatever reason the prosecution have accepted that basis of plea, and that puts the case in a different light." O'Reilly sold the Lotus to a buyer in Germany for about �9,000 a month after the offence was committed on the A515 between Buxton and Ashbourne on July 12. Prosecuting, Rebecca Herbert said the car's new owner had written a letter to the Crown Prosecution Service to confirm that the car had not been modified "in any way". Asked by the judge why the prosecution case had not involved tests of the Lotus in Germany, she added: "The defendant has asserted that the car could not have done that speed. Inquiries have been made as far as they can be and we can't go further than that. "It may be because our defendant is fortunate in the circumstances that the car has been moved very quickly from the country." But Dominic Shelley, defending, said "slippage" with speeding devices or human error can account for such disparities in recorded and actual speeds. "They (Lotus Elises) are not built for that speed and the likelihood of one being able to keep control of such a vehicle at that speed is beyond comprehension," he said. The stretch of A515 along which O'Reilly was caught speeding with the pilot time-and-distance device was described in court as "hazardous" because of its hidden dips, farm entrances and side roads. Judge Hamilton said: "It's a country lane on which people could have been walking, cattle could have been crossing, children could have been cycling with their parents. "All of them would have stood no chance with (the defendant) driving at 100mph." Mr Shelley, in mitigation, said: "So far as this offence is concerned, he offers no excuses or justifications. He recognises that day as being a gross error of judgment. He understands and accepts fully how he could have caused considerable danger." O'Reilly was also ordered to pay �1,250 in costs.

Lord Ahmed jailed for dangerous driving

Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Lord Ahmed jailed for dangerous driving: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/25/lord-ahmed-jail-text-crash

UK Photocard Driving Licences - check your expiry date!

Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Thousands of motorists are at risk of being fined up to �1,000 because they are unwittingly driving without a valid licence. They risk prosecution after failing to spot the extremely small print on their photocard licence which says it automatically expires after 10 years and has to be renewed - even though drivers are licensed to drive until the age of 70. The fiasco has come to light a decade after the first batch of photo licences was issued in July 1998, just as they start to expire. Motoring organisations blamed the Government for the fiasco and said 'most' drivers believed their licences were for life. A mock-up driving licence from 1998 when the photocards were launched shows the imminent expiry date as item '4b' They said officials had failed to publicise sufficiently the fact that new-style licences - unlike the old paper ones - expire after a set period and have to be renewed. To rub salt into wounds, drivers will have to pay �17.50 to renew their card - a charge which critics have condemned as a 'stealth tax' and which will earn the Treasury an estimated �437million over 25 years. Official DVLA figures reveal that while 16,136 expired this summer, so far only 11,566 drivers have renewed, leaving 4,570 outstanding. With another 300,000 photocard licences due to expire over the coming year, experts fear the number of invalid licences will soar, putting thousands more drivers in breach of the law and at risk of a fine. At the heart of the confusion is the small print on the tiny credit-card-size photo licence, which is used in conjunction with the paper version. 4b: The small print on the back of the driving licence is easy to miss Just below the driver name on the front of the photocard licence is a series of dates and details - each one numbered. Number 4b features a date in tiny writing, but no explicit explanation as to what it means. The date's significance is only explained if the driver turns over the card and reads the key on the back which states that '4b' means 'licence valid to'. Even more confusingly, an adjacent table on the rear of the card sets out how long the driver is registered to hold a licence - that is until his or her 70th birthday. A total of 25million new-style licences have been issued but - motoring experts say - drivers were never sufficiently warned they would expire after 10 years. The DVLA said failure to update the photocard after 10 years fell into the same category as failing to inform them of a change of address. CHECK YOUR LICENCE EXPIRY DATE!!!

Vehicle speed limiters

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Speed limiters are likely to become an increasingly common feature on vehicles. It is believed that they will assist in reducing carbon emissions and reduce accidents. Intelligent Speed Adaptation uses satelite navigation technology and will automatically reduce a vehicle's acceleration when entering an area subject to a lower speed limit. The system, which could be overriden at the press of a button by the driver, has been tested extensively on roads throughout the UK. It is believed it could significantly reduce accidents. Whilst speeding is a factor in just 7% of accidents in the UK, the ISA system is being welcomed by motoring safety lobbyists and groups.

Fiat in Iraq kickback settlement

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Fiat, the Italian carmaker, has agreed to pay $17.8 million to settle claims it gave kickbacks to Saddam Hussein�s regime in Iraq.

More information - http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article5387302.ece

The UK car industry is running out of cash

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The car industy in the UK is facing an emergency as manufacturers are running out of cash.

More information - http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/engineering/article5355513.ece

Mortgage fraud on the increase

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Following the news the Madoff fraud case could result in British banks losing billions, legal experts have revealed mortgage fraud prosecutions have hit an all time high. A recent report by the National Fraud Strategic Authority (NFSA) revealed mortgage fraud losses costs the UK �hundreds of millions of pounds�. With banks finding themselves in financial difficulty they are clamping down on lending and reviewing existing mortgage applications. More people are being taken to court for mortgage fraud. North West law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small has seen such a tremendous soar in these claims it has set up a department dedicated to the cases. Ian Lewis, partner at the firm said: �Mortgage fraud has had a troubling impact on the financial services sector and housing markets. We predicted there would be a rise in fraud cases but we didn�t anticipate it would be this high. �We are currently working on a number of high value serious fraud cases and our team is working around the clock to deal with the influx of work.� This week Tory leader David Cameron called for the Financial Services Authority to be given more power to make an example of fraudsters operating in the mortgage world. He noted that very few criminal charges have been brought against mortgage cheats and suggests more must be done. The National Fraud Strategic Authority (NFSA) plans to bring together all the groups involved in the mortgage process, and has provided a structured approach for people to identify the causes of mortgage fraud � and most importantly develop and own the solutions that will shut down the opportunities for fraudsters to exploit the buying process.

Speeding drivers face ban after two offences in new crackdown

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT

A new government proposal could see drivers receive 6 points instead of 3 for breaking the speed limit. This would mean drivers could face the possibility of a disqualification after only 2 offences.

More information - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/article5194491.ece

Law firm wins technology award

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

MANCHESTER law firm Lewis Hymanson Small is celebrating after scooping a British Chamber of Commerce award for Innovation through Technology.

The law firm won the North West Region award for its cutting edge risk and compliance management system, beating off competition from strong contenders.

Brian Rogers, operations director at LHS who created the system, said:

�Winning this award is a fantastic achievement for us and makes all the hard work developing the technology worth it.

�We set about developing our own fully interactive risk and compliance system as we could not find any similar system like it in the legal IT marketplace. The system helps the firm to comply with its professional conduct rules covering management and supervision by centrally controlling all professional indemnity insurance matters, complaints, client feedback, money laundering reports, referral fee arrangements and file auditing.

�Following market research we are now looking to sell the system to the regulated professional services market, including legal, accountancy, surveying and other sectors, and are currently in discussions with a software development and support company to do just this.�

The Chamber panel judged how the technology systems have made a difference to each of the businesses short listed and which business made the most of the technology.

Lewis Hymanson Small, along with the other winners of the regional Chamber Awards will be put through to the national finals. This year�s National Chamber Awards gala dinner will take place on 27 November at London�s National History Museum.

Overseas property owners hit by credit crunch

Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

LEGAL experts are reporting a surge in overseas property investors attempting to sue developers and agents as the market slumps.

Off-plan investors when they contracted to buy were hoping to turn a profit are now left with property that is difficult to sell.

Spain and Portugal have been hit worst as the over-supply of property has led to values decreasing over the last three years.

Earlier this year, Juan Carlos Sandoval, President of the Union de Cr�ditos Inmobiliarios owned by the Santander and BNP Paribas banks, revealed the price of housing in Spain has fallen in some areas by 30%.

Delays in completion dates means values are below predictions as prices continue to fall.

Furthermore, some agents offered buyers 12 months guaranteed rental income for the first year as an incentive to buy. Now, the oversupply of property and change in market conditions means they can�t rent them out and so in some cases agents do not have money to pay the buyers this rent. This is causing buyers to look into suing the agents.

Adrian Taylor, residential and foreign property partner at national law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small, advises clients on Spanish and Portugese property. He said:

�A few years ago when the property market was flourishing, investors were being advised to buy overseas properties off plan rather than make traditional investments. The theory was people would pay a deposit for the property and sell it on at a profit prior to formally completing.

�However, the market has changed dramatically. Supply outstrips demand and investors are now finding they have to complete, something which they were not necessarily anticipating they would have to do.�

In addition, the Euro is stronger than it was so people now have to find more sterling to buy overseas property. Usually this would be done by remortgaging a UK property but many people are finding themselves unable to do this due to the current UK property market.

Taylor continued:

�Those trying to get out of their contracts must take legal advice and get their legal representative to go over contracts with a fine tooth comb to see if there�s a way out. Contracts can be ambiguous and involve foreign jurisdictions which can put people off. However, in some cases, depending on the wording in the contract, it may be possible to issue proceedings for recovery in the UK.

�If you�re planning to buy a property, speak to an independent legal advisor as some overseas developers and agents offer the services of lawyers who are very closely connected to the developer.�

Businesses feel the heat with energy performance certificates

Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Businesses must act now to get an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) for their building despite the deadline extension, say legal experts.

The EPC gives buildings a �fridge rating�, graded A-G, showing their energy efficiency. The original deadline was 1st October but a shortage of qualified Commercial Energy Assessors (CEA) means businesses now have until 1st January to obtain the certificate, unless the building is sold or rented before this date.

However, lawyers are urging businesses not to delay as the certificates can take weeks to organise.

Calire Egerton, partner at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�Businesses may be tempted to delay arranging an EPC due to the extended deadline but this is a mistake. The low number of assessors means there are long waiting lists for assessments. Too many business owners don�t realise they are far more time and labour intensive than residential certificates.�

Nick Trowell, head of real estate at law firm Heatons LLP said:

�The onus is on the owner or lease holder of the property to meet the criteria of this new law and have all the documentation in place. There is no excuse for claiming ignorance as organisations need evidence to prove their energy saving credentials.

�Businesses also need to think about the potential damage to the value of a building if they don�t prepare their documentation in time. Failure to provide a valid EPC will not only damage their green credentials and risk negative publicity, but will hit the bank balance hard.�

Valid for ten years, an EPC must be produced when a building is to be sold or rented out and it should be supported by a report recommending how energy efficiency might be improved.

Businesses risk facing a financial penalty if they do not get a certificate. In most cases the fine will be 12.5 per cent of the rateable value of the building, with a minimum penalty of �500 and a maximum of �5,000.

�In the future it is possible that buildings with a poor energy rating may suffer a reduction in value or be subject to an increase in business rates, in addition to the higher energy costs of running the building. It is also possible that the implementation of energy saving recommendations may become compulsory.

�Buyers should take careful account of the energy performance rating of any building and any energy saving recommendations when thinking about investing,� Trowell added.

Legal warning for novice landlords

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 GMT

NOVICE landlords are flooding the buy to let market with properties they are unable to sell, according to reports released this week.

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) says the slump in house sales is forcing many more people to become either landlords or tenants. In July, RICS members saw new instructions from landlords rise at their fastest rate on record.

However, legal experts say people should beware of the potential pitfalls of becoming a landlord.

Claire Egerton, residential property partner at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said landlord and tenant laws are complex:

�First and foremost, potential landlords need to check with their lender whether they�re able to let out the property before even considering becoming landlords.

�Landlords new to the game must recognise their legal responsibilities. For example, all gas appliances must be properly maintained and an annual safety check should be carried out by a CORGI approved contractor. The landlord should keep a record of these checks and any remedial work carried out, for at least two years.

�Landlords must provide a copy of the gas safety certificate to the tenant at the commencement of the tenancy. Landlords could still be liable for property damage or personal injury to the tenant.

�For tenants of course, this is good news as with an increasing number of properties on the rental market, rents are likely to be reduced considerably.�

Robert Jordan, chairman of Jordan�s and founder of the Rent-2-Buy scheme that helps first times buyers and novice landlords, said:

�New buy-to-let investors should ensure that they have a proper lease drawn up before they rent out a property. Failure to comply with the assured short hold tenancy legislation could result in not being able to evict tenants who could gain security of tenure.

�Novice landlords should also use a professional letting agent either a member of the RICS or ARLA. They will ensure the landlords money is bonded so if the agent goes bust the landlord will get their money. There are lots of Estate Agents offering rental services who are not members of these organizations and landlords money could be at risk.

Robert Jordan has produced a ten-point checklist for new landlords:

1) Notify your bank or building society if the property is mortgaged and you are planning to let the property.

2) Advise your insurers as your buildings and contents policy will need amending to cover the property against malicious damage and bursts if the property is left empty . There are specialist policies for landlords.

3) Confirm with the freeholder there are no restrictions or covenants which prevent you from letting the property

4) Pay taxes - if you are residing outside the UK and you are using an agent you need to register with HMRC to enable you to get your rent paid without tax being deducted.

5) Keys � have keys cut for the property, enough for each adult tenant plus a set for a lettings agency who should hold them in a secure way without the address on the label

6) Legal - The Landlord will be responsible for legal action against tenants plus any necessary costs incurred. Using a qualified solicitor is essential.

7) Inform Gas and Electricity suppliers of the date of transfer to the new tenants your professional letting agent should be able to do this for you

8) Water Rates and council tax are the Tenant's responsibility in most cases, but advise them of your new forwarding address. Beware there are charges for Council Tax if the property is left empty. Arrange the transfer for the actual day that your tenants will be moving in.

9) Money Don�t release the keys until you have all the rent and deposit. There is legislation requiring deposits to be registered if you do not there is a mandatory fine of three months rent.

10) Mail Redirection - the post office can redirect your mail. Arrange prior to vacating the property for the term of the tenancy.

Call for clarity in congestion charging

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Manchester professionals are calling for clarity after a barrage of misleading information about the proposed congestion charging.

The request for clarity comes after reports this week revealed half the cost of congestion to Greater Manchester is caused by traffic that never comes inside the circular M60, which will avoid the charges.

Brian Rogers, operations director at Manchester city centre law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small said:

�The information released to the public has been unclear and is making it very difficult to choose a side in this debate. We�ve had a raft of misinformation including the reported �3bn that will be invested in public transport when the figure is actually �2.8bn, including a contingency fund of �600m.

�Advertising banners state that only when ��3bn� has been invested in public transport will congestion charging start but the detailed consultation report states that it will start once 80% has been invested.

�The pro-groups say that if the �600m contingency fund is not spent it can be kept by Manchester for other transport initiatives yet Transport Minister, Ruth Kelly says it must be returned to central government.

�Now, the news this week that only 28 per cent of traffic is caused by one of the two proposed charging bands, is another example of the grey areas in the congestion charging debate.

�Also at a recent congestion charge debate meeting I witnessed the pro congestion charging side given a disproportionate amount of time to present their case in comparison to those who were against. I also saw viable questions posed by the audience and those opposing the charge dismissed which is unacceptable, especially when there is a vote involved.�

It was announced this week that all 10 local authorities agreed unanimously to hold a public referendum on the issue. People of Greater Manchester will vote on whether to introduce the congestion charge to the region. The vote is likely to be held in early to mid-December.

Don�t slip up in the kitchen

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

SLIPS and trips could cost restaurateurs more than they bargained for after a fast food chain recently paid out �20K in damages. The cost of personal injury claims as a result of a slip or trip has rocketed to over �500m per year, with the food industry having the highest incidence at about twice the average rate of the manufacturing industry. A recent case saw an employee of a well known fast-food giant requiring constructive surgery on her arm after she slipped and submerged it in scalding oil. An investigation found the flooring was inadequately slip-resistant when contaminated. The company was found guilty and was forced to pay out over �20,000. Neeta Laing, head of employment at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said: �The case highlights the importance of complying with health and safety legislation and also shows the importance of ongoing training. This case occurred against one of the largest fast food chains in the world so the �20K payout wouldn�t have made much of a dent but the same case for an independent restaurateur would be potentially devastating, especially in current market conditions. �This food industry employs over 1.7 million people and is continuing to grow, therefore it is important that the causes of accidents and ill health are effectively controlled. It is the employers� responsibility to ensure that regulations are adhered to in order to minimise the risks.� Laing gives four tips for employers to help prevent workplace accidents:

Have a full risk assessment of the workplace carried out to check the necessary precautions are in place
Make sure you have an accident book and always ensure that every accident is recorded, investigated and preventative steps taken
Employees must be trained on employment and health and safety procedures at induction and receive refresher training
Make sure you implement a proper Health and Safety Policy and clearly display this Health and Safety notices for all employees to see

Summer holidays could lead to discrimination claims

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

EMPLOYERS are risking discrimination claims by showing preference to certain employees when granting annual leave this summer, claims HR expert Stephen Seymour. Seymour, of HR, training and recruitment consultancy The Urquhart Partnership, said bosses must be careful not to show favouritism at this time of year. He added: �Employers often feel obliged to allocate summer holidays to parents and carers but, at this time of year, many staff request time off so it is important not to show bias. �All employees should be treated equally and having a policy in place with clear guidelines on holiday requests can minimise any confusion or resentment. �A holiday request can be refused if there is a genuine business reason, such as no staff cover, and operating a first-come, first-served policy or a rota system could be a solution to this. �Adhering to a holiday policy ensures fairness and equality in the workplace.� Neeta Laing, head of employment law at Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said employers can fall foul of employment legislation by treating some employees more favourably than others. She added: �Employers must be aware of causing offence when granting annual leave during the popular summer period. An added complexity is if employees request time off on religious grounds which is also now protected under legislation. �Having a very clear written policy in place to manage employee requests is very important.�

Sisters IHT battle highlights need for careful planning

Fri, 16 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

LEGAL experts say the case of two sisters who fought for the same inheritance tax rights as married couples and civil partners has highlighted the need for careful financial planning. Joyce and Sybil Burden have lived together all their lives but if one of them dies, the other will face an inheritance tax bill of more than �50,000 and may have to sell the family home to pay it. The sisters have been battling since 1976 for the same IHT allowances married and civil partnership couples have. They finally lost their case in the European Court of Human Rights this week. Howard Burns, wills and probate partner at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, says the case highlights the need to have a will in place: �The case should serve as a warning to people everywhere that they must plan now to reduce the inheritance tax burden. Everyone should have a professional will in place and examine their finances carefully. The fact the case went all the way to the European Court means it has been taken very seriously and could open the floodgates for other similar cases.� Howard Burns gives six tips for reducing your inheritance tax bill:

Re-write your will � IHT is based on the value of your estate. You can reduce this figure by making donations
Consider downsizing � this will release capital to pay your IHT bill
Remember that if you survive seven years after making a gift, IHT is not payable
Give away items which will rise in value. The increase will then benefit the receiver rather than swelling your estate
Take advantage of other lifetime gifts which are tax free
Invest in non-quoted shares. AIM listed shares and shares in privately owned companies are free from IHT if held for two years

LHS wins trio of contract renewals

Wed, 07 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Manchester law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small is celebrating after clinching a trio of prestigious contract renewals for national employee associations. LHS will be legal representatives for the National Youth Advocacy Service (NYAS), G4 Securicor, and the TV Licensing Association. NYAS is a UK charity that provides children's rights and socio-legal services, they employ 180 members of staff. G4 Securicor is the world�s leading provider of security solutions and operates in over 100 countries, employing 25,414 people in the UK. LHS will also represent all members of the TV Licensing Association. LHS will draft employment contracts, new service contracts, host employment training days, and handle all other legal issues. Ian Lewis, partner at LHS says: �The fact we have won renewals for these extremely prestigious associations is a testament to our hard work. To be working with such high profile national associations in our first year of practice is a real accolade. We have vast experience working with associations over the years on many high profile cases.�

�Well note� system has fundamental flaw

Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

A law firm is warning of a fundamental flaw in the proposals to introduce �well notes� in place of the current �sick note� system. Health Secretary Alan Johnson is urging GPs to issue "well notes" outlining the tasks a worker can perform, instead of certificates signing them off all work. Social Security rules state that GPs must give an accurate diagnosis of the patient�s disorder, which has led them to advise the patient to refrain from work; they also state there are times when GPs can refrain from giving a true diagnosis if they feel it is not in their patient�s interest to do so. Brian Rogers, operations director, at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small says the rules need to be overhauled: �If doctors use this opt-out, and they do, how can employers be sure that what is on the sick note is the true reason for the employee�s absence and take the appropriate action to try and help them? Surely any system falls apart when it allows the truth to be withheld? �The opt-out wasn�t designed to mislead employers but it has been adopted by some doctors as a way of protecting their patients from what they may see as unscrupulous employers who may react negatively if given the true reason for the absence. Surely the Employment Rights Act and other employment legislation is supposed to protect employees from employers who discriminate? It should not be the job of doctors to do this.�

Employers prepare for rise in sexual assault claims

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

LEGAL experts are warning employers to prepare for an increase in sexual assault claims after a recent ruling by the House of Lords. Sexual assault claimants used to have six years after a sexual assault took place to bring a case to court. However, the decision made last week means the time limit has decreased to three years, but the court can decide if a case that has gone past the time can go ahead. Brian Rogers, operations director at Manchester law firm, Lewis Hymanson Small says the decision could have major implications for employers and employees across the UK. He said: �The decision means claims from ten years ago or more could be brought to court. It also means claimants will no longer need to prove negligence by employers and will simply have to prove they were assaulted and suffered an injury as a result. The employer could be liable for this. �It means for employers, the door on historic abuse claims could remain permanently open. Staff and former staff will have the threat of claims hanging over them for life, and employers are at risk of having to pay out millions of pounds in damages.�

Employers should brace themselves for blue Monday

Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

GLOOMY mornings and far off summer holidays will see many staff calling in sick on the first Monday in February. According to a Sky Travel survey of 4,000 people, hangovers, lack of sleep and retail therapy are the main reasons people choose to stay away from the office on this day. But Stephen Seymour, who heads up Manchester-based HR, training and recruitment consultancy The Urquhart Partnership, believes workers should think twice before jumping on the sickie bandwagon. �We all experience the blues from time to time but this is no excuse for shirking your work responsibilities. Pulling a sickie may seem tempting with the summer still a long way off but what if you get found out? �Some people see sickies as an extension of their holiday entitlement but spare a thought for your colleagues who are left to pick up your workload. Pulling frequent sickies can also affect your reputation and a reputation for being a shirker is hard to shift.� Head of employment at Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, Neeta Laing says employers can take action: �Some employers are now taking a firmer stance, monitoring absence and withholding sick pay for non genuine reasons. With sick days costing UK firms billions of pounds last year alone, it is not hard to see why. �In order to combat serious absence issues in the workplace, employers need to introduce an absence management policy which includes absence reporting procedures, disciplinary procedures, and return to work interviews. An effective policy should result in improvements in absence levels and of bottom line profitability. �Many companies are now introducing absence measuring techniques such as the Bradford Factor � a formula that highlights frequent short term absence and helps to identity individuals with serious absence and patterns of absence worthy of investigation.�

Legal Executive appointed Associate

Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

RESIDENTIAL property specialist Claire Fieldhouse has been promoted to Associate at the London office of national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small � the first Legal Executive to be given the role at the firm.

Fieldhouse, head of residential property in the firm�s London office, began her career as an estate agent before qualifying as a Legal Executive. She set up the residential property department in London last year and the team has already won a number of high profile clients.

Mike Hymanson, partner and Head of Property at Lewis Hymanson Small, said:

�Claire has built a successful team around her and the client base is growing quickly. We�re delighted to have been able to promote Claire to Associate and reward her for the hard work and commitment she has shown.�

Fieldhouse, said:

�When we set up in London there were very few law firms specialising in residential property so we quickly found our niche in the market. The sector is continuing to grow and we�re receiving lots of new instructions, especially from property investors overseas. We exceeded all our targets last year and expect this to continue into 2009.�

Manchester lawyer switches from blue to red for charity

Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

A Manchester lawyer substituted his Merseyside allegiance from blue to red when he turned out for the Liverpool Legends football tournament on Sunday. Graham Small, partner at Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small played alongside famous ex-Liverpool footballers, including Strictly Come Dancing star John Barnes who hot footed it from London to take part. Other players on the Liverpool side included Jan Molby, Michael Thomas, Howard Gayle, Michael Thomas and Mark Wright. The team went on to win the five aside tournament after beating the All Star team in a nail biting penalty shoot out, made up of soap stars and ex-Manchester United players including Dennis Irwin and Lee Martin. The tournament and the subsequent Charity Dinner raised �68,000 for Claire House Children�s Hospice on the Wirral. Small comments: �I was approached by Jan Molby�s wife to take part in the event, who thought it was very amusing as I am an Everton season ticket holder. Despite my loyalty to the toffees I jumped at the chance to take part when I heard it was to raise money for Claire House. �There were around 20 teams that took part and to be on the winning team was a big achievement. There was a real feeling of camaraderie on the day and it was a fantastic for me to play alongside such well known football legends, particularly in the number 7 shirt!�

Manchester lawyer advises detective in Dodi and Diana�s inquest

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

A MANCHESTER lawyer is advising one of the senior police officers giving evidence at the new inquest into the deaths of Diana and Dodi Al Fayed. Ian Lewis, partner at Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, represents the Police Superintendents� Association (PSA) and is advising retired chief superintendent Jeffrey Rees. Rees was appointed the British/French police liaison officer at the time of Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed deaths ten years ago. A new inquest into the deaths began this month and Jeffrey Rees will be called to give evidence. The inquest at London�s High Court will sit for at least six months and cost more than �10 million. Rees also led the investigation into allegations against Mohammed Al Fayed and others when emeralds worth more than �1m went missing from the late Tiny Rowlands' security box kept at Harrods. Ian Lewis has worked with the PSA for 16 years and during this time, has advised its officers on a number of high profile cases including Stephen Lawrence, Deepcut Barracks and more recently he represented Superintendent Ali Desai. Lewis said: �Our work with the PSA means we are involved in cases that are forming �current� British history. Because of the nature of the rank that we represent we tend to be involved in all the major profile cases.� Ian Lewis is also involved in a number of high profile city fraud cases. The Police Superintendents� Association of England and Wales represents the interests of more than 1,600 Superintendents and Chief Superintendents.

Minster�s mobile blunder sparks concern over company policies

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Since immigration minister, Liam Byrne was caught and fined for using his mobile phone while driving, legal experts are urging businesses to update company car policies. Magistrates at Sutton Coldfield court fined Byrne �100, reduced from �150 after the Labour MP pleaded guilty and magistrates deemed him to have expressed sufficient remorse for his crime. Brian Rogers, operations director at Lewis Hymanson Small, said: �The fact that Byrne, who previously worked as an ex-police minister, used his mobile while driving has really thrown the Home Office into disrepute and other businesses should take note. Employers must make sure that they have a clear company car policy that covers mobile phone use in company cars. �Employees who use mobile phones while driving do not only break the law but also damage the reputation of the company they work for and could face disciplinary action leading to their dismissal. �Many businesses do not have car policies in place and those that do often fail to address the use of mobile phones. Policies should cover things like excessive hours, drink driving, insurance and roadworthiness of vehicles. Employers need to make it clear that using a mobile phone while driving is against the rules and any employee that is in breach of the policy will face disciplinary action.� Businesses should update company car policies and procedures before the introduction of the Corporate Manslaughter Act on April 6, 2008 which states companies and government bodies will face prosecution if they are found to have caused a person�s death due to their health and safety failings. Rogers concludes: �With the impending Corporate Manslaughter Act there is an argument that the magistrates acting on the Liam Byrne case should have made an example of him instead of letting him off with a reduced fine. As a government minister he should know better than most.�

Why IHT allowance transfer will prove tricky

Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

People will find it almost impossible to take advantage of being able to transfer Inheritance Tax (IHT) allowances, claim legal experts. Married couples and civil partners were considered winners when the Chancellor announced in last week�s Pre Budget Report that they would be able to fully utilise their total nil-band rate of �600,000 by transferring unused allowances in the event of death. However, this is not an automatic entitlement. Howard Burns, a wills and probate lawyer at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains: �People will find it extremely difficult to make an IHT allowance transfer claim as they need to provide comprehensive records to HMRC for unused allowances to be calculated. �This could prove particularly difficult where the first spouse died a number of years ago. The vast majority of solicitors only keep client records for seven years and many individuals fail to keep accurate financial records.� Under the new allowance transfer rule, surviving spouses and civil partners do not need to make any claim when the first spouse or civil partner dies. A claim only needs to be made upon the death of the widow or widower. At this point, beneficiaries can add the two IHT allowances together and only pay tax on anything above the threshold. For married couples and civil partnerships, the combined threshold is currently �600,000 and is due to rise to �700,000 by 2010. Burns continues: �The concern is the amount of detail which the still unpublished transfer claims form is likely to require. In theory, the transfer of allowances is a good idea that should benefit millions of people across the country. In practice, supposed executors will miss out as completing a claims form is likely to require full and accurate records of how the first person to die used their nil-band rate. Executors will need to provide records of what the person owned and who their estate was left to. �In addition, to make a claim, executors will probably need to produce birth, marriage and death certificates for the first person to die as well as a copy of their will. Making a transfer claim could be a long and drawn out process. People should ensure that they keep accurate records of their estates and entrust copies of documents to executors.�

Darling Labours IHT threshold rise

Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Experts are dismissing the Chancellor�s Pre-Budget Report changes to the Inheritance Tax (IHT) threshold as a �smoke and mirrors� stunt to win back public support for the under-fire Labour Party. In the Pre-Budget Report, Alistair Darling announced that from the 9th October 2007 the IHT nil-band rate threshold would increase from �300,000 to �600,000 for married couples. It will then rise to �700,000 by 2010. However, this new rate is no different to the current minimum amount (the threshold) that is subject to so-called �death tax�. Howard Burns, a wills and probate lawyer at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains: �In his last Budget report, Gordon Brown increased the threshold from �275,000 to �300,000 per person. This means that prior to this year�s Pre-Budget Report couples with properly prepared wills could already leave up to �600,000 tax free to heirs. �Brown also pledged to increase the IHT threshold to �350,000 per person by 2010. Again, this amount is no different to the �700,000 rate that the Chancellor is promising by 2010. Essentially, the Chancellor�s nil-band rate increase is a con and will have no added financial benefit for married couples.� Announcements were also made in the Pre-Budget Report that spouses and civil partners can now transfer their nil-band rate allowances. This means that any part of the nil-band rate not used when the first spouse or civil partner dies can be passed to the surviving partner. Burns continues: �It is more positive to see that allowances have been made for couples to fully utilise their total nil-band rate. People should ensure that they keep a record of the value of their estate and check it regularly to see how it affects their IHT allowances.� HM Revenue and Customs is planning to offer more detailed guidance on IHT and how to transfer nil-band rates via its website (www.hmrc.gov.uk). To make a transfer, the surviving partner will need to complete a HMRC claims form. Burns concludes: �The new transfer rules will make provision for existing wills containing discretionary trusts, but it is strongly recommended that these wills are reviewed by a specialist. �Mitigating IHT is a complex process. It can be achieved by making IHT non-exempt gifts, but this varies widely according to the value of a gift and the timescales in which it is made. A more effective way is for people to reassess their wills and distribution of estate. �A tailored will can help protect estates against unnecessary levels of IHT.� Useful information: What is Inheritance Tax? Inheritance Tax is the tax that is paid on your estate. Broadly speaking this is everything you own at the time of your death, less what you owe. It's also sometimes payable on assets you may have given away during your lifetime. Assets include things like property, possessions, money and investments. Inheritance Tax exemptions:There are also a number of exemptions which allow you to pass on amounts (during your lifetime or in your will) without any IHT being due, for example:

if your estate passes to your husband, wife or civil partner and you are both domiciled in the UK there is no IHT to pay even if it is above the nil band rate
most gifts made more than seven years before your death are exempt
certain other gifts, such as wedding gifts and gifts in anticipation of a civil partnership up to �5,000 (depending on the relationship between the giver and the recipient), gifts to charity, and �3,000 given away each year are also exempt

New underage smoking crackdown could cost newsagents

Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Thousands of newsagents and shopkeepers will risk losing their tobacco license as a result of over-zealous trading standards officials clamping down on the new tobacco law. The new law came into effect on 1st October and bans the sale of tobacco products to anyone under the age of 18. Trading Standards officials have announced that they will crack down on shops that break the law by carrying out under-age test purchases. Offending shopkeepers face fines of up to �2,500 and risk losing their licence completely. Ian Lewis partner of national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, which represents the National Federation of Retail Newsagents � an organisation championing the rights of over 21,000 newsagents in the UK and Ireland � comments: �While it is reassuring to see these new laws put into place to cut underage smoking, shopkeepers have expressed concerns that officials over-step the mark in testing the sale of tobacco to minors. Past test purchase cases have seen guidelines ignored and test candidates lie about their age when questioned by retailers �The overall campaign for the change in the legal smoking age has been relatively low-key with many shopkeepers claiming to have received no official notification about the change and how it will affect them. This has sparked concern that officials will be quick off the mark to prosecute shopkeepers who may be unaware of the new laws.� Home Office guidelines state that volunteers used in test purchases of tobacco will not normally be aged over 16.5 years, will answer questions truthfully, not wear make-up or clothes that make them appear older and not persuade shopkeepers to make sales. Newsagents and shopkeepers should take the following precautions to deter underage alcohol sales and protect themselves against over-zealous Trading Standards officials:

Train all your staff on the new law and how to question and refuse sales if necessary. Remember to keep records of training and refusal of sales.
Keep CCTV tapes of refused sales.
Give advice to staff about acceptable forms of age ID and only accept nationally recognised documents � passport, photo driving licence and Portman Group Proof of Age card.
Cleary display posters stating that you may require ID for tobacco sales.
Make sure that if you have any doubt, they refuse the sale of tobacco.

Bridging Finance Limited backs code of conduct

Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Manchester professionals are backing calls by the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) for the formation of a trade body that will introduce a code of conduct for the booming bridging loan industry. Management at Bridging Finance Limited is supporting the CML and is calling upon other industry heads to take part in a proposed scheme. Chris Baguley, managing director of Bridging Finance Limited, said: �We believe an independent industry-wide code of conduct for providers is long overdue and we are keen to ensure that the CML gets the support it needs. We fully endorse an independent initiative like this. It will give the industry more credibility and root out some of the less transparent players in the market.� �Bridging is the last unregulated part of the commercial finance industry and it needs a Code of Conduct to ensure that consumers, clients and introducers can have absolute confidence in the reputable providers.� Mike Hymanson, equity partner of Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, agrees: �Increasing numbers of clients are using bridging finance facilities in order to fund growth and exploit new business opportunities. Having a clear set of guidelines on best practice would be a big step forward. Such a scheme would help people avoid the bad apples and ensure they make use of reputable operators in the market.� Bridging Finance Limited is calling for the following five measures to be laid out in new guidelines:

A flexible 12 month facility being offered to give the client confidence that the terms will remain the same in the event that the bridge runs over the average 2/3 month period
All fees to be clearly stated on the offer document or illustration at the outset so customers and advisers can make fair comparisons
Fees to introducers to be within reasonable levels and communicated to borrowers embracing an approach to �treating customers fairly�
Structuring a transaction appropriately and looking at whether the facility would be better suited on a longer term mortgage by understanding how the facility is to be repaid/exited.
Documentation to be clear and easy to understand, written in jargon-free English and embracing complete transparency

See www.bridgingfinance.co.uk

Public Facebook profiles bring fresh problems for businesses

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The announcement this month that Facebook profiles will now be open to public searches on Google has sparked new concerns for companies across the UK. Employers have previously been concerned by employees spending work time on Facebook and the financial cost of this to productivity. Businesses now have to contend with their reputation and brand being tarnished, perhaps immeasurably, by an employee�s actions and beliefs out of office hours. Brian Rogers, operations director at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains: �Websites like Facebook are making employees private lives more public, especially now that their details can be found on major internet search engines. It is easier for an individual�s personal actions and attitudes to be viewed by clients and other companies.� Facebook allows its members to list work details and post messages on the site and also enables them to set up social groups that other members can join. The influence the social networking site has on businesses came to light recently when HSBC was forced to retract its account charges policy in response to student pressure mobilised through an anti-HSBC Facebook group. Rogers adds: �It is unreasonable to ask employees to sacrifice their private life and out-of-work persona, after all work is such a huge part of our lives that it is only natural that they discuss it outside of work. Employers should have a code of conduct in place for their employees that stipulate that they must not knowingly put themselves in a position where their private interests conflict with work. �The key to handling this situation is for businesses to update communications policies to cover social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. Policies need to make it clear that the firm�s name should not be used in any context unless it has been authorised by a member of senior management.� �Ignoring this situation is potentially very damaging and by alerting employees to the seriousness of it will save any nasty surprises when they find out their employer doesn�t approve of something they said or did.�

New law firm continues recruitment drive

Mon, 03 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Neeta Laing has joined new law firm Lewis Hymanson Small as head of employment law. With over 15 years of legal and business experience, Neeta, previously worked as an associate for international law firm Eversheds. Prior to this she spent six years as an associate at Davis Wallis Foyster Solicitors, where she led a team in completing all aspects of employment law for a diverse national client base. At LHS, Neeta will be providing clients with a full package of employment law services including drafting contracts, policies and procedures, employment tribunal representation, as well as added value services such as training seminars on a host of employment issues. Neeta said: "LHS provide a refreshing and unique approach to the provision of legal services for clients. My aim is to further develop the department to continue provide a first class service to clients by working closely with them to fully appreciate and meet their requirements." Equity partner, Ian Lewis added: "Neeta brings a wealth of expertise and experience to this role as well as a solid understanding of employment law. Her drive and determination to deliver a meaningful and tailored service for clients fits well with the firm's approach to business."

Freshers and landlords alerted to new housing laws

Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT

As thousands of students across the UK start hunting for homes for their new university lives, experts are advising property landlords not to fall foul of the law.

Property law experts say too many landlords and student tenants are still confused about the Governement's housing deposit scheme, which was introduced in April this year. The new Tenant Deposit Scheme regulates the handling of housing deposits during an agreed tenancy.

Mike Hymanson, head of property law at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains: "The new scheme acts as a safety net for students and landlords as it helps reduce improper deductions from deposits and the non-payment of rents. In addition, the scheme also offers a resolution mechanism for when difficulties arise."

The scheme is run by the independent, not-for-profit company, The Dispute Service. The company handles housing deposits and requires legitimate reasons from landlords for any deductions to be made. Deposits can be revoked if a student tenant fails to pay every month's rent and if a dispute arises at the end of tenancy, it is handled by the Independent Complaints Examiner. If there is no dispute, deposits are prompty returned to students.

Hymanson adds: "Freshers landing at university for the first time must check their landlord is taking part in this scheme and landlords must ensure they comply. Greedy landlords and rent dodging students should become a thing of the past now this scheme has been introduced."

What should students do?

At the beginning of a new tenancy agreement, students should pay their deposits to the landlord or letting agent as usual. Within 14 days, the landlord or agent is required to provide students with details about how their deposit is protected including:

The contact details of the tenancy deposit scheme
The contact details of the landlord or agent
How to apply for the release of the deposit
Information explaining the purpose of the deposit
What to do if there is a dispute about the deposit

If students don't receive this information, they should ask their landlord or agent the simple question - 'how is my deposit protected?'

Safeguarding deposits

Student tenants have a responsibility to leave the property in the same condition that it was let to them, allowing for reasonable wear and tear. When signing tenancy agreements, it is a good idea for students to make sure that they:

Keep a detailed list of contents (furniture and fittings)
Record the condition of the property and its contents (photographs are a good idea)
Check the circumstances in which landlords or agents could have a claim on the deposit

New Power of Attorney will put people at risk

Tue, 21 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Changes in the law affecting the appointment of Powers of Attorney could leave thousands of people vulnerable to financial exploitation, according to legal experts. From 1st October 2007, a new Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) will come into force with the view to offering people suffering from dementia greater financial, legal and health protection. The Alzheimer's Society estimates that more than 700,000 people in the UK suffer with dementia and around 60,000 deaths per year are directly attributable to the condition. Leon Swerling, an associate at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, comments: "The LPA will be more complex, expensive and onerous to put in place. This is likely to deter people from making one. This would leave them with little influence or control over decisions made about their assets should they become mentally incapable." Currently, many people protect their financial and legal rights by making an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA). Under an EPA, a person appoints one or more people to manage their affairs during ill health. Sometimes an EPA can be used when a person is still in good health. LPAs will completely replace Enduring Powers of Attorney. In addition to covering financial matters, LPAs can also deal with health and welfare. However, an appointee under a LPA will not have the right to demand certain medical treatment if doctors are in disagreement. EPAs made before the end of September, when the Mental Capacity Act 2005 comes into effect, will remain valid. Swerling concludes: "If people do not opt to make a Power of Attorney, a receiver can be appointed to take care of their financial affairs if they suffer from dementia. This is done through the Court of Protection and can prove time consuming and expensive. "There are over 100 different types of dementia and experts predict that the number of people suffering with dementia will increase by around 40% by 2025. It is important that people take steps to protect their interests to ensure that decisions made on their behalf during ill health, are the decisions taken by those who they trust. "There is still opportunity for people to make an EPA under current rules, which will continue to offer protection after the law changes on 1st October 2007."

Taken from ITN Report: "Hidden Cost of Childcare Vouchers"

Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Parents could be worse off as a result of taking advantage of tax-free childcare vouchers, a law firm has warned.

Thousands of families with pre-school age children have signed up to buy vouchers worth up to �55 a week as a "salary sacrifice", before tax and National Insurance deductions, which is claimed can save over �1,000 a year in childcare costs.

However, law firm Lewis Hymanson Small has said that although the scheme offers advantages, many people are unaware of the downside, meaning that thousands may have been mis-sold the vouchers.

The "salary sacrifice" could result in reduced pension rights and lower maternity and paternity pay, Lewis Hymanson Small has said.

Operations director at the firm, Brian Rogers, said: "Many voucher providers only present companies with basic information packs about how to set up schemes. "This leaves employers under the impression that they can easily manage the schemes, even if they are an SME (Small & Medium-sized Enterprises) without any HR (Human Resources) and accountancy support, and means that employees are not provided with all the facts."

He added: "Businesses are failing to fully appraise the potential pitfalls of salary sacrifice schemes, including pension rights, state benefits and other salary related benefits such as maternity and paternity pay.

"As a result, employees opting for childcare vouchers are losing out financially."

Full ITN Report - "Hidden Cost of Chilcare Vouchers" Click Here.

Please visit the Low Income Tax Reform Group web site if you require further information on the effects child care vouchers can have on Working Tax Credits. Low Income Tax Reform Group

How wills could help improve family bonds

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Following the renewed political interest in good old fashioned family values, legal experts are advising people to make and review their wills. In recent weeks, marriage and families have featured highly on Gordon Brown and David Cameron's political agendas as the opposing parties debate improving social stability. According to Government statistics, it is estimated that family breakdowns cost �24 billion every year. Wills and probate expert Leon Swerling, from national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small (LHS), comments: "Family ties and values have slowly eroded over the last few decades, having an adverse affect on society. This has led to a rise in family breakdowns and disputes, especially after death over people's estates. "Political parties are placing a new emphasis on strengthening family units with proposals of tax breaks and more financial benefits for both married and cohabiting couples and families. If more people marry or cohabit, and start a family, it is vital that they protect their interests in the event of death. "A well drafted will ensures that an individual's estate is shared among the beneficiaries of their choice and can minimise the risk of disputes and litigation." According to Swerling, the vast majority of people are deterred from making wills as they believe them to be expensive and confusing. He says: "A straightforward will can be made for less than �150 and can save a great deal of emotional distress after death. "Good solicitors will simplify the will making process for their clients by running them through a simple questionnaire. The questionnaire helps to eliminate legal jargon, identify any issues and ultimately, provides individuals with a will that meets their wishes. "People should take heed of Government and political moves to reform family values and take their own steps to protect themselves, family and friends. Making a will should not be considered a morbid task, as it can provide security and peace of mind."

Adele Librae joins Lewis Hymanson Small

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Adele Librae has joined new law firm Lewis Hymanson Small's corporate and commercial team. Adele has acted for a wide range of clients, several of whom are well known nationally and in the Manchester business community. Adele is experienced in private company transactional work, and has acted for owner managed businesses in connection with strategic acquisitions, disposals, funding and joint ventures. She also advises businesses on an ongoing basis in relation to commercial contracts.

Manchester law firm join fight against Tesco

Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Manchester law firm Lewis Hymanson Small has joined the fight against the potentially misleading content on Tesco's new property website. The supermarket chain recently launched the site www.tescopropertymarket.com which details the perceived advantages of using a licensed conveyancer instead of a solicitor when buying or selling a home. The website has been met with outrage from law firms across the UK as it brands solicitors 'slow to respond' and says that they 'won't necessarily rate your property sale as their highest priority'. Brian Rogers, operations director at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, said: "The content on the Tesco website can be misleading for consumers and we, along with others in the legal profession are calling upon them to consider reviewing the wording or removing it completely." The website content, provided by Lawpack, a legal self-help publisher providing products for Tesco's online legal store, is currently under review by The Law Society to ensure compliance. Rogers added: "Conveyancing solicitors at established law firms have many years of experience in this field. A good solicitor may not know too much about beans but they certainly know how to provide an efficient conveyancing service."

Woman wins PPI claim

Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

A Sale woman has won a full refund of �9,500 on a mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) policy, despite her claim being originally rejected by the Financial Ombudsman. Jackie Dennis' victory comes amid widespread concern from consumer groups about companies wrongly selling customers PPI policies. The 41 year old mother of two believed that she had to take out the personal protection insurance policy as part of a remortgage she applied for. She comments: "My mortgage provider Nemo Personal Finance was unclear about what cover the PPI included and did not make it obvious that cover was optional. They didn't answer my questions with straight answers." After being faced with excessive monthly repayments, Ms Dennis tried to cancel the policy, but was unsuccessful. Following this, she sought legal advice. Her claim was initially rejected by all involved parties including Nemo Personal Finance, insurance Broker Central Trust Plc which recommend Nemo, policy underwriter Norwich Union and the Financial Ombudsman. Turon Miah, a solicitor at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, acted for Mrs Dennis. He said: "The sale of the vast majority of PPI policies do not comply with Financial Services Authority rules on lending. Borrowers are often mis-guided about terms and conditions and many people are sold policies which offer them no real protection. "Ms Dennis' was one of these people and her claim should not have been rejected in the first instance. Her mortgage agreement was for 25 years and yet the PPI only offered cover for five years. She was not provided with clear guidance on what she was agreeing to and was wrongly convinced that she needed the insurance. "The industry needs to do more to regulate the selling of PPI and protect consumer interests." Ms Dennis adds: "I am relieved that my case has been settled and I am no longer tied into the insurance policy. I advise anybody taking out mortgages or loans to be firm with salespeople offering payment protection insurance and to make sure they know exactly what cover policies provide and how much they cost. "People should not be made to feel stupid or put under pressure by finance providers that are more interested in sales commission than their customer's best interests." Payment protection insurance is taken out alongside credit card or loan agreements and is supposed to provide borrowers with the financial security to cover repayments if they become ill or lose their job. Around 40%* of PPI cases are settled by the Financial Ombudsman Service. It is estimated that around 30 million people may have been mis-sold PPI.

Law firm shines in Kings Road lease negotiations

Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

National law firm Lewis Hymanson Small (LHS) has helped leading jeweller Thomas Sabo open its first shop in the UK. Located on Chelsea's prestigious Kings Road, the shop marks the start of the sterling silver jeweller's national expansion plans as it looks to increase its market share throughout the UK. Thomas Sabo has 21 standalone boutiques and over 40 shop-in-shops across the world. Dr. Harald Winzer, managing director at Thomas Sabo UK, comments: "During the last four years, we have been successfully reaching UK consumers through concessions in renowned retailers including Harrods, House of Fraser and Selfridges. This has enabled us to firmly establish Thomas Sabo in the UK. "Opening our own shops will enable us to build on this successful entry to market by strengthening brand awareness and increasing product availability." LHS negotiated the 10 year lease agreement with retail leasing advisers Wilson McHardy. Anthony Sacks, partner at LHS, comments: "There is extremely high demand for properties in Kings Road and securing lease agreements is very competitive. We had to plan carefully and move quickly to ensure that we reached an agreement that suited all parties." Keith Wilson at Wilson McHardy adds: "There is a long waiting list of retailers for Kings Road properties and landlords are very prudent about which companies and brands they allow to let their premises. Interested parties need to ensure that they can make decisions quickly and clearly demonstrate their long-term business objectives. A well-planned marketing strategy can be very influential during negotiations." Thomas Sabo's Kings Road shop opened on 1st July 2007. The company is now looking at other potential retail outlets across London and the UK. Mr Winzer concludes: "Opening our first UK shop tops what has already been an exciting year for Thomas Sabo. Our new range of charms, which was launched last year, is selling extremely well. Furthermore, we have increased our target market following the introduction of our new Unisex collection. "Kings Road has an excellent reputation synonymous with our brand values and product quality. The new shop is perfectly positioned to serve our target market and will provide a good benchmark for the opening and running of future outlets in the UK. Our existing concessions will complement our growth strategy."

Solicitor challenges fellow professionals to put 'em up for charity

Thu, 28 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Manchester based solicitor Ian Lewis is looking for fellow solicitors and accountants to fight in a bid to send poorly children on dream holidays to Florida. Having donned boxing gloves for the first time earlier this year to help raise funds for Francis House Childrens' Hospice, Ian is back in training and hoping to get back in the ring to help support childrens' charity Destination Florida. Ian, an equity partner at law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, comments: "The charity bout in March this year was great fun, a fantastic way to raise funds and an excellent way of keeping fit. "The boxing night was organised by Manchester businessman Russ Arrowsmith who is now arranging a second event for 2nd November 2007. All I have to do is find some solicitors and accountants willing to step into the ring." Ian won his fight in March and the charity boxing night raised over �27,000 for Francis House. Ian concludes: "Destination Florida is a brilliant charity that organises sunshine breaks to Florida for children that haven't been able to enjoy holidays because of illness. They take teams of doctors and carers as well as medical resources to ensure that children are properly cared for. "If I can persuade a handful of North West professionals to take part in the event, it will no doubt help raise funds that will enable more children to enjoy the holiday of a lifetime." To take-up Ian's challenge and for further information, contact him on: Tel: 0161 827 1800 or Email: ian.lewis@lhs-solicitors.com A separate charity boxing event is being organised by JM Promotions and local trainer Lee Whitehead and is taking place at the Reebok Football Stadium in Bolton on Friday 7th September 2007. To step into the ring or for tickets, contact: 0797323789.

Vehicle smoking ban could leave employers fuming

Thu, 28 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Despite efforts to comply with the national smoking ban, many employers across the UK risk leaving themselves open to prosecution according to experts. The national smoking ban, which becomes law on 1st July 2007, prohibits smoking in all enclosed public places and workplaces. To meet new regulations, employers have been removing indoor smoking areas, building outdoor smoking shelters for employees and posting 'no smoking' signage throughout workplaces. However, many businesses are failing to address smoking in vehicles, which must also comply with the Health Act 2006. Brian Rogers, operations director at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, comments: "While employers are clear about what changes they need to implement to make their workplaces smoke-free, they are uncertain about how the new law affects smoking in vehicles. Further confusion is being caused by questions of vehicle ownership and how this affects the enforcement of no smoking policies. "Vehicles that are being used for work purposes must be treated as an enclosed space and smoking banned in them, irrespective of whether the vehicle is owned by the employee or the business." Under the Health Act 2006, vehicles that are primarily used for private purposes will not be required to be smoke-free. The Act requires vehicles to be smoke-free at all times if they are used to transport members of the public and in the course of paid or voluntary work by more than one person - regardless of whether they are in the vehicle at the same time. Rogers adds: "Employers should not nit-pick through who is allowed to smoke in a vehicle and when they are able to do so. This will leave them exposed to litigation and fines of up to �2,500. Instead, they should ensure that any vehicle transporting work personnel is kept smoke-free and promote no smoking in all lease and fleet vehicles." Rogers advises that employers take the following steps to promote no smoking in company owned vehicles:

Remove the vehicle's ash trays and cigarette lighter
Post no smoking signs on vehicle dash boards
Post signs in car parks reminding employees of smoke-free vehicle regulations

For vehicles owned by employees, employers should issue them with smoke-free guidelines which can be downloaded from www.smokefreeengland.co.uk

New law firm makes early appointment

Wed, 02 May 2007 00:00:00 GMT

New law firm Lewis Hymanson Small (LHS) is celebrating after encouraging commercial lawyer Colin Mellor to postpone early retirement and join the practice.

Boasting over 25 years experience, Mellor, 50, has acted in various commercial matters including many complex and high value transactions and headed-up renowned North West based law firm Pickles Halliwell Solicitors. He led the firm's successful merger with North Ainley Solicitors in April 2001 and stayed-on as a consultant until 2005.

At LHS, Mellor will be working within the firm's commercial property, company and commercial law teams. On why he joined the LHS, Mellor comments: "For the past year or so, I've been broadening my professional horizons and practising software licensing for an IT company in addition to my usual area of commercial work. While this has been interesting, I'd decided to take early retirement from practising and pursue other commercial interests, when LHS got in touch.

"Having met the firm's three equity partners and the rest of the team, I decided to continue practising as I was so impressed by the firm's outlook. The team is full of enthusiasm and expertise, and has a clear vision of what it wants to achieve. This is matched with a really positive and fresh attitude, and approach to market.

"I'm excited about working with the team and drawing on my commercial property law and corporate litigation and transactional experience to help meet client and firm objectives."

Equity partner Ian Lewis adds: "As well as a wealth of expertise and experience, Colin has a solid understanding of business and many personable qualities. He'll fit well with the team and LHS' ethos of delivering a meaningful and tailored service for clients.

"Appointing talented individuals, such as Colin, will enable us to build on our successful entry to market, realise our year one fee target of �3 million and differentiate LHS from big, faceless law firms."

April IHT increases will still leave homeowners exposed to 40% death tax

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Experts are warning that thousands of homeowners across the UK will still be liable for Inheritance Tax (IHT), despite this month's increase in the minimum amount subject to the so called 'death tax'. Following last month's Budget, the IHT nil band rate (the maximum amount you can leave before your estate becomes liable to tax) increased from �285,000 to �300,000 for the new tax year starting 6th April 2007, and will rise to �350,000 by 2010. While the Chancellor's increase in allowances are supposed to leave fewer people exposed to IHT, the country's booming property market will continue to push people's estates into the chargeable zone at the rate of 40% taxation. Howard Burns, a partner at national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small, explains: "People should not be blinded by the nil band rate increase. UK House prices are increasing by an average 8% to 10% per year, whereas the IHT threshold will increase by around 4% per year over the next three years. Put simply, IHT allowances are not balanced with the rising value of people's estates or sufficient enough to protect the vast majority of homeowners." The IHT nil rate band will rise to �312,000 in April 2008 and �325,000 in April 2009 before reaching �350,000 in 2010. Burns adds: "Although �300,000 plus sounds like a lot of money, many people do not realise how easy it is to creep past the threshold. "In addition to rising property values, inheritance and life insurance payouts received upon the death of a spouse, civil partner or parent and forgotten savings can all push estates significantly into the 40% tax bracket." The traditional approach to beating IHT is to give away assets more than seven years prior to death. However, giving away the family home while still living in it has become more difficult in recent years. Burns explains: "If an individual gifts a home but still lives in it, they will fall under the gifts with reservation of benefit rule, meaning the asset would still be subject to IHT. In addition, income tax can be levied on the notional rental value of a home." To cost effectively mitigate IHT, Burns advises that people reassess their wills and the distribution of estate: He concludes: "A Deed of Variation can allow a deceased person's Will to be re-written so that the deceased's estate is redirected, as long as it's written within two years of death and agreed by all beneficiaries." Useful information: What is Inheritance Tax? Inheritance Tax is the tax that is paid on your estate. Broadly speaking this is everything you own at the time of your death, less what you owe. It's also sometimes payable on assets you may have given away during your lifetime. Assets include things like property, possessions, money and investments. Inheritance Tax exemptions: There are also a number of exemptions which allow you to pass on amounts (during your lifetime or in your will) without any IHT being due, for example:

If your estate passes to your husband, wife or civil partner and you are both domiciled in the UK there is no IHT to pay even if it is above the nil band rate
Most gifts made more than seven years before your death are exempt
Certain other gifts, such as wedding gifts and gifts in anticipation of a civil partnership up to �5,000 (depending on the relationship between the giver and the recipient), gifts to charity, and �3,000 given away each year are also exempt

Lewis Hymanson Small enter Manchester legal scene with a bang

Mon, 02 Apr 2007 00:00:00 GMT

FORMER Rowe Cohen partners Ian Lewis, Mike Hymanson and Graham Small have launched a new city centre based commercial law firm. With 8 partners, 3 associates and a 60-strong team already in place and fees expected to reach �3 million in year one, Lewis Hymanson Small LLP (LHS) has hit the ground running. The trio is confident of long-term success in Manchester's competitive legal market. Graham Small comments, "New entrants into any market claim to bring something new. In this respect we are no different because we genuinely believe we have something unique to offer businesses in the region. "Everyone at LHS is highly experienced and will provide clients with commercial solutions and not just legal answers. We are certain our 'can do' approach will enable us to realise our ambitious growth plans. "A flurry of mergers among law firms in Manchester over the last few years has left the sector polarised. There is a shortage of firms with the breadth of experience and the cultural fit to work with the city's growing number of successful SMEs and owner-managed businesses. We aim to establish LHS as a leader in this sector. "There are some very big hitters in the Manchester legal league and we know we're not among the biggest. We also know there's a market for mid-sized firms to serve mid-sized clients, and we are passionate about being the best in this arena. "Client feedback has told us that mid-sized businesses are baulking at the rates the larger firms feel able to charge. They are also getting fed up with having whole teams allocated to them, when they'd much rather develop a meaningful relationship with a partner who is supported by a streamlined team tailored to their specific needs." Others to join LHS from Rowe Cohen include partners Anthony Sacks, Adrian Taylor, Howard Burns, Vicki Fletcher, Neil Gouldson, and associates Dee Scott, Claire Baglin and Leon Swerling. All clients for whom the LHS partners previously acted have moved with them, including London Scottish Bank, Police Superintendents Association, Avonside Roofing and GGM Properties, the private property vehicle of entrepreneur Ged Mason. Small continues, "The amicable separation from Rowe Cohen has meant the smooth transfer of client files. We now have a team with a wealth of knowledge and experience that understands business." To augment the firm's 10,000 sq ft office on Peter Street, LHS has opened a London office at the Royal Exchange Bank in the Square Mile, and invested �250,000 in leading edge IT and case management systems. Sir Howard Bernstein will officially welcome LHS to the Manchester legal scene at a launch party in April.

New holiday legislation could leave employees feeling blue

Wed, 07 Mar 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Government proposals to increase paid annual holiday entitlement could compromise benefits for employees, say experts. The proposals could see statutory annual leave increased from 20 to 28 days (based on an average 5 day working week). While the prospect of additional time-off will leave many employees happy faced, it could cost businesses millions of pounds and leave them with little choice but to impose holiday deadlines, pressurise employees into taking holidays needlessly and reduce other employee benefits and perks. Employment law expert Neil Gouldson from national law firm Lewis Hymanson Small explains: "Businesses realise that they need to offer good remuneration packages to recruit and retain the best staff. To achieve this, packages are developed bespoke to employee requirements and the demands of the business sector they operate in. "Increasing the statutory holiday entitlement will provide businesses with less flexibility to develop tailored, employee focused terms of employment." Under the proposed changes to the Working Time Regulation 1998, employers will have to make paid time-off available for Bank and public holidays in addition to the standard four week entitlement. The changes will take place in two stages with the first taking place on 1st October 2007 when the entitlement will increase from 20 to 24 days. The second change will take place on 1st October 2008 and see the entitlement raised from 24 to 28 days. Gouldson adds: "These changes will increase operational costs for businesses during busy Bank Holiday periods, meaning reduced holiday and overtime rates for people that opt to work. In addition, the new legislation may see an increase in unused holidays, meaning that businesses have to roll them over or buy them back. This would have a detrimental impact on cashflow and operational efficiency, and result in businesses having to be more stringent in managing annual leave. "Increasing statutory annual leave is not the answer to improving work life balance for employees. It is merely a smoke and mirrors exercise to divert public attention from high taxes. Government effort should be focused on assisting business development. This will provide employers with more resource to provide greater benefits packages that can be tailored to meet individual requirements."