The Original - "Solicitors from Hell"

Hegarty & CO Solicitors
48 Broadway, Peterboough & 10 Ironmonger Street,
Like 'Smoking' some solicitors should come with a 'Government Health Warning'

"Who is Richard 'Dickie' Hegarty"
'Dickie' is the Law Society's Chair of the Compliance Board (Rules Enforcer)
What is "Dickie's" Job?
'Dickie' is suppose to see that solicitors' comply with the Law Society's rules

How does 'Dickie' interpret his Job

Dickie' himself has violated the Law Society's Data Protection Notice which in turn is a violation of the Data Protection Acts 1998. What can we deduce from his action, that's simple, he believes that the rule book only applies to those 'stupid' people who complain about their treatment from the 'Members of his Mob'.

(God Save the Complainants')

Web Search



Law Society

King Richard






Mr Higgins QC

Kamlesh Bahl


Hegarty & Co


On Thursday 6 November '03 at 6.15pm Hegarty & Co Solicitors with offices in Peterborough and Stamford rang me (their offices close at 5.15pm) . The first thing I noted was Hegarty & Co knew the name of my business and they found out my home 'phone number that is not listed. I believe this shows, as I have said in the past also in a letter I wrote to the Legal Ombudsman's office, that there is a lot of 'blather mouthing' goes on by members of the Law Society (see Hegarty & Co own 'Client's Charter' rule 15 "We shall keep what you tell us confidential"), if Richard Hegarty used other members of the Law Society to get information on me can he be trusted not to pass clients information on to at least other solicitors, which could end up in the hands of other third parties. Can you afford to trust 'Hegarty & Co Solicitors'?

Confidentiality rule: Client details must be kept confidential (not even the client's identity may be disclosed without the client's consent)

Secondly, if you want to communicate with your QC you have to go via your solicitors and you have to make an appointment to see a Solicitor, Senior Partners refuse to see you and hear your complaints, the OSS take 18 months to reply to you also they and the Ombudsman will not address all of your complaints, Peter Williamson, the Law Society's President does not reply to your letters and Richard Hegarty, Chair of the Compliance Board (Rules Enforcer 'what a joke') first of all he ignored me and after I complained to the Deputy Vice President of the law Society he replies and calls me a "disgruntled complainant", and they believe they can just pick the 'phone up and talk to us 'Mere Mortals'. Well, 'Dickie' is of the opinion, as seems are all members of the Law Society, that they are 'God's Gift' to us 'Mere Mortals' and they believe when they snap their fingers we jump. After 10 years of these people who show little regard for members of the public, I no longer have any respect for them.

What did Richard Hegarty have to say, he believes my comments (13 and 17 September I assume) are "defamatory", may be he should write to me and explain just what he considers is "defamatory". As what I state is based on facts I can't see the problem or may be he doesn't like being called 'Dickie', well I don't like being ignored or being called a "disgruntled complainant". The conversation did not last very long before I put the 'phone down, which was very 'discourteous' of me. However if people are 'discourteous' to you then they should expect that you will be the same to them and unless they change their attitudes it will stay that way.

You may recall from my 'Preface' web page I stated a point about the 'establishment' ignoring individuals so making them 'ineffective' which seems to be the case when the Law Society want to cover up, not giving answers to complaints or don't want things to go any further. Why is Dickie trying to make me ineffective? That is because he knows, being the 'Rules Enforcer', because my solicitors never carried out the 'in-house complaints procedures' they are guilty of 'professional misconduct', see their own rules: -, he also knows as I have continually complained to the OSS the LSO, Zahida Manzoor, and now himself, which he has even used 'intimidation' to shut me up, is it likely that Gordon Luckhurst the Senior partner at Thos Boyd Whyte's is not the only member of the Law Society who is guilty of 'professional misconduct'.

Hegarty & Co Solicitors besides the Law Society's rules have their own 'Clients' Charter' which is very commendable. Richard Hegarty founded the firm of Hegarty & Co in 1974 and is the Senior Administrative Partner he is also the Chair of the Law Society's Compliance Board (Rules Enforcer). I wrote to him concerning the 'Client Care Agreement' that my solicitors refused to comply with and the OSS also the Legal Ombudsman applied the 'Ignore Rule', he himself called me a "disgruntled complainant" and also applied the 'Ignore Rule'. The point here is if Richard Hegarty doesn't like something in his own 'Clients Charter' will he apply the 'Ignore Rule' just as he has done with the 'Client Care Agreement' and refer to the client as a "disgruntled complainant"? May be there is a bit of Jeckyl and Hyde lurking in him.

My final thought is why did Richard Hegarty go to all that trouble of finding out my home 'phone number then 'phoning me from his office one hour after his offices had closed? A touch of 'intimidation' possible. A comment that was in the 'Consumer Association's' investigations stated "They tried to bully me with legal action for daring to complain". If you go to Hegarty & Co's Solicitors 'Introduction' web page at: - "" the bottom line reads, "The individuals we help come from all walks of life, and need our help in many different ways". Richard Hegarty while wearing his 'fire, hail and thunder' coat as the Law Society's 'Rule Enforcer' has resisted being any "help" at all. So if or when it came to the 'crunch' would 'Dickie' be any 'help' in 'enforcing' his own 'Clients' Charter'?

It appears Dickie told Aman Virk Manager,Quality & Service Standards of the OSS, the reason he collected my personal information was so he could discuss "Law Society business" so as to "address" with me an "issue" that I had "raised". The "issue" he "raised" on the 'phone concerned parts of this 'website' that were personally directed at him, so why did he ignore Law Society's rules concerning the collection, purpose and use of data? From this website he had direct e-mail contact with me plus he had my address so why did he violate the rules? Click here to see the "issue" that was "raised" Click here as Dickie got 'special rights'

Do you believe all members of the Law Society are honest? Then go to this web page: - and scroll down to the paragraph in red, it will probably change your mind.