Online legal advice attorney in Cape Town court again
17:50 / 9 JUN 2016
CAPE TOWN, June 9 (ANA) – A man who wanted free legal advice, after a used luxury car he bought turned out to be an insurance write-off, engaged the online Legal Advice Office, a court in Cape Town heard on Thursday.
Iain Orpen told the court he engaged in the LAO in the mistaken belief that the LAO was in fact a firm of attorneys.
He testified at the trial of Hugh Pollard, 64, an attorney whose name was struck from the Attorneys’ Roll some 13 years ago, who faces five counts of fraud.
He has pleaded not guilty to all the charges, in the Specialised Commercial Crime Court in Bellville, Cape Town, before magistrate Sabrina Sonnenberg.
Prosecutor Simone Liedeman alleges that Pollard continued to practice as an attorney, illegally, in the name of The Legal Advice Office.
According to the charge sheet, Orpen bought a 2001 model BMW X5 for R110 000, in April 2011.
When the car turned out to be a Code 3 vehicle (an insurance write-off), the seller agreed to buy the car back from Orpen, but failed to do so.
This led to Orpen’s search of the internet for online legal assistance, to enforce the agreement.
His internet search produced the LAO’s website, and he completed an application for assistance online.
He told the court: “The accused said I had a valid case but that I needed to move swiftly.
“He required the immediate payment of R1 500 for a letter-of-demand and, if the seller failed to respond, the next step would be a summons costing me an additional R7500.
“I paid the R1 500, and emailed to the accused the written document in which the seller had agreed to purchase the car back from me,” he said.
In fact, the agreement for the re-purchase of the car back from Orpen formed the very basis for Orpen’s action against the seller.
Orpen said he made several payments into the LAO’s trust account, totalling R20 000.
Later, Pollard informed him that the seller had filed a notice to defend the action, with a number of counter-allegations against Orpen.
Pollard said the counter-allegations meant that Orpen’s details of claim had to be changed, at extra cost.
Orpen added: “I did not want the summons re-drafted, and instructed the accused to proceed with the original summons.
“The accused said an application for summary judgment against the seller, would have to be filed at an additional cost of R8 000.”
When Orpen eventually had sight of his own details of claim, as filed by Pollard, there were a number of inaccuracies, and Orpen insisted that they be corrected in accordance with the written agreement that he had emailed to Pollard in the very beginning.
It turned out that Pollard had lost the email, Orpen said.
A dispute arose about this, in which Pollard claimed to have 35 years experience in civil litigation.
During cross-examination, defence attorney Eben Klue said nowhere in the LAO’s internet advertisements was it stated that the LAO was a firm of attorneys, or that Pollard was in fact practising as an attorney.
Orpen said he nevertheless gained the impression that the LAO was in fact a huge firm of attorneys.
He agreed that with each payment that he made, he received services for his money.
The case continues on Monday.
African News Agency