Derek Sands, partner at Rowlands Solicitors, is set to retire following a career that has spanned four decades.

Qualifying to practise law in 1965, he has worked for Manchester based firm, Rowlands Solicitors for 44 years. Holding a multitude of high profile appointments during his career, Sands was president of the Manchester Law Society in 1985/86. He is also one of only a few life members of Manchester Law Society and was on the Council of the Law Society, based in London from 1986 to 2000..

The acclaimed lawyer has acted on many high profile cases, including a £90 million pharmaceutical company sale.

Sands, partner at Rowlands, commented: "The British legal system has altered a great deal since I began practising in 1965, and working in the field has changed immeasurably. Practising law is very different these days – it is a lot more competitive and involves much longer hours. However, along with this comes opportunity to work on interesting cases and make a real difference, which for a lot of people in the profession more than makes up for the hard work.

"Manchester is a fantastic city to practise in law, with such a great mix of talent and expertise. Rowlands has been a fantastic firm to work for all these years and with some great legal minds. I have enjoyed working at the firm immensely."

Sands joined law firm Kirk Jackson in 1967 after qualifying as a Solicitor in 1965. The firm merged with as Rowlands in 2002.

People should make sure they inform their family when they draw up a will, an expert has said.

Speaking to the Baltimore Sun, US probate lawyer Steve Spitzer explained that Michael Jackson's death has revealed a number of advantages when it comes to making a will.

Firstly, the 50-year-old made a will, which is a vital step for anyone with young children, the legal expert said.

Secondly, by setting up a family trust, Jackson was able to divide up his estate as he chose, and ensure this process was kept out of the public eye.

However, the article also advised individuals to tell people about their wills. "For days after Jackson's death, it wasn't clear whether he had a will or, if he did, where it was." the writer noted.

Other lessons to be learned from Jackson's end-of-life planning included the benefits of informing the executor, or people named in your will, of where your will document is kept.

The advice comes after research by consumer body Which? found that more than a third (35 per cent) of Britons over the age of 65 thought they did not need to make a will.

Peter McCarthy, speaking on behalf of Which?, warned: "If you die without getting your affairs in order, your money, personal belongings and even your home could go to the person you least want to have them and your loved ones could lose out."

Philip Appleby of Rowlands Solicitors LLP adds: "Everyone should make a will to ensure that their estate passes in accordance with their wishes when they pass away, regardless of how simple they consider their affairs to be.

Once the will is prepared, family members and the intended executors should be informed of its existence and location. We also recommend registration with Certainty, a new national will register, to make sure that the will can be easily traced in the future."

Michael Jackson's death highlighted the importance of making a will to confirm which person parents would like to be the guardian of their children when they die.

Jackson's will, made in 2002, granted guardianship of his children to the singer's mother, Katherine, but his former wife Deborah Rowe – who is the mother of Jackson's two eldest children – is reportedly considering legal action to challenge for custody.

Simon Hughes, head of the Private Client Department at Rowlands Solicitors LLP, comments: "We recommend that everyone should make a Will but having a proper Will in place is particularly important where children are involved. You can appoint guardians to look after your children if the worst should happen and, also, set up trust arrangements to ensure that your children are provided for financially until they are sufficiently mature to handle things on their own".

Older drivers are more likely to drink and drive than younger motorists, a new RAC survey suggests.

Nearly one in three drivers aged 45 to 64 admitted to driving while potentially over the legal alcohol limit, compared to less than a quarter of 17 to 24-year-olds.

However, the study also found that more than 25% of 17 to 24-year-olds sometimes sent text messages when driving, while 5% said they frequently texted at the wheel.

One in four young motorists said they had been in a car when they believed the driver had taken drugs, while 10% of people aged 17 to 24 admitted driving while they themselves had been under the influence of drugs.

RAC motoring strategist Adrian Tink said: "This year's report clearly shows a generational divide among motorists as regards their vices. Younger drivers have many good habits that bode well for the future of motoring, but their attitude towards drug-driving is worrying."

Aidan Carr, senior partner at Rowlands, added: "Younger motorists – and, indeed, the general public – would benefit from clearer information on the effects of driving under the influence of drugs. This is not least because figures show that the number of fatal accidents involving drugs has increased by 28% in recent years.

"Organisations such as Alcohol Concern believe random breath tests are the only way to completely stop drink-driving. The government, though, is understandably reluctant to approve such a radical measure due to civil liberties issues and an anticipated backlash from sober drivers who would be inevitably stopped and tested."

For those with access to finance the current property market offers good potential for profitable investments an expert has suggested.

Kesh Thukaram, Managing Director of property website Smartlandlord.co.uk believes that despite the volatile economy there are landlords who don't need to rely on debt to expand their property portfolios.

On data published today in the Halifax House Price Index which revealed that house priced fell by 0.5 per cent in June, Mr Thukaram admitted that many landlords could be struggling in the private rented sector.

However, low prices are a blessing for potential investors, he continued.

"This is a perfect opportunity for them to invest in further properties while they offer the best value for money" Mr Thukaram said "They can secure good yields for the future while expanding their portfolios."

Landlords looking to cut costs to protect their investment were advised by the expert to consider managing properties themselves rather than paying fees to a letting agent.

The drop in house prices recorded by the Halifax House Price Index comes despite the latest data from Nationwide recording a 9.9 per cent gain.

Philip Bellamy, Head of the Property Department at Rowlands solicitors in Manchester said "Availability of funds is to the key to recovery. Investors with access to loans or with cash resources are beginning to return to the marketplace. However, they are tiptoeing rather than running and are driving hard bargains when they arrive."

Simon Rubinsohn, Chief Economist at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, said the discrepancy between the two surveys offers a "timely reminder" that the housing market has not necessary "bottomed out".

A Sheffield-based couple have lost their legal battle against a speeding fine after trying to dispute the camera's accuracy because it was set up on a bend in the road.

Vikki Fielden was backed by her husband Dr Iain Fielden, a physicist at Sheffield Hallam University, in challenging a speeding ticket she was awarded three years ago.

She was snapped travelling at 36mph in a 30mph zone in June 2006 and a High Court judge told her that her case was "doomed to fail".

Ms Fielden had argued that the camera's reading was inaccurate because it was placed on the far side of a road on a corner.

She said the camera's positioning breached guidelines and could give a wrong reading if the car deviated from a straight line.

Last year a judge at Bradford Crown Court rejected their appeal, leaving the couple with a £15,000 legal bill.

Aidan Carr, partner at Rowlands, who specialises in motoring cases, commented: "This case illustrates how important it is to obtain professional, impartial advice about the merits of the case and also the likely costs involved.

It is an important part of a lawyer's task to advise both when there is defence to an allegation and when a case has no merits".

Hundreds of thousands of motorists caught speeding might be able to claw back points they lost on their driver's licence and penalty fines they were charged – because police distributed the tickets illegally.

The blunder involved an employee at Essex Police who has been sending out penalty letters to motorists caught speeding without authorisation from a Chief Constable, which is a requirement under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

Reports have suggested that the blunder could lead to compensation claims worth a total of up to £50 million from drivers who have received the notices over the past four years.

However, Donna Veasey, a spokeswoman for the force, said: "It should be stressed that even if this does prove to be an issue it would only affect a proportion of cases where the person went to magistrates' court since March 2007.

"It would not affect the vast majority of the cases the bureau deals with, including fixed penalty notices or taking part in the driver improvement scheme, rider improvement scheme or speed awareness course."

Aidan Carr, partner at Rowlands who specialises in motoring cases comments: "Sometimes cases can be won on technicalities – so called 'loopholes' – but this requires specialist knowledge of procedures.

Motorists can lose their jobs and sometimes their houses if disqualified and so it is important to consult a solicitor at the earliest opportunity".

The government's review of the default retirement age is being brought forward to 2010 – 12 months earlier than scheduled.

Ministers have revised the timetable as a result of the 'change in economic circumstances' since the default retirement age was introduced.

The report, Building a society for all ages, indicates that the government has started its consultation process with stakeholders and is collecting evidence that will be used to determine the outcome of the review.

Commenting on the announcement, William O'Neill Partner at Rowlands Solicitors said: "Any changes to the default retirement age are expected to be introduced in 2011 to enable employers time to prepare and employees to assess their options for retirement".

The government's Age Positive policy, an initiative that aims to works with employers to encourage retaining and recruiting older workers, is to be expanded to allow more employers to give staff greater choice over retirement.

In his foreword to Building a society for all ages, the prime minister, Gordon Brown, said: "For the first time in our history, there are more pensioners than there are children under the age of 16.

"Evidence suggests that allowing older people to continue working could be a big factor in the success of Britain's businesses and our future economic growth."

Mr Brown added: "The scale and complexity of the challenge should not be underestimated, but I have no doubt that we should view these demographic changes as an opportunity rather than as a threat".

Bosses at a Bristol water purifier firm taunted a lesbian couple at work by labelling their behaviour as "disgusting", an Employment Tribunal heard.

Saleswomen Beth Moules and Sharleen Amos, both 25, complained about sexual harassment from their bosses at Aquatec Rainsoft, but were told to stop because "lesbians never had and never would suffer in the way that Jews had".

Miss Amos, who was fired, was awarded £5,000 for unfair dismissal after arranging an out-of-court settlement with the firm.

But Miss Moules, who resigned and claimed for constructive dismissal, was awarded £7,142.30 for unfair dismissal by a panel at the tribunal.

In addition, Aquatec Rainsoft was instructed to pay each woman £5,000 as compensation for sex discrimination and hurt feelings.

The ruling comes after Jaine Telling, a 41-year-old from Moredon, won £50,000 after suing a former employer for sex discrimination, harassment and unfair dismissal, because she was "made to feel inferior" and received constant "digs and stick" from male colleagues while she worked as a lorry driver, the Swindon Advertiser reported.

William O'Neill Head of the Litigation Department at Rowlands said: "In today's society, where so much emphasis is placed on promoting equality and diversity, any outward expressions of homophobia in the workplace is totally unacceptable and in some cases can amount to sexual discrimination or harassment."

"A person subjects a woman to harassment if, for a reason related to a person's sex, he engages in unwanted conduct that has the purpose or effect:

1. of violating her dignity, or
2. of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for her."

This conduct does not have to be physical but can be verbal e.g. by way of comments, jokes and remarks, as in the above case or can be non-verbal such as staring, emails or images.

Whether the conduct is unwanted or not is a subjective test, therefore it only matters how the conduct is interpreted by the victim and it is irrelevant if another person placed in the same situation would not have been offended by it.

Neither is it necessary to show that the employer intended to harass the victim, so long as the victim themselves feels harassed.

This means that Employers are well advised to take extra caution as to what they say in the workplace, even if comments are intended to be made in a light hearted manner, as if faced with an over sensitive employee, they could find themselves presented with harassment claims.

A recent article written by one of the UK's most respected pensions commentators Colin Jelley of Skandia life suggests that the writing could be on the wall for higher rate tax relief on pensions as part of the governments bid to recoup the huge sums it has spent propping up the ailing economy.

Ron Walker, Managing Partner of Rowlands Wealth Management says "The government has to get the money from somewhere and cutting pensions tax relief would certainly be consistent with their track record of raising taxes by stealth. Higher rate taxpayers should consider maximising their pension contributions now while the top rate tax relief is still available."

You can read Colin Jelley's article here: http://www.ifaonline.co.uk

About 100,000 employment tribunal cases a year are attributable to payroll disputes, a study has shown.

Employment Law Advisory Services (ELAS) found that complicated payrolls, a "blizzard" of wage regulations, and unauthorised deductions from pay were behind many of the distributes.

The survey of 2,000 businesses in the retail sector also revealed that 1,000 tribunals result from employees not being given regular payslips from their bosses.

Some 98,806 tribunals in the 12 months up to March 31st 2008 were pay-related disputes. This was double the number of unfair dismissal cases and four times the number of sex discrimination cases.

ELAS spokeswoman Annabel Dawkins said: "Businesses sometimes get overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of handling workers' pay.

"Our research showed that small and medium-sized firms in particular can get fazed by the laws and regulations impacting on pay, and how they apply to their workforce."

Smaller businesses said they needed specialist legal help to cope given the "potentially disastrous consequences of getting an employee's pay even slightly wrong", Ms Dawkins added.

An engineer who lost his right shoulder in a roadside bomb explosion in Iraq has brought his landmark claim for damages against the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

Graham Hopps, 45, from Whitkirk, Leeds, is suing the MoD and his former employer Mott Macdonald for failing to provide better-armoured vehicles for transport men working in Iraq. Both the MoD and Mott Macdonald deny liability for the incident.

Mr Hopps' arm and shoulder was shattered, and another passenger was fatally injured when the Land Rover in which they were travelling in was attacked on a road known as "bomb alley".

"I could smell cordite and was aware of extreme pain in my right shoulder and arm," Mr Hopps said. "It appeared that my right arm was hanging off and I was very frightened."

Should Mr Hopps win the case, other civilians injured in warzones could be able to sue their employers.

Indeed, families of military victims have recently brought legal action against the MoD for providing lightly armoured Snatch Land Rovers for use by servicemen, despite the vulnerability of the vehicle's body armouring to roadside bombs.

Speedy repossession proceedings against buy-to-let property owners have been criticised by the National Landlords Association (NLA).

David Salusbury, Chairman of the NLA, the professional body which represents the interests of private residential landlords, claims landlords should be given the opportunity to manage their financial problems.

Mr Salusbury said 44 per cent of landlords experienced some form of rental arrears in the six months to March 2009 and admitted that the recession has claimed a growing but small number of buy-to-let investors.

However, the rental sector is making an "ever-more important contribution to the overall housing mix", he argued.

"The UK needs a strong rental sector and this article makes a clear case for offering landlords sufficient space to try and deal with their financial problems," Mr Salusbury said.

"By moving quickly to repossess properties owned by buy-to-let borrowers, the problems of pressure on social housing and increased homelessness will not go away." he added.

According to data for the second quarter of 2009 published by the Association of Residential Lettings Agents, some 50 per cent of the body's membership agreed that dramatic interest rate cuts from the Bank of England last year are "tempting investor landlords back into the market because of the minimal interest to saving rates".

A workplace accident left a man with serious brain damage and years of suffering from verbal aggression, poor memory and reduced concentration, London's High Court heard.

Idris Smith, 57, of Parc Afon in Rhondda, south Wales, fell into a skip in August 2004 while at work at LC Window Fashions Ltd, the Press Association reports.

His employers admitted liability, but distributed the amount of compensation they would award him.

But Mr Smith was today awarded over £1 million damages after the High Court ruled that he was entitled to full compensation for loss of future earnings up to the age of 65.

Earlier this month, a 61-year-old man pursued a successful personal injury claim after a motor accident left him with long-term back and neck pain caused by a trapped nerve in his spine.

The man received £50,000 compensation after he was forced to give up his job because of the injuries he sustained while driving his car in December 2004; another motorist crashed into the back of his vehicle.

A celebrity has challenged the media's right to report on family court cases by demanding a blanket ban to block journalists from attending to protect the privacy of children involved in the proceedings.

The Guardian reports that a man of "celebrity status and a highly-publicised lifestyle" has challenged rules introduced in April that opened the family courts to the media – a move intended to promote a culture of "openness" in the legal system.

It comes after Earl Spencer and his estranged wife Caroline agreed to settle their divorce case out of court last week to avoid publicity.

Their decision followed Mr Justice Munby's decision in the High Court to reject the couple's demands to exclude reporters from their final private hearing.

Lord Spencer, who was previously married to Victoria Lockwood, has two children with Caroline.

Mr Justice Mundy described their decision to settle the hearing out of court as "an attempt to circumvent the procedure laid down in the new rules".

Male drivers pay £289 more each year for their car insurance than women because they are more likely to be involved in motor accidents, a study has found.

Research by price comparison website moneysupermarket.com found that in 2008, the average annual motor insurance premium paid by men was £743; women paid £454.

The average 18-year-old male is charged £2,200 for an annual policy, but this falls to £997 by the time he reaches the age of 20 - if the driver is not involved in an accident.

Steve Sweeney, Head of Home and Motor Insurance at moneysupermarket.com, said: "It's clearly careless versus cautious as the motor insurance battle of the sexes lives on, and it is shocking to see the extent of the extra cost [£17,000] to a male driver for a lifetime of being behind the wheel."

He added that the Equality Bill, which came into force in April, has not stopped insurers from using age and sex as a factor in calculating premiums.

John Hesketh – consultant in RTA Department at Rowlands said "The brutal fact is that the leading cause of death for under 25-year-old males is a car crash, the leading cause of death for under 25-year-old females, is being a passenger in a car which is being driven by a male under the age of 25 years. The insurance companies are simply acknowledging that fact when they set their premiums in the way that they do. That is why you have insurance companies which will only ensure female drivers, statistically, they have far fewer accidents than men and when they do have them, they are less severe in nature. Generally speaking the male of the species is more willing to take a risk, the female is more risk averse."

Last year the number of people killed and seriously injured in motor accidents fell to record lows of 2,538 and 269,029 respectively - but child deaths rose from 121 to 124, according to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.

The financial legacy of Michael Jackson, who died last week aged 50, will be made public once probate is granted – if the legendary singer made a will, an expert has said.

However, this will not be the case if the King of Pop established a trust during his lifetime, international inheritance expert Fernando Gandioloi told the Times.

If Jackson did not make a will then, providing he has no legal wife, his wealth will be inherited by his three children: Michael Jospeh Jackson Jr, 12; Paris Michael Katherine Jackson, 11; and Prince Michael II, 7.

There is huge speculation about the potential for a protracted legal battle over Jackson's business and music empire.

The Thriller star reportedly had debts of $400 million (£242 million) when he died, and the release of the contents of his will – if he made one – should indicate how his estate will be divided.

Jackson may have taken out a life insurance policy or transferred assets into a trust to protect some of his estate from creditors and manage the inheritance of his wealth among his children.

Although Jackson's extravagant behaviour led him to be branded 'Wacko Jacko', the entertainer made a shrewd investment in 1985 by buying ATV Music Publishing, which owned the Beatles' back catalogue, for $47.5 million.

His financial trust sold 50 per cent to Sony for $150 million ten years later, but Jackson's share at present is estimated to be worth $2 billion.

This weekend, Jackson's 2003 Number Ones album went to number one in the album charts and set a new record for fastest sales in one day.

Gennaro Cataldo, spokesman for music retailer HMV, said: "The demand for Michael Jackson hits has just been phenomenal – even more than when Elvis, John Lennon and Freddie Mercury died."

Philip Appleby of Rowlands Solicitors LLP comments "Michael Jackson's sudden tragic death shows us all the importance of making a will, especially if there are children involved. If no will is left then the Court decides who is to look after any children, so we would strongly recommend that anyone with a young family makes a will to ensure that appropriate guardians are nominated. Trusts can also be set up to make appropriate financial provision for children as they grow older."

Pre-nuptial agreements could become legally enforceable in this country following a groundbreaking court ruling.

German heiress Katrin Radmacher has reversed a previous court decision to award her former husband, Nicolas Granatino, £5.8m of her £100m fortune, regardless of their contract.

Mr Granatino, who is French, had agreed not to claim if the couple divorced. 'Pre-nups' are binding in France and Germany where the couple signed their contract, but not in England where they were married.

The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Miss Radmacher that pre-nup agreements should be taken into account when marital assets are divided.

It is expected that Mr Granatino will apply for permission to take his case to the House of Lords.

Commenting on the Court of Appeal ruling, Alex Mattur at Rowlands, said: "This judgment from three senior judges has wide-ranging implications for divorce cases involving wealthy individuals in England and Wales. It suggests that that pre-nuptial contracts will carry significant weight and influence the judge when the court is asked to determine how the parties' assets are shared."

The couple's pre-nuptial agreement was signed in Germany before the couple married in London in 1998. They divorced in 2006 and a High Court ruling last year awarded Mr Granatino £5.8m.

Miss Radmacher's counsel, Richard Todd QC, told the Court of Appeal that the freedom to agree a contract was "at the heart of all modern commercial and legal systems".

He added that Miss Radmacher had never said her former husband would leave the marriage with nothing. The Court of Appeal judges ruled that Mr Granatino's settlement of £5.8m should be cut to £1m in lieu of maintenance. Mr Granatino's debts, of about £700,000, are also to be paid off by the heiress, who had always agreed to this part of the settlement.

The Court of Appeal has rejected a woman's attempt to obtain more money from her former husband after a four-fold rise in the value of his shares in a company.

Kim Walkden, aged 47, had sought a higher maintenance payment from her former husband, Martin, as a result of the profit he made from the sale of the business, of which he was a major shareholder.

The case throws into reverse a number of credit crunch-related cases where former husbands have tried to have their payments cut because of economic difficulties.

In an earlier settlement, Mrs Walkden had received a £225,000 lump sum, based on an £800,000 valuation of her ex-husband's company in 2006 when the couple were divorced.

In August 2007 the timber company, Triesse, was sold for more than £3.7 million.

At York County Court last June, Mrs Walkden was given permission to reopen the divorce case after her lawyers submitted that the company sale meant her husband received 82 per cent of the couple's assets while she received 18 per cent.

However, Mr Walkden, aged 47, won his appeal because the Court of Appeal ruled that his situation was no different from that of the tycoon Brian Myerson whose divorce settlement was not altered despite the collapse of his assets following the fiancial crisis.

Lord Justice Thorpe, sitting with Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Elias at the Court of Appeal, said that Mr and Mrs Walkden had reached a compromise agreement out of court. He said he had handed down his judgment because the issues in the case were of "general importance".

Gail Cartwright at Rowlands, commented: "Lord Justice Thorpe was entiely correct when he said that both parties would have been aware of the variable value of the shareholding when the original settlement was agreed in January 2007. The case underscores the transient and unpredictable nature of business valuations as part of divorce settlements, especially in the current climate of economic uncertainty and financial volatility."

More than 1,100 fatal accidents in Lancashire workplaces last year has done nothing to stem the rise in personal injury compensation claims against employers.

The figures have prompted specialist personal injury lawyer Gino Sonczak to warn regional businesses that they must improve their safety record or pay a hefty price in fines and compensation.

"In an initiative by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) last year, enforcement action was undertaken in 103 cases of the 187 safety inspections carried out at construction sites," said Gino Personal Injury Executive at Rowlands.

"This disregard for safe working practices was further highlighted by a recent blitz by the HSE at construction sites in Cheshire, where nearly 40% faced legal action for flouting health and safety rules. This is despite a high profile awareness campaign by the HSE warning of the dangers of working in this industry."

In response to the disturbing trend the HSE has set up a website, Shattered Lives, which highlights the problems of workplace safety in the UK and aims to educate employers and staff on preventing injuries.

"Frustratingly, most workplace accidents are avoidable by ensuring that straightforward safety procedures are adhered to, coupled with employee training and awareness," commented Gino. "In the inspections it was found that over half the notices were issued because of unsafe work at height, with the remainder dealing with the welfare of workers, faulty equipment and general maintenance on sites."

Gino continued: "In the current economic climate it is perhaps not surprising that the number of accidents has risen as employers look to cut costs wherever possible - sometimes by ignoring safety rules.

"Before the recession less than a quarter of those injured made claims, valuing loyalty to employers and colleagues who may ultimately have been responsible, above compensation. However, the lack of job security or redundancy has led to a change in attitude, especially when it is realised that a claim can be made up to three years after the accident."

Gino added: "Statistics clearly show that saving time or money by ignoring safety rules is quite simply not worth the risk when compared against the consequence of a serious injury at work. I would urge every employer to ensure that all health and safety guidelines are followed in detail.

"Employers who fail to adhere to safety rules may find themselves subject to a snap inspection by the HSE and then burdened not only with the cost of remedying a breach of safety but also a substantial fine. This would be in addition to any claim made by an injured employee. Surely prevention is better than cure."

Employees who lose holiday pay while on sick leave will be allowed to claim compensation for unauthorised deduction from their wages following a new House of Lords ruling.

The decision was in response to an earlier European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgment that employees are entitled to paid holiday for their whole period of absence and can take this when they return, or accept payment in lieu if their employment ends.

The House of Lords had to decide how the ECJ judgment would fit in with UK legislation in light of the Working Time Regulations that say employees lose any holiday entitlement that is not taken within 12 months.

The House of Lords resolved the issue by ruling that the ECJ judgment overrides the Working Time Regulations.

"Employers will clearly want to know the how the ruling will affect them," said Latham Parry, Associate Solicitor at Rowlands. "Organisations with staff on long term sick leave should let them accrue at least the four weeks statutory holiday stipulated by the Working Time Directive.

"Staff should then be given a choice, either to specify a period of absence to be considered as holiday, for which they will receive holiday pay; or to carry forward any holiday owed from one leave year to another. If this has not been taken before the end of their employment, they must be paid in lieu.

" As a result, businesses with staff on long term sick leave face major cost implications.

"Employees can now benefit from the more generous time limits applying to unlawful deduction claims," explained Latham Parry.

"Working Time Regulations say that a claim can be back-dated no more than three months. However, the new ruling means that a worker can go back much further with an unlawful deduction claim, if the employer has failed to make holiday payments on a number of occasions and the claim is made within three months of the most recent failure.

" In a worst case scenario for employers, employees can now take holidays for many years, which they were not previously allowed, or claim payments if their request is turned down.

Latham Parry added: "The immediate upshot of this judgment is that the cost of continuing to employ people on long term sick leave will rise considerably. Nonetheless, employers should avoid dismissing staff in this category unless they have taken professional legal advice, because case law imposes substantial limitations on such action."

The vast majority of consumers are sceptical about the quality of legal services provided by supermarkets and banks, according to a major survey.

Some 69% of respondents in a study carried out for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) said they would be concerned about the quality of services offered by these organisations.

The survey additionally showed that 83% of people who had used a solicitor in the last five years were satisfied with the service. Complaints about solicitors' services were most frequently taken up with the Citizens' Advice Bureau. Some 51% did not know who was responsible for regulating solicitors, with 19% believing this was a government function. Only 9% identified the SRA.

Commenting on the findings, Jon Andrews, Joint Managing Partner at Rowlands, said: "I'm not surprised that people are concerned about the quality of legal services provide by supermarkets and banks.

"Our firm, like many others, has a tradition of relationship-based service stretching back more than 100 years, with many longstanding clients who recognise that our relationship is long-term and personal, not short-term and transactional. A firm's reputation is hard-won through its expertise and diligence over an extensive period. Reputation should not be seen as a pre-packed item and consumers are correctly wary of the Tesco Law concept."

Jon added: "The survey also indicates that the SRA needs to do more to promote itself in the public consciousness. It is a regulatory body that fulfils a very important role and it's essential if the public is to have confidence in our legal services system that the SRA's activities are more widely recognised and understood."

A young mother is taking her case to the European Court of Human Rights after being stopped from seeing her three-year-old daughter because UK courts ruled she was not intelligent enough to care for the child.

The woman, who can be identified only by her first name, Rachel, for legal reasons, learned from a family court that her daughter is to be adopted in the next three months, after which all contact will cease.

Her case was taken over by the official solicitor who was brought in to represent Rachel's interests because she was judged to be intellectually unable to instruct her own solicitor. The official solicitor did not contest Nottingham City Council's adoption application, in spite of Rachel's wishes.

Adoption order was granted regardless of a subsequent psychiatric opinion that Rachel, aged 24, has the mental capacity to understand the legal process.

"Rachel's little girl, K, was born prematurely and the city council believed Rachel was not capable of managing her demanding medical requirements. However, Baby K has been released from hospital and is now with a foster family," said Tony Broadley, Joint Managing Partner and a family law specialist at Rowlands.

Rachel has lodged an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights, which has the power to quash the adoption. In addition she has applied for a judicial review of the adoption order.

Tony added: "There are aspects of this case that are not in the public domain, so it's important to avoid a knee-jerk reaction based solely on the newspaper reports we have seen recently.

"Nonetheless, the system of appointing the official solicitor - which is at the heart of this case - is regarded by many family law professionals as a broadly paternalistic approach and a review of all the relevant facts is to be welcomed."

"The mother of Baby P and two men are due to appear at the Old Bailey today to be sentenced over his death.

The uncomfortable truth is that there are many adults out there preying upon vulnerable children and that stiff sentencing is all well and good, but by then the damage has been done and children have been killed or traumatised for life.

The only positive aspect of this horrifying case is that child abuse and the role of social services has been brought under the spotlight and we should hopefully see some reforms to the system that ensure children like Baby P don't slip through the net again.

Many may feel that if the Baby P abusers are sent down for life then justice will have been served, but the fact of the matter is that if our social services were functioning properly then it would never have come this far. People have been quick to point the finger of blame at Haringey Council over this tragic situation but it is clear that our social services are in crisis and social workers are underpaid, overworked and undervalued.

If we want to avoid another case like this then we need to look harder at how we are failing our children within the system.We need to properly fund the agencies that protect our children. Is that not a good use of public money?"

Comment from Tony Broadley, Head of Family at Manchester based law firm, Rowlands, on today's sentencing for Baby P abusers

Allegations that grieving customers of Co-operative Funeralcare are being ‘cold-called' by the group's legal services division are being investigated by the Law Society.

Its wills and equity committee is looking into claims that the Co-operative's legal services department has been offering free advice about probate to recently bereaved families.

The Co-operative denies cold-calling, insisting that most customers are happy to receive free legal advice, and where this is not the case they can simply inform the funeral director.

Wills and equity committee committee chair, Helen Clarke, commented: "We have one example of a client who said they did not want legal advice being rung back and offered it. That's not acceptable."

Tony Broadley Joint Managing Partner of Rowlands, said: "It is important to protect people when they are emotionally vulnerable. Losing a loved one means family members are not always in the best position to make important financial decisions and pressure should not be put on them in any shape or form.

"Over the years the Co-operative has put a huge effort into building a strong reputation for its principled approach to business across the gamut of its commercial activities, and it would be a great shame if this much-deserved and hard-won reputation was damaged."

The Court of Appeal has upheld a 21 month prison sentence imposed on a driver who exchanging more than 20 text messages before crashing into and killing another motorist. The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, Mr Justice Lloyd-Jones and Mr Justice Wyn Williams ruled that the jail term should not be varied after the Attorney General had referred the sentence as unduly lenient.

Curtis, aged 21, was driving at 70mph when she smashed into the back of a stationary car in November 2007. Phone records showed she had sent several text messages to friends while at the wheel, as well as calling her boyfriend and a taxi firm shortly before the collision in which Victoria McBryde was killed.

Miss McBryde, aged 24, had pulled over because of a flat tyre. She died at the scene. Curtis admitted using her phone during the journey but evidence showed that she had not been using the phone when the collision happened.

The Attorney General submitted that the sentence was unduly lenient as Curtis had been using her mobile phone to call, read, receive and write text messages while travelling at high speed during the journey.

Aidan Carr, a partner at Rowlands who regularly defends motoring prosections commented: "The length of sentence was upheld by the Court of Appeal, although the Attorney General had considered the jail term in this case to be unduly lenient. There is mounting public pressure for harsher sentences in situations where using mobile phones whilst driving has contributed to a road accident."

Aidan Carr added: "The Police and Crown Prosecution Service are taking an increasingly harder stance on the use of hand held mobile phones whilst driving – they are regarded as an aggravating feature which can mean the difference between facing a charge of driving without due care and attention and one of dangerous driving. The Police routinely now seize mobile phones following a road traffic accident to investigate whether the driver was using the phone before or at the time of the accident."

Regulations that will see agency workers given the same rights on pay and conditions as permanent staff have gone out to consultation.

The new rules have been the subject of negotiation between the government, employers' groups and the unions.

Under the EU Agency Workers Directive, temporary staff will receive the pay and conditions entitlements after working for 12 weeks in a given job.

Employers will also be prevented from releasing staff after 11 weeks and then re-employing them as a way of circumventing the regulations.

It is thought the legislation will be passed at some point this year, although the government will have until December 2011 to bring the new rules into force.

Pat McFadden, the employment relations minister, said: "The government is determined to ensure that people get a fair deal at work, including the agency workers who play a vital role in the UK economy.".

Business organisations expressed concerns that the new rules should not hamper economic recovery or limit the flexibility of the UK's labour market.

John Cridland, the CBI's deputy-director general, said: "Although this directive has been agreed in Brussels, there are still lots of questions that remain about how it will be implemented in the UK."

"It would be a nonsense to introduce redundancy rights in a company where agency staff work but are not employed. Agency working is important for the UK economy and we mustn't undermine it with clumsy regulation."

Kieran O'Keeffe, who is head of European Representation at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), urged delay in implementing the regulations: "The success of the UK economy over recent years has been down to our flexible labour market. While the economy is weak this is not the time to further reduce flexibility."

"Implementation of this directive should be delayed until the last possible date. The government's priority should be to honour their commitment to move a million people back into work and they must make sure this directive does not undermine that."

Kevin Green, chief executive of the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), argued that care should be taken to ensure the legislation is workable.

Mr Green said: "The stakes are extremely high for business, the £22 billion temp market and for the employment landscape in the UK.

"A poorly drafted and unhelpful implementation of the EU Directive could unleash a regulatory wrecking-ball through the UK's jobs market. Over a million temporary and contract workers are on assignment each week, and it is crucial to ensure that the equal treatment measures do not reduce employment opportunities.

"After what has essentially been a political debate in Brussels, it is time look at the practicalities of making the directive work in the UK." The REC has put forward a series of recommendations that, it says, would improve the application of the new laws.

Specifically, the REC wants the scope of equal treatment limited to basic salary and other basic statutory rights. The 12-week qualifying period should be made easier to administer too, and the provision of the directive should be limited to individual workers.

Introducing the changes, the REC added, must be put back until October 2011.

Responses to the consultation must be submitted by 31 July 2009. More details are available at http://www.berr.gov.uk/

Businesses employing more than 250 people must make figures showing average hourly rates paid to male and female employees publicly available under the new Equalities Bill.

From 2013 employers will have to publish details of average pay for men and women.

The Bill will also make it illegal for businesses to use ‘gagging clauses' that stop employees from disclosing information about their pay.

The Bill is expected to enter the statute books early next year and represents an ambitious attempt to reform about 100 items of equality legislation.

Public bodies must take action against discrimination on social background, and employers can select a candidate from an under-represented group if faced with choosing between two equally matched candidates, without risking a discrimination action. Positive discrimination which means less suitable candidates are offered jobs because they come from a minority group, will retain its current illegal status.

The Bill will also outlaw age discrimination when providing goods and services which means that travel insurance, for instance, must reflect the cost of risks rather than age categorisation.

Commenting on gender wage transparency, William O'Neill, of Rowlands, said: "The greater clarity and streamlining that the Equality Bill aims to deliver are welcome. Modern businesses in a competitive and increasingly global marketplace will benefit from broader diversity and transparency at senior levels, and unambiguous guidance on new positive action proposals will be of some assistance."

William O'Neill added: "However, we are less enthusiastic about the proposal to make pay audits compulsory by 2013. Forcing businesses to publish their average female and male pay might appear reasonable, but the way to tackle the gender pay gap is not by comparing potentially misleading average pay rates, but by improving opportunities for women through better childcare and careers advice."

Alistair Darling's recent budget brought bad news for high earners with income tax to be levied at 50% on those with incomes above £150,000 but at least this budget, unlike Labour's previous few budgets, left the Inheritance Tax (IHT) rules largely unchanged.

In line with long-standing commitments by the government, the IHT nil-rate band from 6th April 2009 has risen from £312,000 to £325.000, while the newly introduced transferable nil-rate band means that married couples can leave a combined total of £650,000 without their heirs having to pay IHT. Coupled with these changes, the fact that house price inflation is on hold means that when it comes to death duties, there are some good opportunities to save tax.

Simon Hughes at Rowlands, said: "In fact, the current depressed economic conditions make it the perfect time to reassess personal tax planning, particularly when it comes to IHT. Married couples can look to gift £325,000 each into lifetime trusts before they die. As long as they then survive for seven years, the nil-rate allowances will be reinstated thereby enabling the family home to pass down tax free to the children, provided the value of the home falls within the combined threshold available to married couples. At the same time, the assets held by the lifetime trusts should all fall outside of the IHT net provided the trusts have been set up in a way that avoids the gift with reservation rules. So, with careful planning, up to £1.3 million can be passed down to the next generation without IHT at 40% ending up in the Chancellor's pockets. The important point is to act now to set the seven year period running."

If you would like help in relation to saving IHT or any other issue please contact Rowlands.

Manchester based Rowlands solicitors has launched a wealth management service, Rowlands Wealth Management, a joint venture between the law firm and Clarion plc.

Rowlands Wealth Management has been established to provide financial planning and investment management advice to Rowlands clients.

Jon Andrews, joint managing partner at Rowlands Solicitors commented: "Rowlands Wealth Management significantly enhances the scope of the expertise on offer, providing clients with a much more comprehensive service.

"This is a major new initiative for us, at a time when most firms are scaling down operations, not investing time and money into ambitious new ventures such as this."

Ron Walker, managing director at Clarion plc said: "The current economy has cast a new light on many individuals' wealth management provisions and has encouraged them to either seek advice for the first time or refresh their existing plans.

"Clarion is delighted to be involved in the establishment of Rowlands Wealth Management and is looking forward to developing the service in partnership with Rowlands."

We can now register your Will for you and if it was written with us prior to the 1st July 2008 it's FREE!

After this date there may be a small registration charge.

Why should I register my Will?
If your Will is deemed lost or indeed never written your loved ones and benefactors are exposed to potential financial loss and obviously additional stress.

We hold your Will safely, but we digitally record its location on the Wills register so that benefactors can always locate it when the time comes.

It is a fact that the majority of people (67% in a recent survey) would not know where to locate parents Wills. The passage of time, house moves, and new relationships are all contributing factors to this statistic.

How Do I Register?
Simply call, write or contact us via the enquiry form to request that we register your Will today!

Large numbers of staff absences is certainly an unwelcome interruption for employers in times of a recession.

Should a swine flu pandemic escalate it is predicted that the absence of a quarter of the British workforce could cost the economy about £1.5billion per day.

Under Health and Safety legislation Employers have a duty to their employees to carry out regular risk assessments to assess the risk to their employee's health and safety.

Should the threat of a pandemic materialise, employers should conduct these risk assessments and consider how to minimise the frequency and duration of their employees' contact with members of the public wherever possible.

Be it by facilitating online communications and transactions, video-links, teleconferencing or permitting employees to work from home.

Employers should ensure that offices have good personal hygiene measures in place providing hand sanitizer and clean tissue, ensuring the effective and prompt disposal of waste. They could even consider requiring their employees to wear face masks.

Finally employers should circulate advice to employees over what symptoms to look out for, advise them to stay at home if they present with symptoms and encourage them to seek medical advice at the earliest opportunity.

Employers will no doubt be faced with the predicament of balancing the need to have a full workforce in operation due to economic pressures with the need to ensure that potentially infected staff members take the necessary time off work so as to not pass it on to other employees, causing further absences.

By Charlotte Taylor Civil Litigation Department
Rowlands Solicitors

With both UK and EU businesses now facing far more challenging circumstances than they have become accustomed to in recent years, Rowlands Solicitors is highlighting the importance of shareholders' agreements in preventing disputes between shareholders.

It is very common for companies to be acquired 'off the shelf' and, in their enthusiasm to get the business up and running and money coming in, the shareholders often give little or no thought to the relationships between them or the constitution of the company. In the present economic climate where the pressures facing business owners make disputes all the more likely, failure to put in place an appropriate shareholders' agreement could prove an enormous oversight.

Paul Matthews, partner and head of the Commercial Team at Rowlands Solicitors, commented: "By establishing a shareholders' agreement, companies can avoid or at least contain issues that could otherwise develop into full blown disputes. The agreement typically covers matters such as ensuring that minority shareholders are appropriately protected, putting in place a deadlock resolution procedure and setting out appropriate procedures for and restrictions on the transfer of shares. With the UK and many EU countries approaching or already in recession, the last thing business owners need is to be dealing with stressful disputes, when they could be devoting their time and energy into cementing the ongoing health of the company."

There are many costly, emotionally strenuous and time consuming situations that companies and their shareholders find themselves in, which can be prevented by ensuring that an appropriately drafted shareholders' agreement is in place.

Rowlands' guidelines on provisions that should be included in any shareholders' agreement:

Protection for minority shareholders
The shareholders' agreement should provide adequate protection for minority shareholders with a significant stake in the business. It is common for a participant who has fallen out with the others to become very marginalised. This may lead to their removal from their office as a director and consequent exclusion from the day-to-day management of the company.

Voting Provisions
The agreement should lay down circumstances where a simple majority vote is not considered adequate, such as on borrowing a significant sum of money.

Deadlock resolution
The agreement should establish an appropriate deadlock resolution procedure.

Buying shares of fellow participant
The contract may provide the continuing participants with the right to buy the shares of a participant who has ceased to be actively involved in the company, avoiding the undesirable situation of having to deal with shareholders who no longer play any role in the company.

Dividend policy
A dividend policy should be included to avoid disagreements when it comes to deciding what to do with yearly profits.

Sale of the business
The agreement may detail a procedure for dealing with a situation where a minority shareholder wants to block a sale of the company, which the majority wish to progress.

Transfer of shares
Appropriate provisions should be established in relation to the transfer of shares. It is essential that restrictions apply so that outgoing shareholders cannot transfer their shares to whoever they choose, contrary to the wishes of ongoing participants. However, it is equally inappropriate to limit any transfer to approval by directors – this could result in a situation where it is impossible for a shareholder wanting to sell their shares to do so.

As we have seen from recent press reports, the Danish government has awarded compensation to around 40 women who have developed breast cancer after working long spells of night shift.
 
Firstly, the UK government does not provide any such state compensation fund and until it does then employees will have to pursue claims against their employers. At present, the decision of the Dutch government has no impact on the British legal system.
 
It needs to be determined whether there is a medical link between developing cancer and working long hours and nightshifts. We can only welcome the forthcoming HSE epidemiologist report. which has been commissioned to deal with this issue.
 
If such a link is found to exist, then employees will have to bring claims similar to those which have been brought over the years where workers have suffered disease or illness following exposure at work to noxious substances such as asbestos.
 
Over the last 10 years, the civil courts have seen an increase in compensation claims for industrial disease, instigated by employees who have developed asbestos related diseases such as asbestosis, or in the worst cases Mesothelioma, a form of Cancer. These claims are being brought against former employers of up to 20 years ago or more (or often their insurer), as although the dangers of working with asbestos were known as early as the 1960s and 1970s, some employers did little to protect their employees from such dangers.
 
These industrial disease claimants have been successful because their employer knew, or ought to have known, about the risks to employees' health that asbestos (or indeed other harmful substances) posed, but took no action to prevent or reduce employee exposure to these harmful substances. If the risk of injury is reasonably foreseeable, and the employer takes no reasonable course of action to limit, minimise or remove the risk, then it is likely that they will be liable in negligence or breach of statutory duties.
 
Similarly, if the courts come to the conclusion that it is a reasonably foreseeable risk, given knowledge in the industry, that making employees work night shifts may cause cancer, yet the employer continues to subject its staff to that risk, then they too, may find themselves liable for any damage caused.
 
Employers have an obligation to take ‘reasonably practical' precautions towards the health of staff; they do not have a duty to eliminate all risks. As a starting point, employers should take practical steps to protect night shift staff, such as ensuring that there are regular shift patterns and/or split night shifts, minimising back-to-back night shifts which can result in disturbed sleep patterns.
 
When deciding whether an employee should be awarded compensation, the courts will need to consider expert medical evidence on whether working night shifts was in fact the cause of any damage. Claimants would have to rule out other possible causes and deal with external contributors such as an unhealthy lifestyle or family medical history. Employers are likely to defend such claims on the basis that they did not know and could not have known about the risks and this argument is likely to prevail.
 
As outlined at the start of this article, the question causation is a matter for medical evidence. Claimants may well struggle to establish a causal link between working night shifts and the onset of cancer, in which case their claims will fail.
 
Time and extensive medical research will tell whether a causal link exists between developing cancer and working long shifts. Until then, employers should ensure they carry out stringent health checks and comply with their duties under the comprehensive Health and Safety legislation in order to protect employees and minimise risks of liability.
 
We are a long way off the absolution of night shifts altogether and, if night shifts are as dangerous as some people fear, it could prove a serious problem for the modern business, to which there will be no easy solution.
 

• Danish Courts have awarded compensation to women who have developed breast cancer after working night shifts
• The HSE has commissioned an epidemiologist report on the issue
• Employers have an obligation to take ‘reasonably practical' precautions towards the health of staff; they do not have a duty to eliminate all risks
• Employers should carry out stringent health checks and comply with their duties under the comprehensive Health and Safety legislation

In what circumstances could you be fired for your dress?

In most work places there will be an established dress code, whether in a written policy or through practice. This could be for professional, public or health and safety reasons. It would be advisable, before starting a new job, to check with your new employer from the outset what rules apply or what standards are expected.
 
Your employer could potentially dismiss you if you do not comply with its dress code although whether such a dismissal is fair will depend upon the extent to which you disregard any policy, the employer's reasons for imposing such a policy and possibly whether you have been warned on previous occasions.
 
What action should you take if you believe your company's dress code is inappropriate or sexist?

The first step should be to speak with your employer informally to resolve the matter. If informal discussions fail, you should register a formal complaint in writing under your employer's grievance procedure.
 
If the grievance procedure doesn't solve the problem then, depending on your circumstances, you could resign and claim that you were constructively dismissed. You may also have a claim for discrimination if, for example, any dress code treats you less favourably or harasses you on grounds of your sex or race. You would then have to pursue matters further through the employment tribunals.
 
Would a company legally have to have a written down dress code available to staff before someone could be warned or fired?

Ideally, a clear, written dress code should apply to create clarity between employers and staff as to what standards are expected and to avoid discrimination law pitfalls. However, it is not a legal requirement for employers to have written policies or guidelines on dress although without, an employer may find it more difficult to take disciplinary action.
 
Some minimum standards of personal presentation will be expected and, providing these are reasonable, an employee who is consistently unacceptably dressed is likely to receive little sympathy from a tribunal.

As redundancy figures continue to rise, Manchester based Rowlands solicitors is highlighting the benefit of compromise agreements in avoiding redundancy disputes and potential strikes.
 
Both DTZ and Johnston Press experienced high profile redundancy disputes recently, resulting in staff protests and publicly expressed dissatisfaction with reduced redundancy packages, both of which could have been avoided had compromise agreements been signed, according to William O'Neill, partner and head of employment at Rowlands.
 
A Compromise Agreement sets out an employee's employment rights including, where appropriate, the employee's redundancy entitlement. Employees, by virtue of these Agreements, forego the right to pursue employment rights before the Employment Tribunal, in return for a severance package. It is a common feature of these Agreements to include confidentiality clauses. The document will only become legally binding once an independent Solicitor has explained to the employee the effect of the Agreement.
 
As the economic climate becomes increasingly challenging, more businesses should be looking at establishing compromise agreements to prevent costly and embarrassing disputes.
 
Compromise agreements are not a mechanism by which companies snatch away employees' right to tribunal, but allow both sides to lay their cards on the table and come to an agreement that everyone is happy with.

Following the recent wildcat strikes reported in the media, those keen to uphold the often repeated ‘British jobs for British people' mantra will welcome the new points based immigration system that comes into effect on the 1st April, requiring workers from outside the European Economic Area to meet more stringent criteria before being able to work in the UK.
 
Highly skilled foreign workers will be required to have earned £20,000 over a 12-month period, an increase from the previous £16,000 and will be required to have at least a Masters degree rather than a Bachelors degree. For skilled workers, all vacancies must be advertised in the JobCentre Plus before the employer can bring in workers from outside Europe, ensuring that the ‘resident labour market test' is met.
 
These changes, however, may cause problems within professions that lack employees with essential skill sets, such as the construction sector and performing arts.
 
In industries that rely upon certain employee skills and expertise, of which there is currently a shortage in the UK, it could potentially cripple many businesses at a time when they are already struggling to survive. Employers will undoubtedly experience delays and difficulties in getting the staff they need.
 
There is no way for businesses to avoid the new system, although if it does become apparent that there is a shortage of skills, then this will be used to trigger skill reviews that focus on training resident workers for these occupations.

Leading Manchester-based law firm, Rowlands Solicitors LLP, has experienced a 50 per cent growth in Personal Injury instructions over the last eight months.
 
Commenting on the dramatic rise, Jon Andrews, Joint Managing Partner, said: "For several years we have boasted a strong Personal Injury department and this incredible rise in instructions is testament to the hard work of the team and the reputation we have achieved.
 
The unprecedented level of growth follows the appointment of John Hesketh as a consultant. John was formerly a partner at Coleman's Solicitors and is now dedicated to developing referrals of road traffic accident and industrial disease work.
 
Jon Andrews added: "In bringing John on board we are confident that this department can continue to grow. We have invested heavily in case management systems and are currently recruiting case handlers and further fee earner staff.
 
We have seen that PI claims tend to increase during a period of downturn or recession, and our reputation in the sector means that we are viewed as a trusted advisor to those requiring legal assistance.
 
We are delighted to see such significant growth in one of our key departments and intend to build upon this in the future."

The Employment Act 2008 comes into force on the 6th April 2009. One of the main implications for Employers is that they will now have to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary & Grievance Procedures. The new Code somewhat relaxes the current constringent procedures which Employers have to follow when dealing with grievances and instead encourages Employers to act "fairly and reasonably".
 
However Employers need to be beware. It is vital that an Employer's internal Policies and Procedures for dealing with grievances and dismissals are now revisited and reviewed.
 
It is likely that employment contracts, policies and staff handbooks need redrafting in order to comply with the new Code. Only once this has been done can Employers afford to take the "Common Sense" approach to grievance that the Code purports to offer.

In response to the article "Common Sense" Warning Over ACAS Code by Jonathan Raynor printed in the law Society Gazzette on the 26th february 2009

By Charlotte Taylor Civil Litigation Department
Rowlands Solicitors

Peaches Geldof recently hit the headlines by announcing her divorce from musician, Max Drummey, after only 96 days of marriage.
 
Geldof's attitude towards the marriage - she admitted she didn't go into the marriage thinking it would last forever - typifies the recent demographic phenomenon of the 'starter marriage', which Manchester law firm, Rowlands, have noted is on the rise.
 
Commenting on the legal implications for couples, Tony Broadley, Joint Managing Partner at Rowlands, said: "With a growing number of couples seeking to divorce after around three to five years of marriage, first time unions lasting five years or less, without children, are now being termed 'starter marriages', with the implication they are a trial run for the lasting commitment people eventually hope to have.
 
"Starter marriages often coincide with a couple buying their first home, or setting up joint saving schemes and bank accounts, which means that even without children, the separation process can be complicated.
 
"Despite the example of various celebrities, most couples enter into marriage with the idea of it being a life long, or at least long lasting, commitment. A marriage that breaks up after only a short amount of time can be even more distressing than most, as alongside the emotional consequences, the legal implications can be far reaching, especially when dividing property or assets.
 
"Increasingly, young couples are receiving 'seed money' from their families to help out with the costs of buying a house, or large items of furniture. The process of dividing items like this, or organising a process of repayment can be complex and emotionally draining for everyone involved.
 
"As such, while thinking about prenuptial agreements before marriage isn't the most romantic thing in the world, it could save a lot of heartache and legal expenses later down the line."

The Children and Adoption Act 2006 (the Act), was implemented on the 8th December 2008. The Act provides new ways to help the courts find solutions in private law Children Act 1989 contact cases where there is conflict between the parties, for example, about who a child should see, and how often. The Act gives the courts more flexible powers to deal with cases where parties cannot reach agreement or cases where a person fails to comply with a contact order.

Discussion on the new law has been dominated by the rhetoric of pressure groups which claim to represent fathers unjustifiably denied relationships with their children after separation.
 
Prior to the Act, breach of a contact order by the resident parent was contempt of court, but remedies for contempt were rarely used. There was no reference in any legal analysis to enforcing an order against a non-resident parent. Government Papers suggested that following frequent breaches of contact orders, many non-resident parents simply ‘gave up' their struggle for contact.

The result of the Government consultations is the Children and Adoption Act 2006, which aims to provide ‘realistic and useable' sanctions for breach of a contact order.
 
Breaching orders
Where a contact order has been breached, there are provisions in the Act to enforce contact orders, enabling the court, on application, to impose an unpaid work requirement (an enforcement order) on the person who breaches a contact order without a reasonable excuse. This will give the courts greater flexibility in dealing with breaches of contact orders, and will be in addition to the existing powers to treat the breach of the order as a contempt of court. Courts will be able to take action in respect of a breach of an enforcement order by making that order more onerous or by making a further enforcement order. Concerns have already been raised about the prospect of criminalising mothers who object to contact.

Compensation
The Act also enables the court to award financial compensation from one person to another for losses arising from failure to comply with a contact order (for example, when the cost of a holiday has been lost).
 
Contact Activities
The Act also includes powers for the court to order ‘contact activities' – these include programmes, classes and counselling which aim to facilitate meaningful contact. Failing to attend a contact activity will also constitute a breach of the contact order, and the sanctions above can be applied.

Whilst the new act has been well received by Fathers' Rights campaign groups, there have been concerns raised about the effect sanctions may have on proceedings as a whole, creating further delay and worsening the relationship between parents.

There are also concerns that the act does not address the fundamental problems within these type of proceedings, such as whether the law strikes the right balance between resident and non-resident parents, and how to prevent some resident parents from manipulating the views of their children toward the non-resident parent to such an extent that any meaningful relationship is unlikely, whether or not contact is enforced.

Famous chef Marco Pierre White has failed to successfully sue solicitors over claims that they had encouraged his ex-wife to intercept confidential documents during his recent divorce.

Other recent celebrity divorce news includes the pronouncement of decree nisi between Madonna and Guy Ritchie, who have apparently settled financial arrangements within their divorce proceedings.

It is understood that there will be a shared care arrangement for the younger children.

Also in the newspapers this week are reports that the wife of Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone has commenced divorce proceedings, which will no doubt include a claim in relation to the substantial financial assets of Mr. Ecclestone, estimated to exceed £2bn. The couple married in 1995 and have two children aged 19 and 24.

With the sharp decline in residential property sales many house builders are looking to the alternative of letting out their stock of unsold houses. They should be aware that a tax snare awaits as this sensible stop-gap strategy may attract an unexpected liability to VAT.

In the context of residential property such a tax charge may come as an unwelcome surprise; the sale of new homes is treated as a zero rated supply for the purposes of VAT with the result that VAT is not charged on a sale and the VAT input tax which a builder pays on his expenditure on the building project is fully recoverable. On the other hand, the letting scenario presents a different picture; if a developer lets a new property for a term of less than 21 years the supply is treated as exempt (as opposed to zero rated) for the purposes of VAT.

The effect of this is that the input tax paid on the cost of the building project is not recoverable. This means that a proportion of the input tax claimed in the ordinary course of the building and selling process is clawed back by Revenue & Customs to the inevitable detriment on cashflow at a time when pressures on funding are keenly felt. And, to make matters worse, VAT on the fees incurred in relation to the letting will not be recoverable.

Be aware, however, that it may be possible to take steps to mitigate the impact of these rules provided proper procedures are followed. If we can help please contact us 

A former employee has won record damages of £825,000 from TraffordHealthcare NHS Trust after she was assaulted on two separate occasionsby patients she was caring for.

The 38 year old woman from Trafford, who wishes to remain anonymous, agreed the settlement withTrafford Healthcare NHS Trust three weeks before the trial of the action.

She was represented by Sheila Costello, partner at Rowlands.

The former care worker was first assaulted in 1996 and again in 1999 and the trust accepted liability for the injuries in 2002.

The settlement includes compensation for the debilitating injuries to her neck and right shoulder, her financial losses including her future loss of earnings, and her future care costs.

Sheila Costello said: "Her injuries were so severe that she still suffers with pain on a daily basis and as a result she won't be able to work again. We were able to provide her with the correct legal advice to ensure that she was compensated fairly for the injuries that will unfortunately affect her for the rest of her life."

Two men have been found guilty of causing or allowing the death of a 17-month-old boy, baby P. The child's mother had already admitted allowing or causing the child's death.

The child was on the Child Protection Register and under the investigation of Haringey Council. Haringey was the Council previously investigated following the death of 8 year old Victoria Climbie in 2000.

An independent investigation has been launched to make enquiries as to how a baby who was, unlike Victoria Climbie, on the Child Protection Register and seen by professionals an alleged 60 times, was not, in fact, protected, despite Haringey Social Services appearing to follow the multi-agency approach introduced following the Climbie enquiry.

The Children's Minister Beverley Smith and the Director of Children's Services Maggie Atkinson have both stated that in Baby P's case, the systems in place were correctly used, and have been very careful not to place blame on social services or the Local Authority, pointing out the extensive deception of Baby's P's mother and partner. Indeed it is very important to remember in such emotive cases as this that the perpetrator of the tragic crime was not Social Services, but was Baby P's mother, partner and lodger.

However, leading academics and professionals in the field of Social Work have commented that the training of social workers may be inadequate, that they are not being correctly equipped with the skills required to work in this highly sensitive, extremely important area of work.

In a BBC Newsnight interview last night, a leading government advisor suggested that the answer may be to remove more children from their parents, instead of adhering to the current system whereby Social Services attempt to work with families to improve children's lives within their own homes.

From a legal point of view, this raises concerns about the rights of parents who may not be given a chance to demonstrate change. It is not just the children, but often the parents in these cases who are some of the most vulnerable people in our society, having had little guidance and support throughout their lives.

Further, now that the government has massively increased the fees that Local Authorities are required to pay to bring a case to court to allow a child to be removed from their parents, the question of resources, which is unfortunately critical in so many vulnerable families' lives, requires us once more to ask, what needs to be done to safeguard our children, and how much will the government pay for it?

In May this year, the Government imposed a 2,500% rise in the fees that Local Authorities have to pay to bring a case to Court, on the basis that the courts were underfunded and that care cases were causing the judicial system to run at a massive loss.

Notwithstanding the fact that it is vital, in terms of human rights and the very principles of English law, that these cases MUST be heard in court rather than Local Authorities having the power to remove children without their parents having a say, and that Local Authorities said from the outset that paying the new fees would put a massive strain on their budgets, the Government stance was that Local Authorities had received extra funding as part of a package, and that the number of cases issued by Local Authorities should not be influenced by the cost of bringing them to court.

This fee rise was introduced with a whole range of measures attempting to address child protection issues before the need for court proceedings arose, thereby relieving pressure on the courts and social services, saving money, and keeping children within their families.

These fee rises were, and still are, an area of major controversy. In fact, just last week a legal challenge over increased court fees for public law childcare applications and placement order applications has been dismissed by the High Court. Hillingdon Council, Liverpool City Council, Leeds City Council and Norfolk County Council sought a judicial review after claiming that the raised fees could put funding for other children's services at risk. But on 6 November three High Court judges dismissed the application.

It is not known whether Haringey considered taking legal proceedings in respect of removing Baby P from his mother's care. As practitioners we have expressed concern that in reporting this case, no mention has been made about care proceedings.

Baby P tragically died in 2007, before the fee increases were implemented.
Whilst it is only speculation, we cannot fail to wonder whether, if proceedings were not issued in a case as serious as this, with fees at only in the region of £100, how many fewer cases will in reality try to be sorted by underfunded Social Services who don't want to pay a £2225.00 issue fee.

What can be certain is that we all as practitioners need to look very carefully at the case of Baby P and, regardless of resources, ensure that vulnerable children and families are safe.

 

Melanie Sharples
Trainee Solicitor

The appalling case of Baby P reported yesterday involving Haringey Social Services yet again highlights some of the problems in our society. There are the usual calls for social workers to be sacked and disciplined but we need to identify the real causes and not just jump on band wagons.

The starting point in all of these cases are the perpetrators. There are sadists and paedophiles out in our community that enjoy inflicting pain and abuse upon very young children. Often alcohol and drugs are a factor. Social services departments up and down the country are designed to protect children from these perpetrators.

The Government needs to take some responsibility. The system put in place to protect these vulnerable children is underfunded. The vast majority of social workers are dedicated and work extremely hard for very low wages. The Legal Aid system has recently been changed and discourages senior legal practitioners from continuing to work in this area of the law. Unfortunately as with everything in life money is a major factor.

There is no doubt that if social workers have been negligent in their duties they should be disciplined or sacked. However individual responsibility is rarely the complete answer. Systems should always be regularly reviewed and improved upon. It is incumbent upon us all however to look at the route cause first and not just have a knee jerk reaction. Lessons yet again need to be learnt.

The C-MEC which is to replace the Child Support Agency has a new site to provide impartial information and support to help both parents make an informed choice about child maintenance.
 

It includes a ‘Getting Started' guide which can be downloaded, giving details of the options available for arranging child maintenance, how to start making a child maintenance arrangement, ways to negotiate with the other parent, how to work out the amount of child maintenance and practical steps forward and useful organisations.

See http://www.cmoptions.org/.

The October edition of Family Law referred to recent research conducted in respect of how the law operates to enforce or control contact between children and their parents after a separation.
 

At the end of this month, Children Act 1989 will be amended by the Children & Adoption Act 2006, which will introduce two new sanctions for breach of contact orders.

There will be the possibility of either unpaid work or the payment of compensation for a financial loss. The research concluded that the current range of available sanctions was inadequate.

The report on the findings can be found at www.law.cf.ac.uk/newsandevents/news.php.

The Madonna & Guy Ritchie debate continues with attention having moved from ‘who gets the money' to ‘who gets the children' with Madonna reportedly wanting to settle in New York with their three children and Guy wanting to remain in the UK.

The couple have an eight year old son, Rocco, adopted Malawian David Banda, aged three and 12 year old Lourdes from a previous relationship of Madonna's.

It is of course hoped that the couple will manage to reach agreement regarding the children without the need for Court Proceedings which can often prove extremely stressful and lengthy. It is always preferable for families to agree arrangements which are in the best interests of the children without recourse to Court where an effective stranger, albeit very experienced in judging these matters, will decide what is in your children's best interests.
 

Let's hope that with the right legal advice and support the couple reach agreement and avoid any long term emotional damage being caused to the children.

A new law that prevents forced marriages taking place is due to come into force on 25 November. In addition, where a forced marriage has already taken place, the Court will be able to make orders to protect the victim and remove them from the situation.
 

The Forced Marriage Unit has reportedly dealt with over 400 cases of forced marriage in the last year, though it is believed that many more have occurred but have been unreported.

In one example, a young woman was told by her father & brothers that she was going on a trip to consider her family roots. Once overseas, she was held captive in a remote village, where she was beaten, threatened and had her passport taken away. She was then forced to marry against her wishes.

This new law will help in these situations because of the very wide protection that is offered. Almost anyone can bring an application to Court on behalf of the victim, though they will need the Courts permission to do so. The Order, a Forced Marriage Protection Order, can be made against a wide range of people, unlike other family law provisions where Orders can only be made against associated people.

There are a number of Orders that the Court can make, for example:-

• to prevent the forced marriage from occurring
• to stop violence and intimidation
• to stop someone being taken abroad including confiscation of passport
• to reveal the whereabouts of a person.

Only time will tell how successful this law will be but it is certainly hoped that it will provide much needed protection from abuse within the family.

 www.fco.gov.uk/forcedmarriage

Q: "I had an interview arranged by an employment agency and received a verbal job offer for a temporary post. Some time later I discovered the vacancy had been filled by another candidate but I am out of pocket as I had signed off my Jobseekers' Allowance. Do I have any scope to take the matter further? Was a verbal offer binding?"

William O'Neill, Partner and Head of the Employment Department at Rowlands Solicitors: "Simply put, an offer of employment does not have to be in writing and a verbal offer, and acceptance, will be binding. Obviously, there may be difficulties in proving that a verbal offer was made or what the terms were and it is therefore always advisable to get confirmation of any offer in writing, if possible. The only way this would not be accepted as binding is if the offer was withdrawn before you accepted it.

"However, there is not much scope for taking the matter any further as it would be argued that all employment contracts, whether verbal or written, are subject to termination provisions, either in the terms of the contract itself or implied by law. This means that the prospective employer is able to terminate any contract on reasonable notice, in the absence of anything agreed to the contrary. In your case this would likely be one week's notice taking into account what your length of service would be, although a longer notice period could be implied if reasonable.

"Nonetheless, there is no reason as to why you should not claim one week's notice pay (and any benefits you would have obtained during your first week of employment), and the monies you have lost as a consequence of not receiving your Job Seekers' Allowance, although, of course, you should take steps to ensure your allowance is re-instated and backdated if possible. You should perhaps write to the prospective employer to see if this can be resolved amicably as any legal costs could be disproportionate to what you are seeking to recover."

In 2007 more than 3,000 people were seriously injured over the four week period around Guy Fawkes night, and many of these accidents were caused at DIY bonfire displays says health and safety experts, Rowlands Solicitors.

The North West firm of solicitors says there was a 40 per cent increase in injuries among people handling fireworks at private parties during 5 November celebrations last year.

This year, Rowlands is advising people to attend organised bonfires and avoid home made bonfires in gardens, alleyways or in built up areas because of the huge risks to people and property. To check if a public bonfire display is official contact your local council and they will be able to inform you.

The firm has seen an increase in the number of cases of homemade bonfires being restarted and then left in the middle of the night, causing major damage to residents homes and cars.

Jon Andrews, Head of Personal Injury at Rowlands Solicitors said: "Taking practical steps to manage any risks responsibly and ensuring the safety of others is paramount. Many people still don't know it's a criminal offence to let off fireworks between 11pm and 7am, or that if they are caught breaking the curfew they risk paying a huge fine or worst still prison.

"All too often we deal with cases where children have been badly burnt by bonfires and fireworks that they have tried to handle themselves without any supervision or training. To reduce these risks we would advise people enjoy the bonfire night festivities at organised and reputable public displays." 

BBC Radio Manchester presenter Heather Stott asks Family Solicitor Gail Cartwright why 60 is the new 40?

While the overall divorce rate continues to fall, the number of over 60s choosing to end their marriages has increased by a third in the last decade.

Today's over 60s enjoy good health and higher life expectancy.

Many have benefited financially from the housing boom and final salary pension schemes. People can afford to separate and start again.

By the age of 60 most couple's children have finally left home permanently. They can divorce without so much family upheaval.

The change in lifestye brought about by retirement can also be the cause for friction. The extra time together may not be quite what was expected.

And attitudes to divorce have shifted. There is not the same pressure to stay in a loveless marriage.

Today's over 60s are reluctant to settle for a quiet life after reaching retirement age.

You can download Gail Cartwrights full radio interview here.

At the recent 5th anniversary of Collaborative Law in the UK, Mr Justice Coleridge, a senior High Court Family Judge, offered his support to the Collaborative process.

Five years ago, when Collaborative Law reached the UK from America, only a handful of lawyers were trained. Now there are over 1250 lawyers trained in this specialised area.

Once agreement has been reached via four way, face to face meetings between husband, wife and their lawyers, the lawyers draw up a Consent Order which is then approved by the Court. Historically, this process could take 3-4 months depending upon the workload of the Court concerned.

Mr Justice Coleridge has announced a fast track procedure whereby the Consent Order can be approved within a couple of days. This welcome change in practice came following a couple asking for urgent approval of their settlement because one was about to move to the United States with the children.

Collaborative Law is the most exciting development within family law in years and one which can truly benefit the long term relationship of the people involved.

Victoria Withers
Family Law Solicitor

The recent case of Re W heard in the Court of Appeal earlier in 2008 highlights how, as more couples and singles are using sperm or egg donors to have children, the Courts are being increasing required to make decisions about the legal status of donors in the lives of the children involved.

In Re W, civil partners used donated sperm from the brother of one of the partners to enable the other partner to become pregnant. At conception, they all appeared to agree that the father would not play an active role in the child's life, other than as part of the child's extended family.

However, a few months into the pregnancy the father decided that he wanted more involvement with the child, and applied to the Court for Parental Responsibility to enable him to make decisions relation to the child's health and education, and for contact with the baby from birth.

The Court's decision was that the "traditional" method of applying family law, giving weight to biology and "norms" of society, is increasingly the wrong approach, given developments in IVF, assisted conception and adoption.

The Judge said that children do develop a real interest in their natural parents, and that it was, in this case, strongly in the child's interests to maintain a relationship with his biological father.

However, given the inevitable conflicts that would arise if the father had Parental Responsibility, granting an order for Parental Responsibility was not in the child's best interests. The Court always has to consider what is best for the child, even if this is not what is best for the father.

The Judge granted contact to the biological father contact 4 times per year, in order to allow the child to picture his father as "significant, but not ordinarily important".

This recent decision shows that the Courts are very alive to current social developments, and it is pleasing to know that, despite the way they are often portrayed in the media, the Family Courts look at each case on its individual merits, and always have the interests of the child, however their family is made up, at heart.

Britain's first celebrity gay "divorce" was finalised by the courts yesterday when the comedian Matt Lucas was granted a legal separation from his partner in a case reported to be worth £15m.

At an uncontested hearing at the High Court, the Little Britain star's civil partnership to the television producer Kevin McGee was dissolved on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour. Mr. McGee, is expected to receive up to £1m from the television star's estimated £15m fortune on condition that he signs a gagging order stopping him publicly disclosing any details about their short marriage.

Mr. Lucas married Mr. McGee in a civil partnership in December 2006. The dissolution of their partnership was the first high-profile, big-money divorce involving a same-sex couple that had come before the Courts since Parliament brought in laws to permit same-sex marriages in December 2005.

Based on the way that the Courts deal with assets on divorce, the shortness of the civil partnership should mean that the division of the couple's assets should not be split down the middle. We would expect Mr. Lucas's lawyers to argue that there should be a deviation from the normal starting point of equality of assets. The Court will also have to decide how much wealth had been created during the partnership and what contribution each party had made. The rules on civil partnership dissolution are broadly the same as those for divorce. In this case the separation was based on unreasonable behaviour.

There is no separate ground for adultery in civil partnership dissolutions because the law says this must involve a man and a woman.

It is not known whether the couple signed a pre-nuptial agreement.

We have yet to recover from the much talked about and highly controversial split of Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills. In what was possibly the most extreme example of an acrimonious breakup, fought aggressively to the bitter end by both sides.

We now find ourselves faced with the next high profile couple to split, Madonna and Guy Ritchie. We have to wonder whether they will follow in the path of the McCartney's or opt for a more private, non confrontational separation, if only for the sake of the children.

Perhaps Madonna and Guy Ritchie will be the first high-profile couple to divorce collaborative-style?

This new, non confrontational way of reaching agreements relating to money and children has recently received judicial support when Mr Justice Coleridge commented that the Collaborative process was ‘hugely rewarding and a great deal more worthwhile than battering the otherside into submission or fighting to conclusion.'

Working Collaboratively, settlements are reached in four way, face to face meetings between the husband, wife and their lawyers. The key to its success however is the need to reach agreement; if the talks fail then new lawyers must be instructed to deal with any Court proceedings. This will increase the costs considerably.

Let's hope that more couples choose to resolve their difficulties collaboratively in the future, as contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of lawyers do strive to reduce acrimony for the long term good of the family.

Victoria Withers
Family Law Solicitor

You may be aware that the future of Pro Contact is in jeopardy following recent funding proposals by the Legal Services Commission.

Pro Contact is a Manchester based service providing supervised contact facilities predominantly for families engaged in Court Proceedings.

In its 9 year existence, Pro Contact has become an acknowledged leader in assessment, supervision and therapeutic care of children who are suffering the consequences of the most acrimonious family breakdowns.

The proposal is that Public Funding via the Legal Services Commission for Pro Contact's work within Court Proceedings will no longer be available and whilst Pro Contact does receive several grants from charitable organisations, this is insufficient to secure its survival.

Ultimately, the children will suffer and it's unfortunate that their happiness is determined by budgets and bottom lines.

Victoria Withers
Family Law Solicitor

Rowlands are delighted to be sponsoring the Manchester Evening News Residential Property Awards 2008 for the fifth consecutive year.

Developments will be judged over the summer with winners announced at a dinner at the Hilton Hotel on October 23.

Developers can download an entry form here.

Rowlands' Senior Partner, Aidan Carr, commented,

"We are delighted to be sponsoring the MEN Property Awards for the fifth successive year. The categories of awards encourage not only good design and build but also the increasing importance of refurbishment, conservation, sustainability and respect for the environment.

Whether developing or purchasing, good design and construction and wise investments will outlive by generations any current concerns exercising the minds of all involved in the development and acquisition of property in Greater Manchester and the North West especially with so much interest from national and multi-national companies keen to relocate as evidenced by the development of Media City in Salford.

Manchester is a vibrant city, not only commercially but also through its universities that excel in academic spheres and is an entertainment centre second to none outside London.

We have advised over the generations, both developers and individuals in property acquisitions and disposals and we fully expect to be advising the generations of the future.

Together with our co-sponsors, Manchester City Council and Allied London, we wish those competing to win an award the very best of luck."

With the nationalisation of Northern Rock, the merger of HBOS and Lloyds TSB, the collapse of Icesave and the unprecedented multi-billion pound bailout of the banking industry, it is only natural to be worried about the safety of your hard earned savings in the current economic climate.

Please note that Rowlands does not provide financial advice. The contents of this article are only intended to provide general pointers and anyone reading this article should take specific expert independent financial advice before taking or refraining from taking any action on the basis of the comments we make below. If you do need specific advice please get in touch and we will be pleased to introduce you to a local, professional firm of Independent Financial Advisers

WHAT PROTECTION APPLIES TO SAVINGS?

If a bank or other financial institution collapses, then the first £50,000.00 worth of savings with that institution are protected by the Financial Services Compensation Service (FSCS), an independent compensation scheme funded by all UK based financial institutions and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Any amounts above that are unprotected, so you run the risk of losing that amount.

WHAT ABOUT INVESTMENT PRODUCTS?
 
As far as investments (e.g. OEICs, Unit Trusts etc) are concerned, the FSCS also protects 100% of the first £30,000.00 and 90% of the next £20,000.00 (so a total of £48,000.00).

If you are worried about the performance of your investments then you should consult an IFA.

HOW DOES THIS WORK IN PRACTICE?

Both of these limits are per FSA registration – you need to be careful if you have a number of different accounts with separate parts of one organisation.

For example, if you have £40,000.00 in an HSBC account and £40,000.00 in a Nationwide Building Society account then both accounts are fully protected.

However, if you have £40,000.00 in a Halifax account and £40,000.00 in a Bank of Scotland account then only £50,000.00 is protected as they are both parts of HBOS plc – you would therefore run the risk of losing £30,000.00 of your savings if HBOS plc were to collapse.

You will not get your money immediately if you have to rely on the FSCS – the compensation process will take at least 3 months, possibly longer.

WHAT ABOUT ACCOUNTS WITH FOREIGN BANKS?

Branches of foreign banks in the UK are either covered by the FSCS or by schemes in their home county. You should consult the bank in question to check the level of protection.

Foreign schemes may also be unwilling to honour their commitments to foreign customers – as those banking with Icesave are now sadly aware.

WHAT SHOULD I DO?

Our advice is that savers should spread their savings to ensure that they have no more than £50,000.00 with any one institution.

We recommend that clients use institutions that are considered ‘safe' - the larger building societies (such as Nationwide, Britannia, Yorkshire, Coventry, Chelsea and Skipton) or the main high street banks (such as HSBC, Barclays, HBOS, Lloyds TSB or RBS) for the bulk of their savings.

It may also be worth considering National Savings products, as these are backed by the Government and are 100% safe.

 

If you are in any doubt you should consider consulting an IFA.

WHAT ABOUT INSURANCE BONDS?

In the case of UK Life Insurance Bonds 100% of the first £2,000 and 90% of the remainder, without any upper limit, is protected under the FSCS. Offshore Insurance Bonds are not covered by the FSCS but are generally protected through a scheme in the country in which the insurance company is based.

Whilst 90% protection is attractive, what this protection means in practice and the circumstances in which it would apply are often misunderstood.

Unless the insurance company has specifically guaranteed the value of your investment, there is no protection against a drop in value or default of the fund or account in which your money is invested. The FSCS (or other scheme) only comes into play if the insurance company fails.

However, where holding less than £50,000 with any one institution is impractical due to the total level of savings, insurance bonds can be a convenient means of accessing a diverse range of accounts and/or funds within one convenient "wrapper".

Again, if you need any help with this please let us know and we will be pleased to introduce you to an appropriate IFA.

WHAT ABOUT MONEY IN MY SOLICITOR'S CLIENT ACCOUNT? IS THIS PROTECTED?

Providing that your solicitor has informed their bank that the client account is used to hold money belonging to their clients then each client is protected by the FSCS up to the £50,000.00 limit.

Clients should remember that any other savings with that bank count towards the limit – so if you have £30,000.00 in a savings account with RBS and £30,000.00 in your solicitors client account (which also happens to be held with RBS) then you could potentially lose £10,000.00 if unlikely event that RBS collapses.

WHAT IF I NEED LEGAL ADVICE?

The current economic climate is hitting both businesses and individuals hard. We have the expertise and experience to help you through this difficult time.

ADVICE FOR BUSINESSES

We can assist businesses of all sizes. You may need to make redundancies – our Employment Department can ensure that this is done in full compliance with your legal obligations. Proper compliance will ultimately reduce your costs and minimise the likelihood of a claim for unfair dismissal.

 

As a sole trader or partner in a partnership, you may be concerned about your personal liability if your business is unable to continue trading. In many circumstances, converting to a Limited Company or Limited Liability Partnership would reduce your personal liability. Our Commercial Department can advise whether this is appropriate for your business.

ADVICE FOR INDIVIDUALS
 
Our Conveyancing Department can assist those looking to sell, purchase or re-mortgage their home. We have contacts with local Mortgage Brokers who may be able to help you find a suitable mortgage even in the current economic climate.

If you require any assistance please do not hesitate to contact us for advice.

Simon Hughes
Partner and Head of Private Client Department
Rowlands Solicitors LLP

This week's cut in interest from 5 to 4.5% by the Bank of England is likely to give 5 million home owners a boost. Initially this will benefit 4.2 million house holders with tracker mortgages but it is expected that a further 800,000 mortgage holders on standard variable rates could see their repayments fall.

If all Lenders pass on the cut in full to their Borrowers the effect would be at least £47 off the monthly repayments of a typical mortgage of £150,000.00. We believe that this decisive action may be the first step in improving conditions in the current housing market.

 

"People are realising that the show must go on in terms of buying and selling and are becoming more receptive to realistic offers. As ever, those able to buy with cash will undoubtedly be able to get the best deals, negotiating over and above what is on offer in return for a quick completion.

"For first time buyers, the difficulty still lies in getting that initial deposit, however there are good mortgage deals to be found if you search around, and stamp duty reductions should begin to stimulate a sluggish market.

"For all would-be-buyers, the best course of action is to keep an open mind. If you have dreams of living the ‘champagne life' in the Golden Triangle but a ‘lemonade budget', you're going to have to be realistic and explore new localities. Some areas will always be ‘recession proof' and attract high asking prices, but don't let that put you off.

"With a positive attitude and a bit of research, there are still great deals to be had. At Rowlands, we've completed over 65 instructions on sales and purchases in the last month alone, figures that speak for themselves. People will always need to move and there is no reason as to why, at this present moment, you can't be the one to buy."

There are still buyers in the property market looking for reasonable quality properties at prices which reflect market conditions.
 
Other good news this month is from two reports which indicate that values in the property market are expected to reach a low point in the short-term but followed by substantial increases over the next three years.

Separating myth from reality

Intellectual Property in the Dragons' Den 

The popularity of Dragons' Den is no doubt accountable, in large measure, to the personalities of the Dragons themselves. Each brings an individual approach to the inquisitorial exercise that tends to indicate their particular interests in evaluating the likelihood of commercial success.

Regular issues discussed in the Den include the difficulty that some aspiring businessmen or women may have in differentiating the company's money from their own, the difference between turnover and profit, and the often-haphazard manner in which applicants value their companies. However, a constant and apparently increasing focus of interrogation surrounds the question of whether the product or service concerned can be readily duplicated. If it can, and any other barriers to entry can be overcome, then clearly the worth of the business is substantially less than a business commanding an exclusive position in the market. How many times have we heard Duncan Bannatyne, in particular, tell applicants that he could set up in competition in a heartbeat? In addition, Theo Paphitis threw confusion and controversy into the mix this series by claiming that, without a patent, intellectual property rights are useless. So what ways are there to ensure that a business can minimise the possibilities of being sidelined by the competition?
 
In the Dragons' Den, we regularly hear budding entrepreneurs claim that a product has been patented "throughout the world". Further questioning, however, reveals that this tends not to be the case. What most applicants have done is simply file a patent application. This is only the start of the process, which can take some years to complete - hence the claim that it can be somewhat. irrelevant. Even once it has been granted, it has been said that a .patent 'does no more than to give the holder a right to sue those who he 'believes are infringing the claims of his patent. Nevertheless, this can be a powerful tool for a company as it represents a meaningful "keep off the grass" sign that others would do well to heed unless they really do wish to embark on costly and inherently uncertain litigation.
 
Patent protection affords a statutory monopoly to the patent holder for a 20-year period, within which to exploit the potential of his or her patent. Supporting a worldwide patent portfolio means, in practice, that this is only possible for extremely well funded organisations. Consequently, the small business needs to focus its protection in those markets where it has a real commercial interest. In particular, they may want to ensure that their major competitors in Germany, for example, cannot manufacture there. It will need, therefore, to designate Germany as one of the countries to be covered, paying the necessary translation and other costs involved.
 
Patents are not the only means of establishing a protected position in the market. Other forms of intellectual property CIP), contrary to Theo's outburst, can serve a similar purpose. Trademarks indicate a unique connection between a company and its products, and serve to increase its profile in the market. Designs may be registered under a statutory scheme or protected in a somewhat more limited way without the need for registration. Copyright will protect published works including databases and compilations. Circuit designs may benefit from the protection afforded to circuit topog raphies. Business owners must carefully consider what is right for their product, or business, and therefore seek the appropriate advice.
 
For each business, this will be different depending on the type of product or company involved as well as future plans and, of course, budget. What is really important is that companies look closely at what protection might be available to give their businesses a head start in the competitive environment of today's market place. Patent agents or lawyers specialising in IP are a useful first port of call. It would be dangerous to assume that competitors were not equally aware of the potential offered by a well-constructed IP program.
 
By Chris Hacking Head of IP, Rowlands Solicitors LLP

The most recent High Court ruling, on the application of what is commonly known as the IR35 legislation, will no doubt make many consultants very uncomfortable. The case of Dragonfly Consultancy Limited versus the Commissioner for HM Revenue and Customs (2008 EWHC 2113(Ch)) was found in favour of HMRC, who maintained that consultant John Bessell, a 50% shareholder and sole director of Dragonfly, was liable to pay National Insurance and PAYE income tax for a period of 3 years. The amount of tax claimed was £90,000.

The facts of the case are as follows. Mr Bessell worked on three separate projects from January 2000 – January 2003, for one client, through an agency. There were three separate and slightly varying fixed term contracts between Dragonfly and the agency, the first of which was entered into before the introduction of IR35. The agency had only one contract with the client which was to supply temporary staff as they might from time to time require. Mr Bessell did not carry out any significant work for any other persons during the 3 years.

The IR35 rules were introduced in April 2000. Their aim is to ensure that individuals, who should pay tax and National Insurance, do not avoid doing so, by providing their services through an intermediary, for example a limited company (such as Dragonfly).

In order for a court to come to a decision on whether IR35 rules should apply to a particular case, they must consider the nature of the terms of a hypothetical contract between the individual consultant and the client. The question is one of law and fact combined.

The Special Commissioner who concluded in December 2007 that the IR35 rules did apply to the Dragonfly case, provided some useful guidance on how the court would focus on the reality of the situation, rather than what the intentions of the parties were. He found that the fact that Mr Bessell sometimes used his own equipment, paid for his own training, received no sick pay and bore risk in receiving payments against invoices only pointed weakly away from there being an employment relationship. However he thought that the limited right of substitution, the fact that Mr Bessel only undertook work for one other client during the relevant period which did not form a significant part of his income and the limited degree of control, pointed towards employment. An appeal was made to the High Court on four grounds:

Substitution
Substitution is relevant when ascertaining whether someone is in a contract of employment as an employee cannot substitute the services of someone else for his own. Therefore an unlimited right of substitution would point away from employment. In the Dragonfly case the Special Commissioner looked at the contracts, the intentions of the parties and the practical reality of the situation. The contracts between Dragonfly and the agency differed on the point of substitution, but never gave Dragonfly the unfettered right to substitute the services of Mr Bessell for another consultant. Even, as in one contract, where Mr Bessell was not named as the consultant, the fact that Dragonfly was only a one man company set up to provide the consultancy services of Mr Bessell, meant that the Court found that this omission was immaterial. The terms of the contracts only allowed for a substitution with the prior agreement of the agency. This was not seen as an unfettered right to substitute and in addition, the contract between the agency and the client was silent on the point of substitution.

The Special Commissioner found, and the High Court agreed, that there was no unfettered right to substitute which was compatible with a contract of employment.

Control
Control is an essential ingredient of a contract of employment as in the performance of a service, the employee is subject to another person's control to a sufficient degree to make that other person the employer.

Again the Special Commissioner looked to the contracts to examine how they dealt with the issue of control. The contracts again varied. Early contracts provided that the consultant would be under the direct "supervision and control" of the client. However this was later changed so the consultant was just under the "direction" of the client. In addition, the initial contract stated that the consultant would observe and comply with the client's customary rules and regulations, but the latter contracts only provided for the consultant to comply with the client's health and safety measures and other similar regulations. The court felt that the changes made to the control clauses in the contracts were made to try to avoid IR35. The contract between the agency and the client stated that any staff supplied by the agency would be under the full control and supervision of the client on a day to day basis only regarding performance of duties.

Again, the court looked beyond the contracts and at the situation in practice. They found that Mr Bessell was a skilled man engaged in a complex task and was informally appraised on an ongoing basis. He was not told how to conduct any tests but was in consultation with a team allocated to him. The team manager would review the progress of the work in a weekly team meeting and in ad hoc discussions. The Special Commissioner found that the degree of control was one which would be expected in a case of a skilled professional employee. In a hypothetical contract between Mr Bessell and the client there would be a provision that he would undertake the tasks allocated to him, within a specific timeframe and to a point under the client's reasonable directions. The Special Commissioner found that this pointed to employment. This is a finding which was supported by the High Court.

Intentions of the Parties
The Special Commissioner found in this case that the intentions of the parties were irrelevant. The fact that the parties may not have intended to create a relationship of employment did not prevail over the true legal effect of the agreement between them.

There was a statement of intention in the contracts between Dragonfly and the agency that the agreement was not intended to create a contract of employment. However, the Special Commissioner stated that only in a borderline case would the parties' intentions possibly be taken into account and that this case was not close enough for this to make any difference. The High Court agreed.

Worker Status
The final issue upon which the appeal was based was that the Special Commissioner had not considered the possibility of Mr Bessell being regarded as a "worker". For some purposes, the law recognises that people can be "employed", "self-employed" or a "worker" and it was argued that the latter category should be applied to IR35 cases. This was rejected by the High Court on the basis that the additional category of worker was only relevant in certain statutory contexts.

Conclusion
The findings in this case have at least made the IR35 position clearer. The right of substitution must be an actual and unfettered one, rather than just a clause in a contract. The question is, however, whether this is commercially realistic, as often consultants are highly qualified in the required area and the company wishing to use these skills will often only do so following an interview with the consultant.

In addition, a company will realistically want to keep some control over what is being produced. An issue in this case does seem to be the fact that Mr Bessell was allocated work as time went by rather than this being agreed at the outset.

The fact that one of the contracts in the Dragonfly case pre-dated the IR35 legislation certainly did not help matters. However, it seems that no matter what the contract says or what the intentions of the parties are at the outset, the emphasis is placed rather on the events as they occur in reality.

Consultants should certainly take heed of the decision in this case, and if nothing else, it at least provides clearer guidance on the application of the IR35 rules.

If you require advice or assistance in relation to any of these issues please do not hesitate to contact Pippa Billingham or Latham Parry.

Finally mortgages are getting cheaper… To the relief of stretched homeowners, the sun's peeking through the mortgage clouds.

In the last week Abbey, HSBC, RBS & Natwest amongst others joined Nationwide, Halifax, First Direct and C&G in offering new cheaper fixed deals. Some pretty decent rates are now around e.g. two years fixed at 5.6% with a £500 fee, substantially lower than a few months ago.

Property transactions in England and Wales have been running at less than half the normal levels and with so few transactions, pressure is being brought on those sellers who need to move to reduce prices and thus cause a slide in prices.  This slide will be halted as soon as first time buyers start to buy again, so this new initiative by the government on stamp duty can only help.

The recently announced stamp duty exemption comes in from 3rd September 2008 and will be applicable even if you have already exchanged contracts on a deal.  You only pay stamp duty on completion of your purchase.

John Donigan, Head of Residential Conveyancing at Rowlands, said the announcement would help take uncertainty out of the market.  He said:

"We have still been seeing a steady number of transactions at the top end of the market and it is the lower level that needs to be helped, which will then feed through to the rest, allowing people to move up.

There are still people out there who need or want to move and who do have access to funds.  Initiatives like this help give the extra confidence that is needed."

If you would like advice on your property transaction, or would like Rowlands to provide a quote, please contact the Residential Conveyancing Department.

From 3rd September 2008 the starting threshold for payment of Stamp Duty Land Tax on residential property will increase to £175,000 as part of a range of measures aimed at boosting the housing market. The government estimates a half of all property transactions will now be exempt from the tax on house purchasers as opposed to a third with the threshold at £125,000.

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors has reported the fastest increase in residential lettings since 1978 as the property market continues to feel the effects of the credit crunch.

The results of the latest RCIS survey show that 43% more chartered surveyors reported seeing a rise in the number of new landlord instructions than those who saw a fall.

Sales of residential properties have continued to struggle as the number of mortgage approvals continue to decline and potential buyers show a wariness to proceed as mixed messages come from the government on a possible stamp duty holiday.

This has resulted in landlords and investors receiving a welcome boost in the face of a declining market. Landlords and potential sellers are becoming more reluctant to sell their properties as they await future capital appreciation.

However, there are early indications that the eagerness of landlords to capitalise on the current boom in lettings will result in an oversupply of rental properties, and there are signs that the average rent is decreasing.

At Rowlands we are aware of the pitfalls of letting property and we advise landlords and estate agents in respect of:

• Drafting tenancy agreements.
• Possession proceedings.
• Debt recovery matters.

If you are interested in any of these services please contact Steven Brown on 0845 230 3980 or by email at steven.brown@rowlands-solicitors.co.uk.

Rowlands received a call of an urgent nature to see if we could assist a client who was unable to move the matter forward with their current solicitor. The transaction was brought to a successful conclusion within the timescale required by the client.

The client commented:

"As an international client, we found it difficult to locate a solicitor to suit our requirements, as by being located outside Manchester we could not communicate face-to-face throughout our transaction.

Our original solicitor did not take this into consideration and we almost lost the deal.

We turned to Rowlands in our hour of need and they proved to be exceptional. All deadlines were met, communication was prompt and regular with up to date information provided by e-mail and all documentation delivered in good time via courier. We are very happy with the service we received and will definitely instruct Rowlands again for our next transaction.

Thank you Rowlands, for your outstanding work!"

Over the last two months we as a firm have seen certain areas of the housing market and certain regions of the UK remain buoyant and buck the current downward trend in the property market.

Interest rates are decreasing to attract borrowers: evidence of this is the fact that in the last month alone, rates have been cut by several lenders including Nationwide, Abbey, Woolwich, Cheltenham & Gloucester and Halifax.

It would appear also that more mortgage deals are now becoming available. From a buyer's point of view, house builders and housing associations are offering more incentives to assist buyers get on to the property ladder.

For more information please contact us or email info@rowlands-solicitors.co.uk

The implementation of the Public Law Protocol in Greater Manchester leads to decline in the number of Care Applications

His Honour Judge Iain Hamilton, Designated Family Judge for Greater Manchester circulated his comments in relation to implementation of the PLO in Greater Manchester on the 8th July 2008, stating that "the overwhelming view of the very experienced public law ticketed Circuit Judges and District Judges is that the PLO has added little of real benefit to improve the forensic practice of how public law cases are dealt with within Greater Manchester." Various difficulties in relation to the PLO Forms and Orders are highlighted, particularly in relation to the introduction of standard Forms and Orders. The format of the Forms and Orders has led to practitioners failing to draw Orders properly. There is a proposal that the Greater Manchester PLO Implementation Working Group will consider the issues relating to these difficulties, with a view to issuing some guidance for local authorities and practitioners in due course.

The article notes that there has been a significant decline in the number of public law proceedings issued by local authorities in Greater Manchester – a fall of 52% in April and 57% in June has been identified. His Honour Judge Hamilton comments that "It is difficult to know whether that is simply a reflection of the difficulties and uncertainties generated by the different requirements of the PLO, or whether it is a response to the 'fee issue'". He goes on to state "On any view, however, it is worrying that there should be such a significant decline in the number of cases being started."

His Honour Judge Hamilton goes on to mention some positive developments that coincided with the introduction of the PLO, in particular mentioning that Judges have been impressed by the quality of Guardians' case analysis and recommendation reports – "It is recognised that this has been a real benefit to the judiciary in enabling them and the parties to focus better on the real issues from an early stage in the proceedings. The impression is that the PLO requirements have also enabled the parties' legal advisors to focus more effectively on the appropriate expert to seek to instruct."

Of apparent concern to the judiciary is that specialist family law practitioners are becoming less inclined to undertake publicly funded work, as a result of financial constraints, notably the Legal Services Commission's introduction of fixed fees for public law cases. An example is given of Wythenshawe in Manchester, which has one of the largest housing estates in Europe – the area no longer has a firm of family solicitors which offers publicly funded advice for family law problems.

Earlier in the year at the Resolution Annual Conference, Mr Justice Coleridge referred to "the terrible shortage of contact centres" – an issue that is re-visited in an article in Resolution's July 2008 Review.

The article by Judy Birchall, a manager with the National Association of Child Contact Centres urges Resolution members to abide by the protocol introduced in 2002 which provides guidance to Courts considering making an Order for contact which involves the use of a contact centre. Mention is made of the number of unrepresented parents requiring referrals to contact centres. Enquiries can be directed to the National Association of Child Contact Centres.

You may have read many features in the Press recently about the problems with the Spanish Property market.

You may however still be interested in buying a property in Spain in view of the fact that prices are dropping and now might be a good time to buy.

For a detailed look at the problems surrounding a Spanish Property Purchase please review this article by Derek Sands, Partner and Head of Rowlands' Foreign Property department.

Here we see Emma Stockton receiving her prize from Jon Andrews, the joint Managing Partner. Emma entered the draw when she attended the Homebuyers Exhibition show earlier on in the year at which Rowlands had a stand.

When Emma was notified that she had won the Champagne she said that she had never won anything in her life and she was delighted with the prize.

The event was very successful for Rowlands and Jon Andrews says "We are committted to the property sector and were delighted with the response to our presence at the Homebuyers Exhibition."

"Everyone is aware of the difficulties in the economy but we are finding that there are significant pockets of activity, and our Conveyancing team remain busy. We are determined to support this sector of the economy in the North West by offering high quality, pro-active legal services and we are well placed to serve the needs of investors and others who see oppurtunities in the current market."

Britain's largest retailers are uniting in an attempt to change the centuries-old practice of paying landlords quarterly rent payments in advance.

The consortium of retailers, which includes Boots, Next, Argos and Arcadia, are demanding that landlords now accept rent payments on a monthly basis. These moves follow on from the Rent Monthly Campaign initiated by the British Retail Consortium in 2006 which was supported by more than 80,000 small retailers. The retailers argue that making quarterly rent payments in advance has a significant effect on cash flow and the process contrasts with the normal commercial practice whereby invoicing for business services is on a monthly, after-the-event basis. In 2006 the BRC claimed that the current rental system costs retailers around £145 million a year.

The landlords, who include large property companies such as British Land, Land Securities and Hammerson, are in a strong legal position and are likely to be resistant to change. It is normal practice for a lease in respect of commercial property to include provisions relating to quarterly advance rent payments, and there will be no legal obligation on landlords to alter their stance.

The practice of paying rent monthly in advance is already popular in the United States and in certain parts of central Europe. Fifty councils in England and Wales agreed to accept monthly rent payments from retailers in late 2006 as a result of the Rent Monthly Campaign.

There have already been some concessions from landlords in respect of retailers based in out-of-town shopping centres. However, many landlords have ensured that any move to monthly rent payments have not been advertised to prevent other tenants wanting to follow suit.

HIPs Love them or Hate them

We have all read about HIPs over the last couple of months but what makes interesting reading is that the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, the National Association of Estate Agents and the Association of Residential Letting Agents have commissioned a report to look at the impact of HIPs (Home Information Packs) since they were introduced 12 months ago.

The report was carried out by Sir Bryan Carsberg, a former Director General of Fair Trading.

Carsberg concludes that the contents of HIPs had been reduced to very little, despite their cost of on average £350, and that they should no longer be compulsory. Here are some quotes from his report.

"I understand that, to date, few buyers have shown an interest in the HIP, and a substantial number of conveyancers ignore its existence and recommission searches on receiving instructions from their buyer client, suggesting a lack of confidence in the limited content".

"This evidence alone indicates that the cost of HIPs is likely to exceed their benefits. Some would summarise the position by saying that the HIP provides the worst of all worlds – it omits much of the most useful information but still imposes significant costs on the property transaction".

"Even if HIPs were to become more comprehensive, there appears to be a strong likelihood that delays between the preparation of the pack and exchange of contracts would mean that much of the information would have become out of date by the time it was use".

Notwithstanding the report, the Department of Communities and Local Government has said there are no plans to scrap HIPs.

The Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) has published new guidelines for courts sentencing drivers convicted of offences where death is involved. This is likely to result in harsher sentences being imposed. Of particular concern for the average motorist are guidelines applicable for the new offence of causing death by careless driving.

The new guidelines mark a trend that began about ten years ago. Until then magistrates passing sentence for an offence of careless driving involving death were advised not to allow the fact that a death had occurred to become an aggravating feature in the sentence passed.

Similarly, it was generally accepted that the unintended consequences of an accident would generally have little relevance to the penalty imposed where the offence to be dealt with was one of careless driving. Magistrates, when deciding sentence in such cases were encouraged to focus on the degree of carelessness and to bear in mind that a moments inattention could have tragic but completely unintended results.

This approach was changed by two cases R –v- Simmonds in 1999 and R –v- King in 2001, where the Court of Appeal decided that the idea that a sentencing court was obliged to disregard the fact that a death had occurred was somewhat anomalous

Since then, whilst the emphasis has been on assessing the culpability of the driver, the courts have taken into account the consequences of such culpability in so far as they indicate the degree of risk created by the careless driving.

Growing public concern over serious injury and deaths on the roads and the controversy over the use of handheld mobile phones by drivers resulted in February 2004 in the maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving being increased from ten years to fourteen years imprisonment and at the same time the offence of using a handheld mobile phone whilst driving became endorsable with a maximum fine of £1,000.

As a result of the increased penalties drivers convicted of causing death by dangerous driving can now expect an immediate sentence of imprisonment of two years where there are no aggravating features and a sentence of up to ten years imprisonment for more serious offences.

For the new offence of causing death by careless driving with no aggravating features the starting point would be a community order, increasing to a starting point of 15 months imprisonment where the standard of driving fell just below dangerous driving.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have a published policy on cases of bad driving. In deciding whether the driving falls into the category of dangerous or careless they will take into account factors such as:

• Speed, which is inappropriate for the prevailing road conditions.

• Unsafe overtaking

• Use of a handheld mobile phone

• Reading a map

• Talking to/looking at a passenger

• Selecting and lighting a cigarette

It is not therefore, difficult to envisage a combination of circumstances where a driver with a previous good record becomes involved in a fatal accident and suddenly faces an allegation of causing death by careless driving or the more serious charge of causing death by dangerous driving which, on conviction, would result in an inevitable immediate prison sentence.

Motorists should, therefore, constantly remind themselves of the important responsibility they assume when they drive and if they do find themselves involved in an accident, particularly where death or serious injury has occurred ensure that they receive legal advice and representation at the very outset.

For further information contact Aidan Carr.

The Trade Descriptions Act 1968 – RIP?

Many business owners will have heard of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. But how many are aware that it has largely been replaced by The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations that came into force on the 26th May 2008?

The new regulations have been introduced in an effort to harmonise the law protecting consumers across the European Union so that in theory at least, there will be a level playing field for businesses upon which to compete and so that it will be easier for businesses to operate across the whole of the EU.

The Regulations bring together rules and regulations previously spread across some 23 pieces of legislation and provide a comprehensive code under which traders are required to treat consumers fairly.

Penalties for breach of the Regulations range from fines up to a maximum of two years imprisonment at the most serious end of the scale.

Well advised business owners should familiarise themselves and their sales force with the new law to avoid incurring penalties and the attendant potentially catastrophic loss of goodwill.

Usefully, the regulations specifically outlaw 31 prohibited practices, which include: Falsely claiming accreditation – such as falsely claiming to subscribe to a code of conduct or displaying a quality mark when ineligible. This could cover the situation when your membership has simply lapsed and has not been renewed.

Pricing and product information- advertising products at a specified (low) price, but not having them available for sale within a reasonable time.

Limited time offers- falsely stating that a deal or offer will only be available for a very limited time.

Not taking "No" for an answer- making repeated and unsolicited contact by telephone, fax or email.

Market Conditions- misleading the consumer as to market conditions e.g. by stating that due to excess demand new stock will not be available for some time.

If you require guidance on how the regulations affect your business then contact our Commercial Department or if you are subject to an investigation by Trading Standards then contact Aidan Carr in our Litigation Department.

A recent survey by the finance providers Paragon Mortgages has shown that 55% of landlords in the UK are unaware of impending changes in the law relating to energy efficiency requirements.

Under the new laws, which come into effect on the 1st October 2008, landlords letting a residential property will have to provide all prospective tenants with an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC). An EPC is a report on the energy efficiency of a property and can only be prepared by an accredited energy assessor.

An EPC is valid for 10 years and contains recommendations on how to make the property more energy-efficient, but there will be no obligation on the landlord to implement these recommendations.

The obligation to provide a written report arises when the landlord provides written information about the property to a person who has requested it, when a prospective tenant views the building, or when a contract is entered into for the letting of the property. Failure to obtain an EPC will mean that after the 1st October 2008 a landlord will be unable to market the property and will be liable to a fine of £200.00 per dwelling.

High street mortgage lenders have reduced the rates of some of their fixed rate/tracker mortgages. The biggest drop in mortgage costs applies to those that have the ability to put down larger deposits of up to 30%.

Fixed rate deals for house buyers from Abbey, for example, have reduced twice in the last ten days (as at 11th July 2008). Although the offer of mortgages has been affected by the "credit crunch" there is a variety of mortgage deals being advertised for buyers who have a deposit of over 10% available.

Runners from Rowlands hit the streets in the annual Manchester 10K race, raising funds for Cancer Research UK, The British Heart Foundation and St Monicas - a Hospice in Nairobi, Kenya, which looks after mothers and babies suffering from HIV/Aids.

Our picture shows back row from left; Charlotte Taylor, Gail Cartwright, Richard Armstrong, Anne Flynn.
Front row from left; Melanie Sharples, Linda Street and Anita Clews

Recent press coverage has led to controversy over the distribution of local authority funds in relation to the maintenance of defective and dangerous pavements nationwide.

It has been reported that one council had put aside £330,000 to cover legal costs last year but only £62,000 for repairs to broken pavements.

Statistics however show that 2,300 older people alone fall on broken pavements every day and that 24% of pavements in England are in need of repair and maintenance.

The compelling truth is that more than 80,000 elderly people sustain injury following falls on Britain's poorly maintained paths and pavements and then become too frightened to leave their homes. Pamela Holmes of registered charity, Help the Aged warns of the inherent danger in failing to tackle this problem effectively. She said "It is vital councils invest more in keeping public walkways safe, as falls are the leading cause of deaths for over 75's."

It is apparent that significantly more funding is allocated to dealing with claims post accident than in taking pre-accident, preventative action in terms of maintaining Britain's walkways. Put simply, a safe pavement equals a safe public.

It is a fallacy to suggest that this trend has lead to an influx of spurious personal injury claims and therefore a rise in fees being paid to the legal profession. All of us are under a duty to protect the most vulnerable in our society. Everyone should be able to leave their homes and go about their everyday lives without the concern of falling on defective pavements and sustaining serious injury. If the Local Authorities are not prepared to invest the funds in repairing and maintaining Britain's walkways then we, as lawyers, have a duty to represent the vulnerable in their hour of need. This is not simply a matter of obtaining compensation on their behalf, but of giving them their freedom and therefore their lives back.

 

Written by A. Flynn and A. Rowlands

The national press makes rather depressing reading at the moment. Things however may not be as bad as they seem for the North West.

Figures which have recently been produced by the Land Registry indicate that the North West and Manchester in particular, saw price increases of 3.2% in April of this year. Furthermore, prices in the North West generally so far haven't seen as much of a fall in price as in the South East.

The Land Registry figures provide one of the more accurate price monitors recording the actual price for which the property is sold as opposed to the "advertised" price. There is not a property crisis but rather what seems to be a financial/banking crisis and until the financial institutions start to generate some liquidity in the money markets then it would appear that the housing market will be tarred with the same brush.

Clearly, the global credit crunch has already affected the UK and made banks wary of lending but for buyers who can raise a deposit then there are chances to be taken and an advantage is to be gained by lower house prices.

Rowlands is on the takeover trail as it looks to step up a gear following a period of upheaval.

Rowlands, which has its flagship office in York Street Manchester, and a satellite branch in Swinton, is looking to acquire small practices around Greater Manchester, with a focus on commercial specialists.

News of the planned swoops came as Rowlands today unveiled a modest £200.000 rise in fee income for the year to April 30, up from £5.35m.

Joint managing partners Jon Andrews and Tony Broadley said they were delighted with progress made during their first 12 months at the helm after replacing Ron Taylor.

Senior partner Philip Belamy was replaced by Aidan Carr. Mr Broadley said Rowlands was on a stronger footing after investment in IT and marketing services, and looking to maintain its growth momentum this year.
"We are looking to acquire sole practitioners who may be working from home, and also two-to-three partner practices which can add quality to the firm," he said.

Mr Andrews said: "Our growing commercial department, underpinned by our well-established litigation teams, gives us every reason to be optimistic."

The firms roots trace back to 1886, when Theophilis Rowland established his practice in Spring gardens. Today, Rowlands has nine equity partners and 130 staff.

Article originally published in the Manchester Evening News, 17th June 2008

From today, 1st May 2008 Local Authorities now have to pay thousands of pounds in Court fees to issue proceedings relating to children in their care.

Previously the fees for issuing care proceedings in relation to vulnerable children were in the low hundreds.

Local Authorities across the country are concerned that they have not been given sufficient funds from Central Government and as a result will not be in a financial position to issue as many sets of proceedings.

This could lead to vulnerable children remaining in danger and not being taken into care by the local Authority.

These children could be in positions where they are being physical, sexually or emotionally abused by their parents or carers.

It is a real concern and the judiciary amongst other bodies have voiced their strong views on the matter.

Lawyers in Scotland are set to take industrial action in a row over government proposals to reform the legal aid system.

The Glasgow Bar Association, which has the largest representation of criminal lawyers in Scotland, voted to take action on a range of issues.

However, its main grievance concerned the revised levels of legal aid, which will effectively mean a cut in the payments its members receive.

It is still unclear what action the association is to take, although it has ruled out a strike, a move that can put solicitors in breach of Law Society guidelines.

But the association said that its action was likely to cause chaos within the courts.

The Law Society of Scotland warned that the reforms, which were announced earlier in the month, could force the closure of hundreds of practices, and may also lead to miscarriages of justice.

President of the Glasgow Bar Association, Sara Matheson, said that the association was disappointed at having to consider a vote for action but felt the issue was very important and that this was the time when it had to take a stand.

She warned that the level of pay was now such that lawyers would go elsewhere, which could lead to a criminal justice nightmare instigated by the Scottish Government.

Conveyancers are seeing fewer approaches from first-time buyers amid tightening credit conditions, increasing mortgage repayments and fears of a house price meltdown.

And now news that mortgage lending has fallen by 17% since the same period last year is the latest evidence that the housing bubble has finally burst.

The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) has released its provisional estimates for March, which show that lenders dished out a total of £26.3 billion in new home loans and remortgages compared with £31.7 billion for the same month last year.

Leading investment institutions are warning that the bloated UK housing market would slump by at least 10% in the next two years, with up to one in ten homeowners slipping into negative equity.

The weakening housing market is also hitting housebuilders – with the UK's largest, Taylor Wimpey, reporting a 26% drop in orders for new homes.

Despite Bank of England attempts to prop up the housing market with base rate cuts and plans to stimulate lending between banks, lenders are still bumping up rates on some of their mortgages.

Chief UK and European economist at Global Insight, Howard Archer, said that the low level of mortgage activity was down lower demand for housing, fewer and more expensive mortgages and, a particular problem for first-time buyers, higher deposit levels.

The Prime Minister has called on banks to pass on interest rate cuts to homeowners with mortgages in a bid to ease the pinch of the credit crunch.

Gordon Brown made the comments in a Sunday newspaper after the Bank of England cut the interest rate by 0.25%, taking the rate to 5% last week.

It is the third interest rate cut since December but some banks seem to be resisting passing on the full reductions and Mr Brown said he is worried that this is having a damaging effect on the already fragile housing market.

In an effort to resolve the situation, Chancellor Alistair Darling is said to be meeting with lenders to discuss new measures to ensure those lower interest rates are passed on to mortgage holders.

As part of his piece in the News of the World, Brown also said that banks should be honest about bad debts because the lending squeeze was making it harder for them to raise funds on financial markets.

He said that if the world's largest banks could come together quickly and agree as a group to come clean about the potential bad debts they face it could restore confidence to the markets.

Nicola Reeves, Conveyancing Executive at Rowlands, commented "From a personal point of view, as a home owner, a cut in the base rate was appreciated and would have been more so had lenders passed the cut to their borrowers. From a more professional and business point of view this would assist the property market by making mortgages more affordable to our existing and future clients."

Tesco is taking The Guardian to law, accusing the newspaper of libel and malicious falsehood in articles about its tax affairs.

The supermarket giant says that The Guardian had wrongly accused it of concocting a tax structure, primarily involving offshore venture partnerships, designed to avoid paying corporation tax to the tune of up to £1bn on UK property sales.

Tesco defended its actions, describing them as a legitimate way of achieving tax savings.

The supermarket said it was not uncommon to use offshore companies for the purpose of joint ventures with third parties.

In fact, it added, Guardian Media Group had itself announced an offshore structure, as reported in The Guardian last month.

The Guardian hit back by saying that its articles were in the context of a series of articles on taxation issues in a globalised world, which clearly raised serious matters of public interest in relation to tax avoidance.

The paper said that it had never claimed Tesco had behaved illegally, but accused the supermarket of bullying tactics by deliberately seeking to chill public debate on the issue.

The Guardian said it had offered meetings to discuss the allegations, but the offer had been rejected.

Instead, it added, Tesco had taken the extraordinary step of suing for libel in a clear attempt to close down the debate.

William O'Neill, Partner at Rowlands, commented "Reputation is so important to a business. It has to be protected. This is why defamation, whether an individual or company, has to be taken very seriously."

 

Rowlands can advise both commercial and private clients in the area of libel and defamation and in a wide range of legal matters. Contact us for further information.

The Conservatives have renewed their call to scrap the controversial home information packs (HIPs), branding them as a bureaucratic farce and a complete waste of time.

The packs were intended to speed up the house-buying process and reduce the number of abortive sales by providing the buyer with essential details about the property.

However, their introduction had been beset by delays and reduced requirements, with the packs finally becoming mandatory for most residential properties in December.

The Conservative Party has continually voiced its opposition to the packs and vowed to axe the legislation should the party be elected.

Shadow housing minister, Grant Shapps, said everyone involved recognised that HIPs had failed in every aspect.

This latest attack follows recent criticism by the National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA).

The NAEA pointed to research conducted during the HIP area trials, which found that 41% of buyers actually felt HIPs were making the purchasing mechanism more difficult, and that only 20% saw the packs as speeding up the buying process.

Consumer magazine Which? also highlighted the dramatic variation in the cost, saying that it had obtained quotes for HIPs ranging from £234 to £534, depending on type and location of property.

Carl Chapman, Partner at Rowlands commented "HIPs appear to have had no discernable effect on the conveyancing process other than a shift of search costs to the Seller. In my experience estate agents have not been asked to produce them for inspection and the Buyers have not availed themselves of the information, leaving the legalities to their solicitors as before."

 

For professional advice in relation to HIPs or for a quotation on your Sale or Purchase, please contact Rowlands Residential Conveyancing Department.

Rowlands has promoted Jenny Jones and Amanda Rowlands to salaried partners, and Latham Parry to associate solicitor.

Jones, who qualified at the firm, specialises in probate law in the private client department; Rowlands, who is no relation to the firms 19th Century founder, joined the firm in 2000, specialises in personal injury law; and Parry, who joined the firm as a trainee in 2002, specialises in personal injury and employment.

Jon Andrews, joint managing partner of Rowlands, said in a statement: "We are delighted to be able to recognise the existing talent in the firm with these appointments. These three talented young solicitors are already a credit to the firm and will be invaluable additions to the senior roles."

Spanish holiday homes could cost families thousands because they are failing to heed Spanish inheritance law, according to foreign property expert, Maria Prieto of Rowlands.

Spanish law is much stricter and very different from UK law, dictating that on death a certain proportion of the person's estate must be left to his wife and children. Therefore children have an automatic right to part of the estate on the death of their parents, regardless of whether they are expressly mentioned in their Will. Unlike UK law, there is also no automatic transfer to a surviving partner, while tax on any inheritance is payable by the beneficiary and not the executors, as in the UK.

Maria Prieto, foreign property specialist at Rowlands, explains: "If you do not have a Spanish Will to dispose of your Spanish Assets, your heirs will be involved in an expensive and slow process to legalise and translate all the English Probate documentation relating to your English Will which will have to be submitted to the Spanish Authorities"

"If you die intestate, there will be even more complications. In principle, English Law will apply, but the English Law states that for the properties situated abroad the determination of Legal Heirs will be according to the Laws of the Country where the assets are situated, so this will mean that Spanish Law will apply. If you decide to sign a Spanish Will, Spanish Law accepts that English law will apply to the disposition of your estate and you will have complete freedom to dispose of your estate without restriction."

Prieto adds: "Spanish Wills can also save a person's heirs administrative costs, as well as possible disputes over their Spanish estate."

Rowlands has been named as one of the top corporate law firms in Manchester according to the influential Crains Manchester Business.

Senior Partner Aidan Carr commented "This is a very edifying endorsement of our corporate law department endorsing the partnership's decision to expand our corporate/commercial base. We will hopefully improve on this in 2008 as we also expand our private client services."

You can download the Crains ranking here.

Rowlands Solicitors has led one of this year's biggest pharmacy deals, advising PCT Healthcare on its £80 million disposal to Co-op.

Formed in 2001, PCT Healthcare owned 99 outlets throughout the North, trading as Tims & Parker or Peak Pharmacy. The company sold 52 of these stores in the deal but will continue to operate 47. It employs 400 staff and has an annual turnover of £51 million. Founders Andy Parker, Geoff Tims and Peter Cattee, will continue to manage PCT.

It was a multi-discipline deal for Rowlands. Partner Derek Sands led the transaction, assisted by Paul Matthews. Partner Philip Bellamy dealt with all property aspects of the deal, assisted by Michael Stewart and Pippa Billingham. William O'Neill advised on all employment issues.

Sands commented:

"PCT has achieved incredible growth since it was founded only six years ago, led by a strong management team. The deal with the Co-op will allow the Group to continue to grow and indeed PCT bought another pharmacy in Manchester on the very same day that the deal with the Co-op was finalised.

This is the second major pharmacy deal Rowlands has advised on this year. We have also been involved in a number of smaller acquisitions in the sector. This deal confirms our position as leading experts in the field and demonstrates the firm's ability to deal with substantial transactions, by bringing together a team from different disciplines within the practice."

Rowlands has also acted for number of pharmacy consortia in the North West, advising the members of the consortia as independent lawyers.

You can view our range of Commercial Services or contact us for further information.

Rowlands was proud to sponsor the Independent Schools Football Association Golden Jubilee "Sixes" hosted by St Bede's College, who coincidentally, after some exciting matches, turned out eventual winners of the trophy.

 

 

Aidan Carr, Senior Partner at Rowlands commented

"as a firm we have been involved in sponsoring sporting events over many years. This is because we believe that the qualities required to play sport at any level are also the qualities we look for in our lawyers - teamwork, committment, ability and more often than not perspiration and inspiration! We were particularly delighted that Sir Alex Ferguson also supported the event, taking time out from an extremely busy professional schedule. It was obvious that everyone appreciated his presence there.

As a Governor of St Bede's I was particularly delighted to see the College progress to the final and in a very exciting game, overcome rivals Charterhouse."

Rowlands has continued its involvement with the Manchester Evening News Property Awards by sponsoring the event for the fourth successive year. Rowlands has a substantial presence in both residential and commercial property throughtout the region and its support for the event is consistent with its committment for developing and expanding its legal services to everyone involved in the property sector in the North West and indeed beyond.

Philip Bellamy, partner at Rowlands, presented the prize for Best Family Home and prefaced the award with the following comment:

"I can't wait to tell you how delighted we are at Rowlands to sponsor these awards once again, to renew our link with the region's most prominent publication, the Manchester Evening News; and to be part of a truly magnificent occasion.

This event is a celebration of local achievement. It is a fitting tribute to the vision, imagination, ingenuity and perseverance of builders, developers and entrepreneurs of this area. Daring pioneers, they have contributed so much to the enhancement of our landscape and the transformation of our previously unfashionable localities. May they reap the rewards of their efforts and their bold investment.

For a local law firm it is a wonderful opportunity to bestow a little praise upon our own developer clients. It is a privilege to work with them as they meet the challenges of their trade - shortage of suitable sites, moratoriums, planning obligations, affordable housing ratios, carbon reduction and the code for sustainable homes, not to mention restrictive covenants - a whole host of issues to tackle against a background of tightening margins in competitive market conditions. Their success is so richly deserved.

During our four year association with these awards, the calibre of the entries has grown progressively higher. We have seen some great things.

The first award my firm is presenting tonight is in the best family home category. We have seen three great examples of cleverly designed modern family homes – let's find out the winner. "

Manchester City has always been there or thereabouts as one of those football clubs that provoke a smile of sympathy rather than a snarl of envy. Despite a venerable history, in recent years City have threatened to do something great, only to flatter to deceive. And then, of course, there is always Manchester's other team, those pesky Red Devils in whose shadow the Blues have been consigned to live a half-life, one of drama, humour, bathos and pathos, but not a lot of silverware.

Philip Bellamy, the head of property for Manchester law firm Rowlands LLP, knows all about the peculiar fortitude required to be a Manchester City fan. Indeed, the 60-year-old – for 10 years Rowlands' senior partner – might just qualify as the club's most ardent supporter. This is a man who has missed just one league game in the last three seasons, who's barely been absent from the terraces at all for the past 25 years, and whose colleagues, just after he joined the firm in the wake of City's 1969 1-0 FA Cup victory over Leicester City, decorated his tea mug with sky blue ribbons on the Monday morning following the win.

"I fell in love with the club when I was seven," says Bellamy, whose father was a Derby County supporter. The old adage that sons follow their father's teams was turned on its head by the young Bellamy, who went on to convert his father to City, as well as the rest of his family. Indeed, Bellamy even met his wife, Amanda, at Maine Road. "She's almost as fanatical as me," he says.

The pair had brief cause to rue their mutual devotion to City 15 minutes into a flight from Southampton airport. Bellamy takes up the story: "There were 15 of us on board a small plane, including Amanda. We'd travelled down to see City play Portsmouth, in what turned out to be David Seaman's last game of professional football. Despite being 2-1 up at half time, we went on to lose 4-2." Classic City, I suggest. Bellamy chuckles, but what happened next was no laughing matter.

"A short while after taking off from Southampton airport the plane began to lose height. We could smell burning and it soon became apparent that we had a defective engine. It was very disconcerting for me because I could see into the cabin, where the crew was flicking through a manual." Happily, all 15 passengers – including the Manchester City board – lived to tell the tale. "The Captain was magnificent. The procedure he followed was to shut down the engine, and luckily we were at the requisite height for him to do this." Bellamy says that the plane was diverted to Farnborough airport, and that when it landed "there was an almighty cheer."

So, too, shortly thereafter, a large bar bill. The fortunate 15 were taken to a local pub and ran up a tab of £547.50 by way of stress relief. "The club picked up the bill," says Bellamy, who himself once entertained ideas of joining the club at board level. However, he opted to retain his fan's eye view, once which has seen no little drama at Maine Raod over the years and some exceptional footballers. "Bert Trautman, Colin Bell and Georgi Kinkladzi were the best I've seen," says Bellamy.

Bellamy confesses that for some time he was a tortured soul on account of Manchester United's seemingly exclusive rights to success. When United won the 1969 European Cup Final against Benfica, he confesses that he hid away to avoid knowing anything of the team's heroics. By the time United had replicated the feat by winning the Champions League in Barcelona in 1999, he was better adjusted. "The golden era of life under Joe Mercer and Malcom Allison changed everything. For six years we went to Old Trafford and beat United on the trot. I almost felt sorry for them."

Many neutrals felt sorry for the likes of Bellamy when Sven-Goran Eriksson was appointed Manchester City's manager at the beginning of this season. "I didn't exactly do cartwheels," admits Bellamy, who, rather prophetically, posed in 2002 next to the waxwork of Eriksson at Madame Tussauds. But the long-suffering City stalwart has been impressed by the Swede. "I like the way he's got the team playing passing football and he's been very impressive so far."

Should Eriksson continue to deliver the goods, Bellamy might just arrive at work at the end of the season to find his tea mug bedecked in sky blue ribbons. Then again, City might, as so often, throw it all away. In a sense, to the true fan, it matters not. For as Bellamy says: "It's a relaxation, a release from the rigours of the day job. There's an appealing madness about the club that's irresistible."

 

Article originally published on the Times web site 8th October 2007

You can now stay abreast of the latest news and press releases from Rowlands Solicitors LLP by subscribing to our RSS Feed

• Latest News from Rowlands Solicitors LLP

In addition to the latest Rowlands news and press releases you can now also subscribe to Simon Hughes' column which is published in the Manchester Evening News:

• Simon Hughes' Column Inches

You can subscribe using any popular feed aggregator such as Google Reader.
For more information relating to RSS please see this article on Wikipedia.

Derek Sands, partner and head of foreign property at Rowlands Solicitors, advises that people need to seek professional advice in the early stages of buying overseas property to avoid complications later down the line.

He says: "Quite often we find that people get romanced by the idea of having a holiday home in their favourite resort and go off buying property without seeking legal advice. Then, once they encounter contractual problems with builders not completing the project to specification or on time, they come calling. It is much more difficult to solve problems once contracts have been signed so its vital that these are addressed in the early stages."

It's also important for buyers to research the market before diving in. Sands comments: "First of all buyers need to be clear on whether they are buying property as an investment or as a holiday home. They also need to have a good knowledge of the local market before parting with cash. Investors should steer clear of Spain where the market is flat and saturated and look to emerging markets such as Cape Verde and the Margarita Islands, which are becoming increasingly popular and have attracted larger developers. If the property is to only serve as a holiday home, growth potential and market performance are not as important but should still be considered. Although investment in Spain is not likely to make as much money in the future as it has in the past, if you want to buy in Spain for other reasons ie non investment reasons then there is no reason why you should not do so after of course taking proper advice".

SIPPs
Since Gordon Brown applied SIPPs to commercial property last year, Sands says that this method of investment has become very popular.

"A large proportion of people choose to invest in foreign property via a self invested personal pension (SIPP). It is an effective way of getting on the foreign property ladder but people need to be aware that the property purchased becomes an asset of the pension fund and so the value of it will be used to provide retirement benefits. As trustee of the SIPP, you have responsibility to meet the health and safety regulations and the other obligations that fall upon any owner of the property which can differ depending on the country. This means that the property must be properly managed otherwise your SIPP could be at risk," says Sands.

"At one time we never advised clients to buy properties through the medium of a company unless the price was substantial ie at least 500,000 euros. There were also potential tax disadvantages where the user of the property could be charged tax based on the open market rent. However the law changed this year and providing the foreign residential property is the only asset of the company then no tax charge will arise".

Fractional Ownership
Fractional ownership is becoming more popular with people wanting to invest overseas.

Sands comments: "Fractional ownership is sharing ownership of a property, much the same as time share, but the difference is that you are buying into equity in the property. It involves the title deed being divided into fractions ranging from a quarter to a twelfth and then people stay at the property for the corresponding fraction of the year. A management company usually runs the property and each fractional owner contributes to an annual maintenance fund, but make sure this is fixed from the outset.

"It is a good idea to enter factional ownership of a property via a developer, as opposed to individuals who you can easily fall out with. Make sure that the management company owns the property and you are buying it from them and thoroughly check the company's policy, particularly concerning booking holiday dates and inviting friends and family."

Equity release
"Equity release has a bad name in the UK because it wasn't regulated for years and people didn't get a good deal," says Sands.

"It should mainly be for those who have considerable equity in their UK property. As a general rule you will not be able to release all the equity in your property and bear in mind that if property values fall, you could find yourself in a negative equity situation.

"It is important to consider the implications of interest rate rises and potential property price decline as your home will be at risk if you are unable to maintain any loan secured on it."

"The above comments apply particularly to Equity release on UK properties. The same disadvantages may not be present if you wish to borrow money against the security of your foreign property. The disadvantage of losing your home on death would not apply. There is still the same problem of the loan increasing because of rolled up interest rates. Furthermore, there are no companies yet which will lend on an Equity release basis against foreign property although it is easy to obtain a loan on a pre owned property".

Bosses at Manchester solicitors have vowed to make the firm 'a force to be reckoned with' after a period of upheaval involving major changes at the top and a cull which saw more than one in 10 staff take voluntary redundancy.

Rowlands has shut its satellite offices in Droylsden and Sale and brought those operations into the firm's city centre headquarters in York Street.

A total of 17 staff took severance, leaving the firm with 115 employees in York Street and a branch in Swinton.

Senior partner Philip Bellamy has stood down to focus on commercial property work, and Aidan Carr, 52, has succeeded him. Managing partner Ron Taylor has left the firm after 36 years, and his role has been taken jointly by Jon Andrews, 41, and Tony Broadley, 46.

Mr Carr and Mr Andrews joined the practice as trainees in 1977 and 1990 respectively, while Mr Broadley was a barrister before he arrived in 1988.

Rowlands' specialist areas include commercial property, private client and personal injury, but Mr Andrews said the firm would look to add departments.

Practice
"Our strategy is to create a very strong city centre practice which is respected and has growing and sustainable profits. We took the view that we needed to build our presence here. We have got tremendous potential and I think we can be a force to be reckoned with," he said.

"We are looking to start punching above our weight."

Established in 1886, Rowlands has 10 equity partners. Fee income to April 30 was £5.35m and Mr Andrews said the firm aimed to reach £6m next year. "We have been through a period of tremendous change, but we have had a very good first quarter of the new financial year against a background of major restructuring," he added.

The redundancies helped reduce overheads during a period in which the firm is spending a total of £400,000 on IT improvements and refurbishments to its head office.

Mr Andrews said the fact that he and Mr Carr had risen through the ranks showed Rowlands' commitment to nurturing its own talent. "We are very keen to progress this - we like to develop people and play to their strengths."

Mr Carr said Rowlands was 'entering an exciting phase in the firm's development'.

Although a novelty, having joint managing partners was crucial to the firm's future, as the overhaul of operations was too big a job for one person, said Mr Andrews.

The high cost of borrowing following a series of interest rate rises, combined with fears of further hikes is stopping small businesses in the North West from achieving their growth plans, according to commercial law firm, Rowlands.

Interest rates currently stand at 5.75 per cent and analysts are predicting further rises in the months to come. According to Paul Matthews, these further increases could restrict the growth of smaller companies, while pushing those with large loans or overdrafts into administration.

He comments: "Rate rises discourages investment particularly among the smaller business community which tends to work on tight margins.

"It is much more difficult for smaller firms to absorb short-term fluctuations in costs. To protect their businesses, management should investigate fixed-rate loan options, which will protect them given the current economic uncertainty and high cost of borrowing.

Paul adds: "It is important to remember that the economy as a whole will be affected if small businesses fail to achieve their ambitions because of increasing interest rates."

Three partners who all started their careers as solicitors at Rowlands have been appointed to spearhead the future development of the Manchester firm.

Jon Andrews is to take on the position of joint Managing Partner alongside Tony Broadley. Jon became a trainee solicitor with Rowlands in 1990 and rose through the ranks, becoming salaried partner in 1998 and gaining equity status in 2000, while Tony joined the firm in 1988 as a solicitor, following a successful career at the Bar. In addition to the joint appointments, Aidan Carr has been named Senior Partner. He also trained at Rowlands, becoming equity partner in 1986 and is currently head of the firm's regulatory and criminal litigation department.

Jon and Tony replace Ronald Taylor as Managing Partner who is leaving Rowlands after 36 years. He also began his career as a trainee at the firm. Aidan replaces Philip Bellamy as senior partner who will remain with Rowlands and will concentrate on client work.

Jon Andrews comments: "Rowlands is long established and has some outstanding individuals who are well recognised in their specialist fields. Many of the partners were trainees with the firm, which is a reflection of our commitment to developing people and providing a working environment in which individuals can grow and progress- we have also been joined by many talented lawyers over the years.

Tony Broadley said: "While we have all been at Rowlands since the beginning of our careers as solicitors we all have a modern forward thinking mentality. The three of us are forming the future vision of the firm and moving it forward by increasing our profitable commercial, private client and litigation departments."

Established in 1886, Rowlands has developed a solid reputation across the North West. It has a strong commercial and private client base and includes amongst its portfolio niche areas having established a specialist foreign property team with lawyers fluent in Spanish and Portuguese, whilst part of its commercial practice specialises in the acquisition and disposal of pharmacies. In addition to this, Rowlands has a thriving personal injury practice and was a founding member of the National consortium InjuryLawyers4U. In recent years the firm has forged strong links with McKeever Rowan, solicitors in Dublin.

Aidan Carr said: "We are entering an exciting phase in the firm's development and all staff have bought into the future vision for the firm and are committed to delivering our growth strategy.

We are not changing our approach to business or our core values. Our aim is to continue to retain quality people and exceed client expectations in terms of service and results. People like working with us because we are friendly and approachable and get the job done."

Employees in UK call centres are experiencing an increase in severe ear infections and other hearing related problems as a result of unhygienic headsets according to Jon Andrews, a litigation partner at Manchester based law firm, Rowlands Solicitors.

Having witnessed a noticeable growth in such claims, he comments: "Call handlers wear a headset all day, every day and there is an increased risk of ear irritation and infection because headsets are worn so intensively. With approximately two per cent of the UK workforce working in a call centre environment, steps must be taken to prevent these infections, which very often lead to serious hearing problems. In many cases, some employees may experience problems but not realise where it originates."

Call centres need to be more vigilant and must do more in order to avoid the risks associated with unhygienic headsets".

Andrews provided the following simple recommendations to assist contact centre managers:

• Avoid using a ‘pool' of headsets
• Assign each worker with their own personal headset
• Ensure that there is safe and secure storage available out of hours
• Keep headsets healthy with regular maintenance
• Replace ear cushion (both leatherette and form) and windshield every three months
• Implement an effective internal cleansing and hygiene programme

In addition, every employer must comply with the Health & Safety at Work Act, Provision and Use of Working Regulations and the Health & Safety Executive guidelines. This can be a minefield so Andrews strongly recommends attending any or to be aware Health & Safety Executive education awareness programmes in order to protect the well being of headset operators.

Andrews adds: "Many tens of thousands of workers suffer workplace injuries each year and many of these are avoidable should a number of steps be taken. Today's headset operators are striving for high targets and it is not much to expect their employers to adopt satisfactory safety rules and measures.