A long shot, but legal advice sought

Page 2 of 2  
Chris Green wrote | > My final point is that like everything else you get what you pay | > for... | I do wish people wouldn't roll out this old aphorism all the time. | Nowadays especially it's even more untrue than it used to be. Goods | are no longer priced by their value (i.e. according to the raw | materials plus cost of labour), they are priced by market forces. | So you most definitely do *not*, as a general rule, get what you pay | for.... | As regards solicitors, hmmm, I'm not sure! :-)
I think it depends on what you want your solicitor to do.
If you have allegedly walked out of John Lewis with a plasma screen under your arm having forgotten to pay whilst in a temazepam-induced haze following the break-up of a relationship, your rejection from Wimbledon Rickets' fourth team thus dashing your hopes of being the next David Beckham, and years of being brought up an underpriveleged child in a broken home, then the solicitors in the Legal Aid practice in the shabby offices next to the court will know the humble phrases to murmur before the Bench to get you three-months-suspended and a kleptomania management course.
They're also quite useful for debt collection, because even if you don't need legal advice you can meet some toughie in the waiting room who'll do a spot of 'enforcing' for you.
If you are buying a house then you want a conveyancing solicitor who's been conveyancing properties in that street man and boy for forty years and who knows that right of access for the sewer serving the even-numbered houses was never formally granted in 1876.
If, of course, you have allegedly walked out of Harrods with a plasma screen under your arm having forgotten to pay whilst in a cocaine-induced haze following the break-up of your popular beat combo, then the local Legal Aid practice may, you feel, lack a certain gravitas necessary to the most favourable presentation of your case in Court.
Owain
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:56:39 -0000, "Owain"

Mr Justice Cocklecarrot presiding, I presume?
--

Dave

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@isbd.co.uk wrote in message ...

You don't get what you pay for, but you probably get what you deserve.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Plenty of makers call their tools 'professional' when they are anything but. Check the warranty to see if it covers true pro use.
A DIY tool might well represent better value for DIY use, but not for continuous heavy pro work. There is, of course, some that fit the middle ground, and in any case not every pro will necessarily work all of his tools hard.
I doubt you'll find a kitchen fitter with a PPPro cordless drill, though.
--
*If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Confirming what I said in a way as you probably pay a significant amount more money for that 'professional' label and you don't get any more value.

I wasn't saying that there aren't differences in quality, I *was* saying that price doesn't always (often?) reflect quality. The implication of "you get what you pay for" is that if you pay more money you get a better product and I don't believe that is always true, especially nowadays.
--
Chris Green ( snipped-for-privacy@x-1.net)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 17 Nov 2003 15:15:39 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@isbd.co.uk wrote:

Generally I've found it to be a combination of both.
For any product or service, the top price, and perhaps the one below are determined by the power of the brand(s) - e.g. Sony consumer goods, ....
Generally they are a bit better than the second tier, but it is up to the purchaser to decide whether the delta is justified. Then there is the low end where pricing is set by achieving a price point and adding features that cost little or nothing and either are poor quality or are of no benefit. Laser guides on cheap tools springs to mind as an example.

I think that it depends on expectations and amount of use.
I looked at the rating system in Axminster's catalogue and then, at their recent show, some of the products in each category for a selection of tools. The same principle as above seems to apply.
I suspect that in reality there is a law of diminishing returns. At the very low end, you can spend relatively little more and get a lot more. As you go above the middle ground you need to spend a lot more to go from adequacy to top quality. Whether that is justified or not depends on the application and the individual.
For example, I recently returned a DeWalt biscuit jointer costing a little north of 200 because there was an inaccuracy in the design and manufacture which led to the setting angles being about 2 degrees out. This would make joints OK up to a point, but they didn't quite fit and the results were therefore disappointing to me. They might have been acceptable to others. I replaced it with a Lamello costing approx. twice as much, but the tool is a pleasure to use and produces perfect results every time without titting around. There may have been a product at some price point in between, but I didn't want to waste time. The Lamello has been well reviewed and does what it says.
In another vein, I had had a cheap jigsaw for many years and had formed the opinion that they are limited in what they can do and their acccuracy. I bought a Bosch Professional GST model and the results are like chalk and cheese.
This is not to decry the point that entry level tools can be good for basic DIY if the primary objective is saving money. For me the primary objective is producing the best quality result and if possible to save time doing so, although not at the expense of quality. Therefore, I only tend to buy entry level tools if I know that I will use them only occasionally and that the results will not be compromised.

.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll often buy an entry level power tool to see if I *really* need it - then replace it with one that works properly. ;-)
--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But nowadays prices are *not* set by manufacturing cost. This is where your arguments (which I agree with to an extent) break down.
The idea that one tool which is (say) 10% more to buy has actually cost the seller 10% more and thus has 10% more value put into it when manufactured is simply not true any more. Apart from anything else a shop (or wholesaler) may well be happy with a much lower margin on a fast moving item than one that only sells infrequently.
--
Chris Green ( snipped-for-privacy@x-1.net)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

But spending 10% more may make it 100% better and worth 100% more. Lots of consumer products are designed down to save pence.
--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Quite agree, but similarly spending 10% more may get you a 'good' brand name and lower quality. I.e. you *don't* necessarily get what you pay for, that's all I was saying.
--
Chris Green ( snipped-for-privacy@x-1.net)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snip

snip
Twice, at two different times, I purchased a DeWalt biscuit jointer
The first time it was rejected because the blade was not parallel with the base plate. The machine had not been set up at all. While I found it posible to correct the other problems this one was just too much trouble. The replacement for that machine was no better so I got a refund.
The second time, 18mths later, was a repeat.
Eventually I bought Bosch. Not as good a discount but infinitely better. Not perfect but then what is ? Still lust after a Lamello ;-(
In the vein of the original thread I was recently talking with a major Bosch distributor. He decried that they were being squeezed from all sides. The cheapo market was eating into their green range and the yellow peril (DeWalt) was attacking them at the high end. DeWalt had got the name of being , and I quote him, the 'Trendy' tool to have for the younger set.
The biggest rip-off I have come across recently was in Wolf garden tools. I purchased one particular accessory in their range in GBHdeV in Paris @ 6.50, inclusive of French vat. The local price was nearly 18. I know it's not fair to directly compare a large store's prices with a local garden centre, but this difference is outrageous.
Paul Mc Cann
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Given the difference in price perhaps not. But at D&M's Kempton show a Makita rep gave quite a good demo of their angle grinder v. a cheapo. They stalled the latter and smoke started coming out of the motor. On theirs a slip clutch let the motor keep turning, no probs. But the motto of this is probably that if you are not going to misuse your tools and aren't using them day in, day out, then DIY is probably OK
Where I have noticed the difference is in what car makers call NVH - noise, vibration, harshness. My ancient B&D Pro orbital sander has a big flywheel and when you run it the sander plate moves and the body stays put. It's predecessor - a 15 job - vibromassaged the hands. The same is true of the Bosch jigsaw I now have and its cheap predecessor.
--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:57:55 -0000, "John Kent"

I agree. This is very much in line with our current experience. The executor/administration part is quite mechanical and I see no reason not to handle with the relevant authorities directly.
Trusts are certainly a different game and from my reading, it is certainly possible to shoot oneself in the foot...... Hence the suggestion of involving an accountant as a lower cost option than solicitors.
It is interesting how the term "solicitor" and "soliciting" are used both here and in the U.S. Prostitution seems to be the most apt.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy Hall wrote in message ...

It seems that if you're only a trustee as regards the will, you are in effect just a second executor. A helpful soul on the motley fool site has posted a sample deed of appointment. http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp?mid 95420 My hunch is that if the new trustee attends the probate hearing, he can probably be appointed by the surviving trustee there and then. If he can't attend, then probably the deed has to be drawn up. "Drawn up" eh? See how brainwashed we all are by officialdom. What I mean is somebody has to scrawl something on a sheet of paper which is not ambiguous, rather like a will. Your suggestion about the accountant is interesting. Right from the start it seemed logical to me that the tax declaration would be the tricky bit, and yet everyone says you must get a solicitor. Presumably the solicitor then employs an accountant, and God knows what the hourly rate for that would be.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.