Massive Financial Scandals

Scandal number 1.

How some in the legal profession managed to milk taxpayers.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...537772,00.html (need to register)

Some newspapers have carried the story of how £60 million was wasted in a fraud trial. How jurors suffered whilst barrristers made huge sums of money.

£14 million for lawyers!

Not the sort of story for The Sun to put on the front page!


Scandal number 2.

How some farmers managed to milk taxpayers of millions.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foi/s...443896,00.html (you may need to register)


Amongst others; Tate & Lyle enjoy £223 million to export sugar. Queen's subsidy of over £1

million over two years, etc.

Not the sort of story to make the headlines in The Sun.

Farmers milk the tax-payer on a great may products.

Up until about 7 years ago I had my own milk round. While I was delivering for a local dairy (Dale Farm), I learned that British dairy farmers have a habbit of not destroying their ''Over Quota Milk''. I honestly dont know (or really care) what the quota is, but beyond a set volume of milk, the farmer is paid to poar milk down the drains. Instead of doing so, may dairy farmers sell the ''Over Quota Milk'' at a reduced rate to smaller dairies, who then process and sell the milk on at an inflated profit.

Great work if you can get it, get paid the going rate for the milk in your quota, paid to daestroy the rest, and then sell it so the public get shafted twice.

[SMHarman]

Good for them I say - The French probably have an even more ingenious scheme - turning it into brie and selling it for even more money?

[BBKing]

The fraud trial wasn't really the lawyer's fault, the case was always going to be (as is often the case) to be too complicated for a jury to understand. In fact it's too complicated for anyone other than an expert in the financing of large projects to understand, and they were the people in the dock, which rather precludes them from being on the jury. I'm slightly reticent to get rid of juries in any case, being the thin end of a rather dangerous wedge, but perhaps a panel of a judge and two lay experts, as is used in some court cases, would be a better way for these extremely complex trials.

It's far easier to get away with nicking £100,00 0,000 than a sack of tenners from the off-licence.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Gogogo

Not the sort of story to make the headlines in The Sun.

Is the there because the both did actually make Page 12 - half page on the £60m thing.

The farming subsidies made page 2 about 2 column inches.

To drag this thing back on topic the concept of expert juries is an interesting one, but the problem is such experts may well already be conflicted out by work with the fraud squad, CPS, the parties to the case, and as found in this case the self employed, like the surveyor can have their business destroyed by the disruption. Unable to service your clients, they move elsewhere and it's a lot easer to keep a client than gain one.

Originally Posted by SMHarman

To drag this thing back on topic the concept of expert juries is an interesting one, but the problem is such experts may well already be conflicted out by work with the fraud squad, CPS, the parties to the case, and as found in this case the self employed, like the surveyor can have their business destroyed by the disruption. Unable to service your clients, they move elsewhere and it's a lot easer to keep a client than gain one.

I know nothing about company accounts and the law (from the basis of how complex legal arguments work), but surely it would be possible to have a register of retired experts in a given field available for this kind of trial. In the interests of justice/fairness, such people who make populate the list would be subject to a background check to ensure against possible abuse of position?

Just a thought.

[SMHarman]

It would though at the moment you are tried by a jury of your peers, this would change the concept to be a jury of your peers with the aptitude to understand the case - especially important since anyone of any seniority in a company will try to wriggle out of jury duty as it will impact their company / key man risk. These of course are the people who could understand the case. The cleaner on the other hand (no offence intended to under employed quantity surveyor cleaners) would struggle at the volume of documents, deposition, expert evidence causing the case to collapse.