When Solicitors Break the Law
Note: This post highlights unlawful behaviour by a solicitor and client and grounds for significant criminal or civil claims against them. If any lawyers or journalists want to run with it contact dad on X or email (see his X bio) or us on Substack. Dad says you are welcome to the majority of any claim as he is focused on safety and also justice so this doesn’t happen to others.
2/12/2024
A High Court judge orders confiscation of dad’s family home for civil contempt. This seems never to have never happened in the UK before. It could start a trend for civil cases in Britain.
5/12/2024
While judge’s order was being drafted, the other party’s solicitor unlawfully sent a locksmith to change the locks without notice or authority. The tenant was out. For all he knew he could have been locking a vulnerable mother and baby out on a winter’s night. By pure luck the tenant returned while the locksmith was there and was allowed to stay.
The judge was made aware and questions about the legality of the solicitor's actions were raised but the judge did not clarify whether his order allowed it, which enabled worse subsequent behaviour.
The judge knew whether his order allowed breaking into the house but it took him until 3 months later to clarify that it did not. Why did he not clarify in December when he knew the solicitor had committed a crime breaking into the house?
This is no excuse for the solicitor as he knew the law and objections were raised when he broke into the house. He cannot claim ignorance for any of his illegal actions over the 3 months. He is a leading solicitor who knows the law and was informed by me throughout that what he was doing was illegal.
December 2024 to January 2025
The solicitor repeatedly threatened and intimidated the tenant to leave (we have his emails) to enable a sale for financial gain.
After weeks of harassment, that caused psychological and emotional distress, in January solicitor told the tenant he would be evicted by bailiffs on 6/2/2025. The Bailiffs said this would happen by force if necessary.
6/2/2025
Bailiffs evict tenant without the usual eviction proceedings and a court order giving them permission. Since then, the solicitor has blocked the tenant from collecting his belongings by demanding receipts for his items. Nobody has receipts for all their possessions. This is theft and harassment.
December 2024 - March 2025
The judge was kept informed of developments. We have emails including the judge’s replies. He was asked 5 times whether his order overrode tenant’s rights and allowed eviction. He refused to say. Why? The judge knew that, if his order did not grant this permission, the solicitor was acting illegally.
11/3/2025
After 5 requests spanning months, the judge finally clarified his order did not override the tenant’s rights and the order did not have eviction powers. His admission was months too late to prevent significant harm - harm the judge knew about and could have avoided. An analysis of the parties:
Solicitor and Client
i) Illegally broke into the house on 5/12/2025.
ii) Harassed, intimidated and illegally evicted tenant and withheld possessions. None of this was ordered by the court.
iii) The solicitor ramped up costs i.e. £500 to change a lock dad had changed a few years ago for £90. He also paid £1500 for house insurHe informed dad in writing he was charging over £400 per hour for his time in taking and selling the family’s house. The bailiffs must also have charged £1000s.
iv) The solicitor may also be in contempt of court. He broke the court order on 2/12/2024 by breaking into the house. He was aware we had raised this with the judge but he then broke the order again on 6/2/2025 by illegally evicting. Solicitors are meant to follow court orders, not evict unlawfully or harass and intimidate tenants.
v) The solicitor may be using Legal Aid to fund these illegal acts and subsequent gagging orders. Dad has asked the solicitor for clarification.
vi) A court previously judged the other party had attempted fraud against dad so financial motivation is not new. The solicitor also stands to gain financially.
Bailiffs
i) These were not court bailiffs. They were a local firm hired by the solicitor and they carried out an illegal eviction.
High Court Judge
i) Why wouldn’t a judge clarify his ruling? He knew the solicitor had illegally broken into a house on 5/12/2025. He also knew for weeks after the solicitor was causing distress and in February 2025 illegally evicted the tenant. The judge was kept informed throughout by email and asked to clarify his order 5 times. He could have prevented most of this but allowed it to progress.
ii) When the solicitor illegally broke into the house on 5/12/2025 the judge’s order was in draft. The judge knew about the break in (we have the emails). Dad asked for the order to include specific wording in the order to stop more misbehaviour but the judge did not include it.
iii) In March 2025 dad was still asking judge whether his order allowed the eviction that took place. The judge said clarification could wait to the next hearing in April 2025, which has a different judge.
So, an illegal eviction took place and the judge was aware, but he wanted an evicted tenant to wait over a month. It was only when dad asked to make a complaint that the judge clarified his order. He could have done this 3 months earlier.
He knew an illegal break in had occured while his order was being drafted. Subsequently, over the next 3 months, he was informed the tenant was being intimidated, illegal eviction was planned, illegal eviction was carried out so why didn’t he clarify things until the damage was done? I took 5 requests before he clarified his order did not allow eviction.
iv) In other ways too, the court order was so poorly drafted it had basic flaws—like selling the house below market value to a friend before selling at market to profit, though we have no proof that was the intent. Dad raised these elementary flaws to the court and said they invited poor behaviour, but concerns were ignored. A school tuck shop would have better checks and balances than the court order. The appointed solicitor should also have been independent, not the solicitor of the other party - basic things wrong in the order led to criminality that was overlooked for months.
v) The order was made 3 months ago but there has been no judgment or transcript. Dad reminded the judge’s clerk of this and finally, over 10 weeks after the hearing, the judge ordered a transcript, which has yet to appear.
vi) On 13th March 2025, the sealed orders were reissued with that date. This is unusual as the sealed order had already been received 2 months before with a date 14th January 2025. We do not know if this is linked to the illegality coming to light. We also do not know why new sealed versions were made and who requested them. The judge’s clerk was asked but no answer has been given yet. We do not know if substantial changes were made.
This is all about stealing a child’s home. It stinks with a judge at fault, and Kennedy and solicitor now committing crimes and getting a gagging order so the public don’t find out. Kennedy doesn’t even bother to call her child anymore
https://friendsoffairparentingpodcast.substack.com/p/february-2025-update
Note: there seem to be significant civil and criminal claims against the bailiff, solicitor and client as well as good reason to report solicitor and bailiff to regulators to stop them doing this to others. If anyone is interested in handling any of the above let us know on Substack or dad know via X or email.
The judge says this is a distinct property matter, separate from the wider case that other posts in this Substack relate to.
Dad is worried about speaking out because in March he got less than 24 hours notice of a hearing and he wasn’t told what it was about. A gagging order was made. He doesn’t know if it is to stop the crimes the other side committed comig to light or whether reporting crimes cannot be gagged. He also doesn’t know if the other side used Legal Aid to fund the gagging order and the crimes. He has been stopped from getting legal advice so he doesn’t fully understand the terms but he is too cautious to speak for fear of sanctions.