No Win No Fee UK Claims and Domination

Give What You Can

It is a problem in demanding No Win No Fee UK claims that sometimes the attitudes, both good and bad, of the lawyer is inadvertently imbibed by his client. In exerting his authority by ordering his client to do all kinds of tasks—collecting articles of evidence, contacting witnesses, providing factual information—he is also limiting the world of his client and possibly even reshaping it for him. This is something clients should beware.

For one thing, they must learn to discriminate what attitude they should replicate. It may happen that the particular lawyer who you have hired may be too workaholic, to the point that his health is already continually compromised. If you copy his attitude and become dangerously workaholic yourself, then you may reinjure yourself and be unable to proceed with your suit. The eminent reason, in other words, is practical. You need to think very carefully because your claim may be aborted if you do not.

Thus, while it is not an issue whether you should work hard, it is nevertheless imperative for you not to work too hard. You should, in short, give what you can—and no more. In case other people may criticize your decision not to exert all your strength in processing your claim, you must remind them that the rationale of claiming is to earn money primarily to pay for medical bills. A healthy body, to be sure, more than the compensation, is the real aim.

Indolence

It is a sure sign of maturity to discriminate what attitude of your No Win No Fee UK lawyer you should adopt while claiming. Knowing that he too, despite his brilliance, is still imperfect and finite, mature claimants choose to study how he thinks and acts first before finally deciding to judge whether overall his work ethic is a fine one or not. An assumption that is useful to pronounce here is that not everything that lawyers do will always work. There may be times when they shamefully exploit their clients’ trust and credulity to cover up for their bungling mistakes.

This critical attitude should not, however, be used as an excuse to cover up for indolence. It is highly tempting to just sit back and claim that we are still studying the actions and motives of our lawyers instead of trusting him and letting him direct us on what to do. Despite the fact that not all lawyers are ethical or right, the truth is that the claimant will never see for himself unless he does what he is told to do. The consequence of his lawyer’s orders, whether it furthered his claim or not in other words, will then be his guide in estimating his character. Activity and results, to say the same thing in other words, should be our bases in judging our lawyers.