or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 66 comments are related to an article called:

Integrity FC

Page 1 of 3

posted on 10/6/12

Rangers fans should be thankful for people exposing what was going on, no matter the motive.

posted on 10/6/12

So people who expose Rangwrs are a disgrace but those who hide it and let it continue are a disgrace?

What I'm guessing is anyone with anything to do with Celtic you hate?

I notice you chose the word obsessed

comment by (U5278)

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

Great post

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

Bitter tone to the finger pointing.

posted on 10/6/12

Im going to see which of his clients did get money

+++

Whatcha gonny do about it

Away and read leggoland , ya redneck

comment by (U12293)

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

If these blogs did Rangers any good I'm pretty sure it was unintentional.

comment by (U5278)

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

comment by Dos dados - Keep calm and follow on. (U5278)
posted 32 seconds ago
I have no problem with RTC blog, but if your gonna be pointing the finger in moral indignation at rangers then dont get caught robbing dying miners and their families.

===

This

posted on 10/6/12

Not defending the guy....but I don't think he 'robbed' anyone.....


Paul McConville
Sunday, June 10, 2012 at 05:58 AM

To the Editor - Dear Sir, I refer to the article published in your newspaper today under the headline “Ten-year ban for solicitor who failed to pass on Scottish miners’ compensation”. I wish to point out a number of inaccuracies in the article and trust that the appropriate corrections will be made to the online edition, and that a suitable correction notice will be placed in your newspaper. First of all, the headline is incorrect. The sanction imposed, and I will refer to this again below, was not a “ban” but a restriction on working as a principal in a law firm ie a Partner. I am entitled to work as an employed solicitor with Law Society approval and under supervision by the firm for whom I work. The reference to failing to pass on compensation implies dishonesty, and that any funds not passed on were kept by me. It was accepted at the Tribunal by the Law Society and by the Tribunal that there was “no question of dishonesty”, and that “every penny of clients’ funds had been accounted for”. Dealing with the specifics of the article, as referred to above, I have not been “barred from the profession”. I am permitted to work as an employed solicitor with Law Society approval and under supervision. The fifth paragraph of the article repeats that I will not be permitted to work as a solicitor. Again, that is wrong. The statement that I will be allowed to work as a “legal assistant” implies that that is not a solicitor. As mentioned, that is not the case. In the eleventh paragraph, reference is made to a “fine” having been imposed on the firm, contributing to the problems. That is incorrect and no such statement was made regarding a “fine”. Reference to a “fine” implies some form of wrongdoing. There was no such “fine”. Your quote from Mrs Hunter is based on an inaccurate premise, as I am allowed to continue to practise, as referred to above. The accusation of “faking a fire alarm” is untrue. As regards details of individual cases, client confidentiality prevents me making any specific comment. I regret that there were cases where for the reasons explained at the hearing, clients’ affairs were not progressed as well as they should have been, and I apologise for that. However, over the time my firm operated, we had many thousands of satisfied clients, on whose behalf we had obtained justice. That does not excuse even one lapse, but I mention it for purposes of perspective. I am posting this as a comment on your online piece, as well as emailing it to you. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Paul McConville

comment by (U12293)

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

Another ill-informed article from '54 preceding my IQ'

comment by (U5278)

posted on 10/6/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/6/12

No he didn't rob them...

He did, however, let them down...

A human trait I'm afraid

posted on 11/6/12

Depression=Distraction?


Hope never visits you Dos

posted on 11/6/12

it never*

posted on 11/6/12

Well well well

Oh the hypocrisy of it

Disrepute charges, where have we heard that before

Great post

posted on 11/6/12

Disrepute charges, where have we heard that before

+++

RFC

posted on 11/6/12

Exactly

Oh the hypocrisy

posted on 11/6/12

From you?

posted on 11/6/12

From mcconville

posted on 11/6/12

The Faculty of Advocates is to investigate complaints against the leading Scottish lawyer Donald Findlay QC after he was captured on camera singing sectarian songs.
Mr Findlay resigned as vice-chairman of Rangers Football Club following his celebrations of his side's Scottish Cup victory.

The Dean of the Faculty, Nigel Emslie, has filed a complaint against Mr Findlay, alleging "serious and reprehensible misconduct, bringing the Faculty into disrepute".

+++

Lawyers

Although McConville isn't Celtic's vice-chairman, director, employee

posted on 11/6/12

Desperate stuff Tcd, that was how many years ago?

7 mins and that's the best you can come up with?

Page 1 of 3

Sign in if you want to comment