This was an actual question in my law school exams all those years ago. it was one of thos prof conduct questions they wove into the other papers. obviously the answer is NO YOU FCKNg IDIOT. my m7 dave got it wrong and thus managed to fail 8 out of 7 exams.
Assume your m7 Dave got it wrong only because he said of course it's OK, and failed to read the final part of the question which notes "the client is uglynas a hatfull of arseholes".
I’m sure that years ago when the conduct rules were an actual book I read reference to this - from memory there’s not an absolute prohibition but you have to give serious consideration to the basis of your instructions and whether you personally can continue to act.
Interesting VAT issue there. As I understand it, when the supplier is male, the supply is generally taxed as a supply of goods, whereas when the supplier is female, I understand it's a supply of services.
I think it's because in one case there is a physical deliverable which is regarded as the dominant element of the supply.
Although to be fair I think the only difference is when the tax point arises and the mechanism through which you can claim relief.
a friend was asked not to bother the profession for a while after she shagged/shacked up with/married a client of hers. she was a divorce lawyer.
ironically given that she helped him deal with all the allegations his ex wife made about how awful he was, she ended up having to flee him, change continents and take out restraining orders against him
so a client has told me she is an escort. She told me her profile name on the website and let’s just say she is hot and worth the £130 for an hour
how much trouble will this get me in?
None whatsoever, I did it, twice, and now I'm a Partner here...of course if I were you I'd always ask for the 'friends & family' rate and then a discount for cash (at least 20% to reflect the VAT saving with cash).
The blindingly obvious and main point here is that her being an escort is not illegal but your soliciting it is would be. Therefore any payment would constitute proceeds of crime in her hands. You then have knowledge or suspicion that funds subsequently spent on your legal advice would be tainted so you should report that suspicion. Further, absent consent you (either or both) may commit a Money Laundering Offence under, variously, ss327-329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. You're permitting the transfer or retention of funds and/or becoming concerned in an arrangement permitting / enabling that. You did not come into that information in privileged circumstances so cannot rely on the Bowman v Fels legal privilege exception to reporting obligations on the regulated sector under POCA. So clearly you need to submit a SAR identifying her profession and your intended activity with her, the amount you intend to spend (at £130 per hour I estimate it to be less than £13) and when and seek consent from the NCA to deal in the manner set out.
Many many moons ago when I were but a slip of a lad, I worked for a property developer and the "unofficial" rule with regard to, ahem, "gifts" from wannabe suppliers was
"if you can eat it, drink it or f*ck it within 24 hours its ok to take it, just don't be caught with it"
Oooh, some of the suppliers Christmas parties we went to, wouldn't / couldn't happen these days. fond memories of evenings of lots of food, beer & "entertainment" down the local Rugby club and being put up in a nearby hotel afterwards.
Also, if she is charging £130 an hour then she's not just a hooker, she's a low rent hooker who attracts bargain basement punters who are all probably riddled with diseases.
If you want a decent hooker just watch porn a bit then google the name, most of them use porn as a method of marketing their escort services,
Priya Rai starts at about £2500 a night I believe. That is worth it, £130 an hour? She may as well be a high street solicitor ffs.
0
0
Shut up
Raises some complex tax issues
0
0
thread title must go "sleeping with a prostitute"
0
0
This was an actual question in my law school exams all those years ago. it was one of thos prof conduct questions they wove into the other papers. obviously the answer is NO YOU FCKNg IDIOT. my m7 dave got it wrong and thus managed to fail 8 out of 7 exams.
0
0
Assume your m7 Dave got it wrong only because he said of course it's OK, and failed to read the final part of the question which notes "the client is uglynas a hatfull of arseholes".
0
0
Wang
the question is "how much trouble will I be in" and you've replied "NO YOU FCKNg IDIOT".
Dave is you, right?
0
0
What is going to be frowned upon more sleeping with her or the fact I paid?
0
0
Charge her a fortune and effect set-off?
0
0
Probably not a good idea if you are defending her against solicitation charges.
0
0
Is accepting payment in kind a taxable supply for VAT purposes?
0
0
Only if she is over 25
0
0
Yeah she’s 27
0
0
It’s not for solicitation
0
0
if she wears a strap-on is the VAT reverse-charged?
(I have no idea what that means actually.)
0
0
Luckily we all know this question was posed seriously for information purposes and is not a dniwpu
0
0
I’m sure that years ago when the conduct rules were an actual book I read reference to this - from memory there’s not an absolute prohibition but you have to give serious consideration to the basis of your instructions and whether you personally can continue to act.
0
0
Interesting VAT issue there. As I understand it, when the supplier is male, the supply is generally taxed as a supply of goods, whereas when the supplier is female, I understand it's a supply of services.
I think it's because in one case there is a physical deliverable which is regarded as the dominant element of the supply.
Although to be fair I think the only difference is when the tax point arises and the mechanism through which you can claim relief.
0
0
a friend was asked not to bother the profession for a while after she shagged/shacked up with/married a client of hers. she was a divorce lawyer.
ironically given that she helped him deal with all the allegations his ex wife made about how awful he was, she ended up having to flee him, change continents and take out restraining orders against him
0
0
hehe at Clubbers - what a story.
0
0
you'd have been jealous. he was a beeeeeeelonaire.
0
0
did he cough up maintenance etc?
0
0
she didn't want it. but she did max out the credit card for a few months on the trot before fleeing to make sure that she was well provided for.
she's subsequently remarried (even more marriages than me) to a chap who's only worth tens of millions.
0
0
SOME GIRLS HAVE ALL THE FLAMING LUCK
0
0
so a client has told me she is an escort. She told me her profile name on the website and let’s just say she is hot and worth the £130 for an hour
how much trouble will this get me in?
None whatsoever, I did it, twice, and now I'm a Partner here...of course if I were you I'd always ask for the 'friends & family' rate and then a discount for cash (at least 20% to reflect the VAT saving with cash).
0
0
"f**king luck", surely?
0
0
This is totally fine. You're doing your job, she's doing hers, I can't see any problem with it.
0
0
I think we might be looking at this the wrong way.
Isn't there an issue with entering into contractual relations with a client?
0
0
The blindingly obvious and main point here is that her being an escort is not illegal but your soliciting it is would be. Therefore any payment would constitute proceeds of crime in her hands. You then have knowledge or suspicion that funds subsequently spent on your legal advice would be tainted so you should report that suspicion. Further, absent consent you (either or both) may commit a Money Laundering Offence under, variously, ss327-329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. You're permitting the transfer or retention of funds and/or becoming concerned in an arrangement permitting / enabling that. You did not come into that information in privileged circumstances so cannot rely on the Bowman v Fels legal privilege exception to reporting obligations on the regulated sector under POCA. So clearly you need to submit a SAR identifying her profession and your intended activity with her, the amount you intend to spend (at £130 per hour I estimate it to be less than £13) and when and seek consent from the NCA to deal in the manner set out.
That will be £130 please.
0
0
*this is not correct and you should not rely on it.
0
0
She’s legally aided
0
0
God everyone's so negative on here. We need our lawyers to think outside the box, not tell us we can't have sex with our whore clients!!!!!!!
0
0
We need our lawyers to think outside the box, not tell us we can't have sex with our whore clients!!!!!!!
Yup, exactly what SDYSS said - think out the box, that's it.
0
0
Many many moons ago when I were but a slip of a lad, I worked for a property developer and the "unofficial" rule with regard to, ahem, "gifts" from wannabe suppliers was
"if you can eat it, drink it or f*ck it within 24 hours its ok to take it, just don't be caught with it"
Oooh, some of the suppliers Christmas parties we went to, wouldn't / couldn't happen these days. fond memories of evenings of lots of food, beer & "entertainment" down the local Rugby club and being put up in a nearby hotel afterwards.
*resets & exits "Chambo" mode
0
0
What a very silly wind up.
Also, if she is charging £130 an hour then she's not just a hooker, she's a low rent hooker who attracts bargain basement punters who are all probably riddled with diseases.
If you want a decent hooker just watch porn a bit then google the name, most of them use porn as a method of marketing their escort services,
Priya Rai starts at about £2500 a night I believe. That is worth it, £130 an hour? She may as well be a high street solicitor ffs.
0
0
I dropped a tenner to access the private gallery
0
0
Given we are working all hours and accordingly only meet work colleagues and clients I expect many firms would rather risk the fall out with a client.
0
0
The private gallery was very entertaining.
0
0
Please Lord make it stop.
Join the discussion