11 reviews (3/5) and information for Hewitts, Bishop Auckland

Add review

3.5 stars average for Hewitts from 11 reviews  
11 Review(s)

0 review(s) removed
Why are reviews removed?


How to find us

207 Newgate Street, Bishop Auckland, County Durham, DL14 7EL

Other branches


Facilities Office accepts Legal Aid

Languages spoken English 
Size of firm 13 solicitors


Are you this solicitor?    
Contact us to take control of your listing or to request any edits to your information

4621 page views

All content on solicitor.info is viewed and used at your own risk and we do not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information.


Reviews

3.5 stars average for Hewitts from 11 reviews

Based on 11 review(s)

Add review

Summary

5 stars   5
4 stars   0
3 stars   0
2 stars   1
1 stars   3

Legal services at this branch

  • Advocacy
  • Benefits and allowances
  • Children
  • Commercial litigation
  • Commercial property
  • Company and commercial
  • Consumer
  • Conveyancing - residential
  • Crime - general
  • Debt and bankruptcy - personal
  • Debt recovery
  • Employment
  • Family - general
  • Landlord and tenant - residential
  • Litigation - general
  • Mental health
  • Neighbour disputes
  • Personal injury
  • Private client - Probate
  • Private client - trusts
  • Private client - Wills
  • Professional negligence


Add review

Filter Reviews

 


Hewitts

General Legal advice

5 stars

30/07/19 - Reviewed by Mrs A

Spoke with Kat at the Bishop Auckland office. Advice, attitude and helpfulness was exceptional. Thank you.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Family

5 stars

21/01/19 - Reviewed by Margaret allen

Very happy with the service

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 1   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Conveyancing/property

5 stars

03/12/18 - Reviewed by Roger

I found everyone at Hewitts to be friendly and helpful, most especially Emma who helped me through a trick purchase.
Very happy with the company and will use them as first choice in all legal matters

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 2   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Divorce

2 stars

26/11/18 - Reviewed by Anonymous

I visited my local office in bishop auckland and the people there could not be more helpful. I was in a bad way after my split and the solicitor I spoke to was lovely, explained I could pay monthly for my divorce at a price I could afford and to contact if any problems.

Halfway through my divorce the solicitor left and I was transferred to the Newton Aycliffe office. I'm sorry to say my experience was completely different. I was phoned on several occasions asking for my bill to be paid despite £150 standing order being in place. I was told during one phone call that 'maybe things weren't explained properly by the bishop auckland office about how these things work, this solicitor would never work for anything less than £150-£200 a month'. I explained I was paying £150 and refused to up my monthly payments to £200 a month. I was made to feel thick and incompetent.
After my divorce was finalised I paid a portion of the small outstanding bill and asked if it was ok if the last £150 could be paid by my usual standing order and if so could a note be added to explain this was the case . Despite being told this was ok I received a phone call chasing me for the money. I explained a note had been put in the system to which I was told 'I will put note on the system now' so I can only assume there was no note in place.

I decided to seek further legal advice regarding child access and was given a telephone consultation appointment with the same solicitor as my divorce. The phone call never occurred.
On ringing this morning i was rudely told that i had been advised during the last phone call (asking for money) that the new matter couldn't be discussed because I had an outstanding balance. In reality the telephone consultation was never brought up because they were ringing me for money hence I expected a phone call last week.I am once again made to feel incompetent because the someone failed to do their job. Even a courtesy call to explain the matter would have been appreciated but clearly my matter wasn't worthy of even that.
Very disappointed with the attitude and customer service skills fromthe newton aycliffe office - I would certainty never use them again.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 2   Thumbs down 2

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Criminal

5 stars

07/11/17 - Reviewed by Dean

Absolute outstanding service from start to finish with john in the newton aycliffe branch . Very understanding and excellent in the court room .

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 1   Thumbs down 1

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Conveyancing/property

5 stars

08/08/17 - Reviewed by Fraser

Very personal service from start to finish. Andrew was always on hand to advise and guide me through a tricky new build purchase. Will always use or recommend this firm.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 1

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Conveyancing/property

1 stars

28/02/17 - Reviewed by Anonymous

The experience of dealing with Hewitt’s was a very unpleasant and increasingly frustrating one.
I strongly advise avoiding them as, despite the charges, I was treated not as a client, but as if they were doing me a great favour.
Don't want to hear about them ever again

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 1

Respond   Report abuse

Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

25/10/16

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/136115.article?Decision=2016-10-26

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement
This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details
Agreed outcome
1.1 Mr Alan Dennis Green a solicitor formerly of Hewitts of Bishop Auckland, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1.1.1 he is rebuked.
1.1.2 he is fined ?1,000.
1.1.3 to the publication of this Agreement.
1.1.4 he will pay the costs of the investigation in the sum of ?300.
Summary of Facts
2.1 Mr Green was a Partner in the firm of Hewitts.

2.2 On three occasions between 5 October 2015 and 8 October 2015, Mr Green made inappropriate comments and advances of a sexual nature towards a junior female member of staff.

2.3 The member of staff raised a grievance about Mr Green's behaviour, which the firm investigated. During the investigation, Mr Green resigned from the partnership on 22 October 2015.

Admissions
3.1 Mr Green makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

3.1.1 That by virtue of his inappropriate comments and advances of a sexual nature towards an employee of Hewitts, he has:
a) failed to behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in him and in the provision of legal services, contrary to Principle 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.
b) failed to carry out his role in the business in a way that encourages equality of opportunity and respect for diversity, contrary to Principle 9 of the SRA Principles 2011.
Why the agreed outcome is appropriate
4.1 In relation to the admissions made by Mr Green above, the SRA considers that the agreed outcome at paragraph 1 is appropriate because the conditions in Rule 3.1 of the SRA Disciplinary Rules 2011 are met, in that:

4.1.1 the conduct was deliberate or reckless, and persisted after the regulated person realised or should have realised that it was improper;
4.1.2 that the agreed outcome is proportionate in the public interest;
4.1.3 that the conduct was neither trivial nor justifiably inadvertent.
4.2 In deciding that the agreed outcome is proportionate, the SRA has taken into account the following mitigation which Mr Green has put forward:

4.2.1 his prompt admission and acceptance that his conduct was inappropriate, particularly as he was a partner in the firm;
4.2.2 he resigned from the partnership as a result of his conduct;
4.2.3 his clear regulatory history.
4.3 The amount of the fine takes account all relevant circumstances, including those in Appendix 1 to the SRA Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2011.

4.4 The SRA considers it appropriate that this Agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process.

Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement
5.1 Mr Green agrees that he will not act in any way which is inconsistent with this Agreement such as, for example, by denying the admissions at paragraph 3.1 above.

5.2 If Mr Green acts in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be subject to further consideration by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary sanction or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of Principles 2, 6 and 7 of the SRA Principles 2011.

Costs
6.1 Mr Green agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of ?300 inclusive. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.

The date of this Agreement is 26 October 2016.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 1   Thumbs down 1

Respond   Report abuse

Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

25/10/16

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/136115.article?Decision=2016-10-26

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement
Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details



Agreed outcome

1.1 Mr Alan Dennis Green a solicitor formerly of Hewitts of Bishop Auckland, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):



1.1.1 he is rebuked.

1.1.2 he is fined ?1,000.

1.1.3 to the publication of this Agreement.

1.1.4 he will pay the costs of the investigation in the sum of ?300.



Summary of Facts

2.1 Mr Green was a Partner in the firm of Hewitts.

2.2 On three occasions between 5 October 2015 and 8 October 2015, Mr Green made inappropriate comments and advances of a sexual nature towards a junior female member of staff.

2.3 The member of staff raised a grievance about Mr Green's behaviour, which the firm investigated. During the investigation, Mr Green resigned from the partnership on 22 October 2015.

Admissions

3.1 Mr Green makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:



3.1.1 That by virtue of his inappropriate comments and advances of a sexual nature towards an employee of Hewitts, he has:



a) failed to behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in him and in the provision of legal services, contrary to Principle 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.

b) failed to carry out his role in the business in a way that encourages equality of opportunity and respect for diversity, contrary to Principle 9 of the SRA Principles 2011.





Why the agreed outcome is appropriate

4.1 In relation to the admissions made by Mr Green above, the SRA considers that the agreed outcome at paragraph 1 is appropriate because the conditions in Rule 3.1 of the SRA Disciplinary Rules 2011 are met, in that:



4.1.1 the conduct was deliberate or reckless, and persisted after the regulated person realised or should have realised that it was improper;

4.1.2 that the agreed outcome is proportionate in the public interest;

4.1.3 that the conduct was neither trivial nor justifiably inadvertent.



4.2 In deciding that the agreed outcome is proportionate, the SRA has taken into account the following mitigation which Mr Green has put forward:



4.2.1 his prompt admission and acceptance that his conduct was inappropriate, particularly as he was a partner in the firm;

4.2.2 he resigned from the partnership as a result of his conduct;

4.2.3 his clear regulatory history.



4.3 The amount of the fine takes account all relevant circumstances, including those in Appendix 1 to the SRA Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2011.

4.4 The SRA considers it appropriate that this Agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process.

Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement

5.1 Mr Green agrees that he will not act in any way which is inconsistent with this Agreement such as, for example, by denying the admissions at paragraph 3.1 above.

5.2 If Mr Green acts in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be subject to further consideration by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary sanction or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of Principles 2, 6 and 7 of the SRA Principles 2011.

Costs

6.1 Mr Green agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of ?300 inclusive. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.

The date of this Agreement is 26 October 2016.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Conveyancing/property

1 stars

16/09/15 - Reviewed by Steve Dougan

Truly appalling service, the previous reviewers comments ring true. Failed to deliver a quality professional service in nearly every way. Not calling to update at the end of key days such as exchange, causing confusion in the chain, very poor standard of email communication, even getting post codes wrong, poor grammar and spelling, you name it. I would not recommend this form to my worst enemy.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 1   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Hewitts

Conveyancing/property

1 stars

21/09/12 - Reviewed by Anonymous

service was awful , straightforward cash purchase , no chain , no survey , it took them nine weeks ! the person doing the conveyancing was a clerk who went on holiday for two weeks in which time nothing was done towards the conveyance .
we almost lost our buyer . charge 495 pounds , i would recommend them to my old corporal and my mother in law .

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Subscribe to updates

Complete the form below to be notified of new reviews or responses added for this solicitor.


terms of use

Enter this code » Verify

Related links

About us
Legal info
For Solicitors
FAQ
39619 solicitor reviews

4,985,835 page views