Bones of Contention

With Mr. Robert Marren administrator for the estate

1. Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor allowed confusion to arise in relation to the exact disbursement of funds held by him;

2. Grossly delayed, without reasonable explanation, the administration of the estate, the deceased person having died in 2005 some ten years ago;

3. Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor showed a complete disregard for the interests of the beneficiaries, whom Mr. Marren, Solicitor, knew to be elderly, and by his conduct is depriving two of the beneficiaries, of the enjoyment of their share in the estate;

4. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a solicitor. There is no good reason why Mr Marren did not “bite the bullet” and pay over the full 1/6 share when he received the funds way back on 27^th of May 2013.

5. Being reluctant to resolve the issue in isolation to the rest of the Estate;

6. Not provided the detailed bill of costs to include a detailed breakdown of how the figure of €40,892.53 representing fees paid to Robert Marren & Co. were arrived at;

7. Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor brought the solicitors profession into disrepute;

8. Denied me a share in the farming profits, to the extent that I was working for nothing over the 9 years in question from October, 2005 through to 2013;

9. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a solicitor with regards to the explanation he provides to explain how he arrived at his decision to award the moneys received from the sale of Pat Gavin’s livestock together with the Gross payments received from the Department of Agriculture without deducting any expense for the minding, looking after, feeding and caring for the animals for the nine years from 2005 to 2014;

10. Delayed making the decision regarding my share in the farming profits and rightful share of the grant monies received from the Department of Agriculture until the very end with the draft distribution account that contained countless errors on 18^th September, 2014. I was lied to countless times and led to believe that I would be refunded at closing by some of the beneficiaries. Why did Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor, Mullingar make a decision around March 2013 to accept my claim to owning half the livestock and all the sheep? But yet for no logical reason refuses to award me the net amount €xxxxx.11 due to me out of the Single Payment Entitlements representing my ½ share in the profits from farming the lands, which was also sent to Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor, Mullingar on the 5^th of December, 2015 for his consideration. There is no good reason why he took advantage of my good nature and delayed his decision in this matter until the end;

11. Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor squandered the Estate assets by hiring an additional accountant against my wishes at a cost of €8,751.45;

12. Accounting mistakes and lack of clarity;

13. Forced me to incur additional unnecessary expenses in drafting documents and letters time and time again to prove my claim;

14. Not furnished a detailed statement of all the legal costs to his client. Under Section 68 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 provides for charges to clients. Under these provisions a solicitor should furnish a detailed statement of all the legal costs to his client;

15. Not furnished a copy of Solicitor T & N McLynn’s Solicitors, Athlone Bill of Costs for the handsome fee of €38,941.00;

16. Provided incorrect invoice for Catherine O’Conner Accountant. Catherine O’Conner’s invoice states Total Amount Due €584.25 while Cash Account dated 18^th July, 2014 “Fees paid to Catherine O’ Connor €6,857.25;

17. Not provided an invoice for William Penrose B.L. or explanation of why his opinion was sought for €1,230.00;

18. Not provided an invoice for John Dolan Auctioneer, Ballinasloe, and breakdown of the fee he was paid. As I recalls the auctioneer John Dolan did advertise the auction extensively and I recalls full and half page ads appeared in the local newspapers. I would argue that based on the amount of interest and bids made at the auction that these ads served no purpose other than to promote John Dolans Auctioneering service as a whole. I believe that a free mention in the local parish newsletter would have sufficed.

 

With Mr. Tony Henry, Tormeys Solictiors, Athlone

1. Tony Henry, Tormeys Solictiors, Athlone, showed a complete disregard for my instructions known me to be elderly, and by his conduct has deprived my sister Eileen and I the opportunity to have our objections addressed prior to closing, and our 1/6 share of the land from the auction dealt with in isolation to the rest of the estate. Not to mention my share in the farming profits due to me out of the Single Payment Entitlements representing his ½ share in the profits from farming the lands for the 9 years in question;

2. Tony Henry, Tormeys Solictiors, Athlone, provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a Solicitor. There is no good reason why Mr Henry did not at least telephone Mr. Marren in an effort to avoid further proceedings.

At a subsequent meeting with Mr. Henry Solicitor, Athlone after Mr. Marren’s closing, Mr. Tony Henry, Solicitor estimated that court proceedings to sue Mr. Marren Solicitor could take up to 3 years with fees in the region of €60,000 to €100,000, and he suggested that I Michael Gavin should take his age (83) into consideration.

As I recall at our meeting in his office he stated that he could see no fault in Mr. Marren going ahead to finalize the distribution without addressing our objections, namely to pay our €xx,500 1/6 share of the land from the auction in isolation to the rest of the estate. I do recall Mr. Tony Henry, Solicitor stated he would have administered the estate in the same fashion himself, which begs the question why he was still adamant that we should retain his services to sue Mr. Marren, and “put his shoulder to the wheel as he put it.”

He told us he would send us the figures of costs and details in relation to suing Mr. Marren, but he never did.

At the meeting he also agreed to contact us after his call to Marren, Solicitor to let us know how it went.

My Sister Eileen followed up and had to ring Henry numerous times before he finally returned her call weeks after our meeting on the 16^th February 2015. She was on a noisy bus at the time and does not recall exactly what Henry said other that he would send a letter with details of costs and what would be involved, but he never did that.

However this letter never arrived, so after waiting about 2 months in or around the end of March My sister Eileen spoke to another Solicitor in Athlone Martin Egan. Martin assisted her to write a letter to disengage Tony Henry, Solicitor, Athlone.

It would appear that Mr. Tony Henry, Tormeys Solictiors, Athlone, provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a Solicitor. There is no good reason why Mr Henry, Solicitor, did not at least telephone Mr. Marren in an effort to avoid further proceedings.