Legal fees on expenses. Paul Flynn - Newport deserves better.

A quick explination of the above from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Flynn_(politician)

He agreed to pay out more than £36,000 to settle a libel action brought against him by a complaints handling firm that specialises in endowment mortgages. Flynn's solicitor told the High Court that the MP was retracting allegations he had made against Endowment Justice, a company that works on behalf of borrowers who believe they have been mis-sold endowment-linked mortgages. Endowment Justice launched legal proceedings against Flynn after he criticised the growing number of complaints against handling firms. The company had previously held talks with Flynn over its concerns about bad practices at several complaints handling firms. But Flynn subsequently named Endowment Justice in accusations he made about the whole sector. Flynn agreed to pay Endowment Justice's legal costs of £35,450, plus £1,000 in damages, which the company has said it will donate to the NSPCC.He also agreed to publish an apology on his website.[2]

Paul Flynn also charged his legal fees of £10,565.30 to the taxpayer. As released documents from the House of Commons fees office show.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16561869/Flynn

Flynn has attempted on his webshyte to justify his defending himself at public expense. The basic fact is that had he shown more sense at the start he would not have been sued through the courts. He claims he did nothing wrong, even though he lost he was right etc etc etc.

Also he had the opportunity to back down before this went to court and he did not, instead he landed the taxpayer with a bill of over £10,000.

Flynn also removed the apology from his website at the first chance he got. But I have saved it and here it is:

On this website in February this year, I made certain statements referring to Endowment Justice Limited, one of the companies which offers assistance in obtaining compensation for those people who were mis-sold endowment policies. I have been campaigning against companies providing professional services in relation to endowment policy compensation claims, but my facts about Endowment Justice were incorrect.

As a result, I wrongly accused the company and its directors Nick Keca, Marianne Fitzjohn and Graeme Webber of having previously mis-sold endowment policies and now dishonestly overcharging those self-same victims to help them obtain compensation.

I am happy to clarify that neither Endowment Justice Ltd or any of its directors were ever involved in any aspect of endowment policy selling. It was therefore false and unfair to suggest that they had profited from the historic mis-selling of endowment policies. I was also incorrect in stating that Endowment Justice, which offers its services in recovering compensation on a “no-win, no-fee” basis, could charge its customers up to 40% of any compensation gained.

Endowment Justice in fact charge customers 17.5% plus VAT or 22.5% plus VAT of any compensation gained. I was wrong to give the unintended impression that the company or its directors acts in any way improperly or unlawfully in providing services to those seeking compensation for endowment policy mis-selling. I would like to apologise to Endowment Justice for my allegations, and to Mr. Keca, Ms. Fitzjohn and Mr. Webber for any embarrassment or distress caused by my false remarks.

So makes an unreserved apology, then removes the apology from his website and now claims he was right anyway. Class, real class.

Newport deserves better than him. Time for a repost of the old vid I knocked up.

A couple of other unanswered questions as well, why should Flynn get his tv license paid by the taxpayer, why should he have his council tax paid and his utility bills paid when he recieves a wage of £64 grand a year.

Enough to pay all the above and his own legal fees, think about it if we landed up in the libel court our employer would not pay for our defence!

.