Which I really thanks very much for coming. We've just done a recent survey of expert witnesses and I'm often saying that solicitors are putting pressure on them to perhaps change their view or perhaps enhance what they put in their report. Do you have any advice for experts in these say-of-dances? Yes, you're only worthwhile as an expert if it's genuinely your view. So the balance you've got to strike is making sure that anything that goes into a report or anything you say across a lamination genuinely reflects your view. If the language that is being suggested to you, jars with you, whether as a result of the form of the language or the subject what it's saying absolutely avoided, that's the play. So just say no. Just say no. I think the problem is some experts have said that solicitors put some cover pressure on them saying, well you won't get further instructions or we might delay payment, so that's sort of pressure rather than a direct change of opinion. And I guess you're saying the same advice again. Yes, I'm saying absolutely you have to do this because you're of no value to the court and therefore you have no value to your client if there is any hint that pressure has made you either change the way you've put your expert opinion or worse change your expert opinion. Experts are only as good as the truth of what they say. If there's any sense that it's a piece of evidence that is shooted by a fear of being paid late, a fear of not being instructed in the future, then it's worth it. And my experience in court over 40 years is that if it is the product of pressure in that way, if it gets to trial that invariably comes out, it will be revealed. It will be revealed not necessarily because people find out about the pressure but they will think, oh this doesn't quite fit. Just jars. Yeah, yeah. And what would you say being involved in the law in some 40 years? What's what's other advice we can give to experts, what expert witnesses in terms of the relationship with solicitors and barristers? Always be clear about what the limits in the boundaries are. A mix of your expertise. Yes, but well of your expertise, but also you won't be pushed. The other thing is the thing that really makes you an effective expert witness is a grasp of the detail and the facts of the show. So reading, preparing, making sure you know all the facts is what will trick you up both in the preparation with the solicitors and in court is if you give advice on one particular basis and then it becomes apparent that the basis of the facts is different or that you're doing it on the hoof. So know the facts, hard work, stick to your position, being authentic with the three things. Sure. Now of course since the case of Jones and Cainy we've got liability and contract and negligence. We've got the potential game before disciplinary matters in the professional body and then we've got proportionality in terms of fees. So some experts are saying we're not working ever bad and I can't spend that amount of time looking at all the detail because it's not worth it for me. Well first of all I think experts should not complain that people expect them to take reasonable care, shows you the consequences of the contract. Secondly I don't think people think that there's anything wrong with charging fairly. I think there has been a real problem about expert bodies and we've just had the case yesterday in which it's marked. In effect the the high court has said look this expert body has not behaved rightly in in effect striking somebody off, disciplining them because they gave their genuine opinion. It might be an opinion that the court disagreed with in a particular case but feeling that you would actually be disciplined for giving your own view and it was absolutely claimed that the expert in that case did get her own view. It was an honest view. That is a very bad place for the professional bodies that have got to. So that third one made me a risk of being disciplined by your professional body if a conclusion goes against you is a very inappropriate situation. Of course if you've given a view that's not genuinely yours then you should be vulnerable to professionalness and if you just give them a view that's just briefly you should not. I was very concerned by that case. I was glad to see the Mr Justice meeting in effect set aside the findings that it was going to have to be further hearing from the police. Well I think she's been just prevented from giving expert what is evidence for three years. So I don't know whether she's going to appear against that. Is she being a poet that was the conclusion? Yeah so she's been reinstated on the list but well listen thank you so much for your time. Thank you. It's really appreciated.