Tim qualified as a solicitor in 1993, initially practising in all areas of litigation. In 1995 he began to concentrate solely on criminal defence work and soon found himself heading the Criminal Department of his then employer, a position he held for 6 years before joining VHS solicitors in 2001.
He was made a partner in 2006, and undertook an important role in the merger of two firms to form VHS Fletchers. Thereafter, he has been instrumental in developing the Derby and Mansfield areas of our successful practice.
Tim has a key role in practice development, as combined with his strong leadership qualities, he provides the best quality advice and assistance at the police station and is a much respected Magistrates’ and Youth Court advocate. His many years of experience have involved him representing clients being investigated or charged with all forms of matters from road traffic offences through to murder.
He is renowned for his straight talking pragmatic style, an approach highly valued by his clients. A personable and committed defence specialist, Tim is a Duty Solicitor.
Tim is a member of our Regulatory team and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience with him. He is able to provide a complete service to the clients he represents. His skills allow him to give comprehensive advice to professionals who find themselves subject to investigations by statutory bodies. He is one of a very small band of solicitors who is competent to advise individuals who are subject to both regulatory and criminal investigation/prosecution.
He has many years experience of undertaking advocacy before the Magistrates Court and is an expert litigator in healthcare cases before the Crown Court. Recently he played an integral part in successfully defending a client in a multi-handed bribery and fraud trial which lasted 7 weeks before the Crown Court.
Tim has developed the appropriate skills and knowledge to represent individuals and companies called as interested parties in Coroner’s enquiries. He is able to advise the client throughout the process including preparing statements and undertaking the advocacy at the full Inquest.
Over the years Tim has advised individuals facing investigations and proceedings before the General Pharmaceutical Council; not only has he prepared full responses to investigations, but he has also undertaken the advocacy and represented clients facing matters before both the Investigating Committee and Fitness to Practise Committee of the GPhC. Tim uses his experience and skills as a well-established criminal defence advocate to thoroughly prepare responses to emergency applications for Interim orders.
Tim brings together the various attributes required in the field of regulatory law. He is approachable, caring and will stand his client’s corner whilst giving rounded and detailed advice.
Positive feedback for Tim can now be found here.
R v C Murder. An elderly client with dementia killed his wife. The Crown Prosecution Service were ultimately persuaded that a finding of fact hearing rather than a trial was the most appropriate way for such a sensitive case to proceed. Ultimately the client received a hospital order.
R v R Excess Alcohol. The client was a schoolteacher who collided with a vehicle while on school grounds whilst significantly over the legal limit to drive. Following a guilty plea and the advancement of careful and sensitive mitigation the case resolved by way of a low tariff community order despite the presence of significant aggravating features.
R v H Criminal Behaviour Order. The client was an extremely vulnerable individual with longstanding mental health issues. The case involved a high level of care and compassion and resolved by way of a conditional discharge and a Criminal Behaviour Order in terms very much reduced from those originally being sought by the police.
R v W Abuse of Process. The client was accused of physically assaulting a 3 year old child as part of a long running neighbour dispute. Following lengthy submissions to the Crown and a successful abuse of process argument the Magistrates dismissed the charge.
R v M Joint Enterprise. The client was a youth jointly charged with a street robbery. Following a full evidential trial before a District Judge which included extensive legal argument on the issue of joint enterprise the client was acquitted whereas the co-accused separately represented was convicted.
R v J. Bad character evidence. Not guilty verdict for Mansfield client despite poor record for similar offending. Read more here.
R v S. Domestic violence. Not guilty verdict for Mansfield client alleged to have assaulted his partner. Read more here.
R v B. Drink driving. Prison sentence avoided for Mansfield driver four times over the limit. Read more here.
R v P. Drug driving. Not guilty verdict for Mansfield client said to be driving whilst under the influence of drugs. Read more here.
R v P. Drink Driving. Client sentenced to a community order following mitigation demonstrating a wish to change. Read more here.
Jim joined VHS Fletchers in 2001 having qualified as a solicitor in 1991. After gaining years of experience dealing with clients from the police station through to the conclusion of Crown Court cases, he now specialises in representing clients across the country in the police station and the Magistrates’ Court.
Since joining the firm, Jim has worked on a number of serious criminal cases which, of note, involve murder, manslaughter, rapes and serious sexual assaults.
Jim has concentrated his time predominantly on appearing on a daily basis in the Magistrates’ Court.
His substantial experience allows him to boast of an excellent reputation as an intelligent advocate, securing an impressive acquittal rate at trial as well as notable results when dealing with sentences and bail applications, which no doubt influences clients when they return to him for advice and representation or recommend him to friends and associates. A particular specialism is the forensic analysis of the legality of police behaviour in any given case, analysing whether there are opportunities to exclude evidence secured by unlawful means.
Jim is an expert on offences relating to football matches. He has considerable success in representing clients charged with offences alleged before, during or after matches. He is experienced in defending applications for Football Banning Orders.
He also has a reputation for being able to represent clients who can be considered challenging and with clients with mental health difficulties.
Jim is a Duty Solicitor and has held the Higher Rights Qualification permitting him to provide representation to his clients before the Crown Court.
R v B Murder. Client accused of murder by way of injecting a fellow drug user with heroin. An acquittal was secured.
R v C Murder. A case of a man with no prior criminal involvement who was accused of murder of his partner and whose first court appearance was therefore on a murder charge.
R v T. Successful Defence in Football Law case. Our client was charged with a public order offence for allegedly shouting a homophobic insult at a Nottingham Forest player. Successful representation at trial led to acquittal after expert cross-examination of police officer witnesses.
R v W. Sexual Offences. A multiple rape allegation involving alleged rapes from a number of counties and a series of trials.
R v C. Domestic Violence. A serving prison officer was accused of a domestic assault. An acquittal was secured after trial had been adjourned four times.
Jon qualified as a solicitor in 1997 and was a Duty Solicitor from 1999. He is a Higher Courts Advocate who is qualified to represent his clients before the Crown Court and Court of Appeal.
As a result, Jon has substantial experience defending every type of criminal case, providing advice and representation in police stations, Magistrates’ and Crown Courts, and has appeared in several cases in the Court of Appeal.
Jon works on Regulatory Law cases where he represents the Health and Safety Executive in prosecutions relating to breaches of all aspects of health and safety legislation throughout the country. He often represents the Health and Safety Executive at Coroner’s Inquests. He also represents clients in cases relating to firearms law.
He has extensive experience of defending clients charged with driving offences, from speeding to causing death by dangerous driving. Jon has represented professional drivers and those whose livelihoods depend on having a driving licence. Jon is an expert in the technical defences in cases such as drink and drug driving, including post-driving consumption and spiked drinks. He regularly represented clients in putting forward evidence of “exceptional hardship” to avoid disqualification for having twelve or more penalty points. Jon has successfully made legal arguments for the court to use its discretion not to impose mandatory driving disqualifications on the basis of “Special Reasons” for cases involving drink/drug driving, dangerous driving of Large Goods Vehicles and drink driving on e-scooters.
Jon’s forensic approach to cases means that his skills have also been successfully brought to bear on the more technical kinds of proceedings before the Magistrates’ Court. He has considerable success in defending the more complex cases including prosecutions for Dangerous Dogs and applications for Criminal Behaviour Orders.
Jon has provided in-house training to businesses who operate fleets of vehicles, and given talks to motoring groups and clubs.
Possession of shotgun without certificate. Representation in the magistrates’ court of a young farmer whose shotgun certificate had been revoked. Due to an oversight, his change of address had not been notified, meaning the notification had been sent to his former address and he was unaware of the revocation and was therefore in possession of a shotgun without a certificate. Guilty plea and significant mitigation led to a small fine of £93 being imposed.
Representation of shotgun licence holder charged with transferring a shotgun to a non-licence holder and failing to notify the transfer. Successful representations to the prosecutor resulted in one charge being withdrawn. Powerful mitigation persuaded the Magistrates to impose a Conditional Discharge for the remaining offence.
Representation of a retired gunsmith following a police search warrant being executed at his home and the seizure of his collection of more than a hundred antique firearms. Represented at formal police interview under caution. Presentation of evidence and detailed expert submissions to the police led to the return of every seized firearm.
R v P. Court of Appeal. Appeal against sentence. Four year sentence reduced to two years on appeal.
R v W. Court of Appeal. Appeal against sentence. Sentence of 36 months for offence of unlawful wounding reduced to 28 months on appeal.
R v H. Court of Appeal. Appeal against sentence. Sentence of 4 years 8 months for drug trafficking reduced to 4 years on appeal.
R v E. Court of Appeal. Appeal against sentence. Successful appeal for offences of supplying Class A drugs. Sentence reduced from 3 years 4 months to 2 years 9 months.
R v J. Court of Appeal. Appeal against sentence. Successful appeal against prison sentence for historic sexual offence. Replaced with Community Order.
High Court Appeal by Case Stated. Appeal on a point of law against the conviction by Magistrates of client charged with domestic assault. Client was accused of a physical assault on his estranged wife. Following cross-examination of prosecution witnesses by Jon Hullis, Magistrates did not find the physical assault proved, but nevertheless went on to convict of a non-physical assault. Jon lodged an appeal and appeared at the High Court, resulting in the conviction being quashed.
Representation of e-scooter rider for “driving” with excess alcohol. Successful argument of Special Reasons with no driving ban imposed for a student who rode the council-hired e-scooter a short distance with no other vehicles around.
Representation of Large Goods Vehicle driver charged with dangerous driving after his vehicle overturned on an urban roundabout. Successful argument of Special Reasons with no driving ban imposed based on the unusual circumstances involving the operator not supplying appropriate load restraints and wrongly telling the driver that it was safe, with a threat of being sacked if he didn’t obey.
Successful representation of business owner to keep his driving licence. Representation of the owner of a chain of pharmacies who had accumulated 12 penalty points for speeding offences. Thorough preparation and gathering of evidence resulted in successful argument of “exceptional hardship” and the client being able to continue driving.
Speeding – Special Reasons found – No ban or points. Represented director of a security company who overtook an unmarked police car and was seen to drive at over 90 MPH in a 50 limit. Careful preparation of case and supporting evidence. Successful argument of Special Reasons as a result of client’s genuine fear for his safety from the occupants of another car after well documented threats to his life. Resulted in no ban, no penalty points, no fine and no prosecution costs.
VOSA Prosecution. Representing five clients who were HGV drivers accused of a conspiracy to falsify tachograph records resulting from alleged driving without tacho cards inserted.
Security Industry Authority prosecution. Clients were directors of a security company prosecuted by the SIA for using unlicensed security operatives.
Careless Driving. Client was a motorcyclist charged with careless driving after he was involved in a collision that left him with serious spinal injuries.
Dangerous Driving. Client was a type-1 diabetic driver charged with dangerous driving after he suffered a sudden hypoglycaemic episode while driving, resulting in numerous collisions on the M1 and adjoining roads and culminating in a serious collision with a building. A report was commissioned from the country’s leading expert on ‘hypoglycaemia unawareness’ resulting in the Crown Prosecution Service offering no evidence and the charge being dismissed.
Causing Death by Dangerous Driving. Client was a farmer investigated after a motorcyclist died following a collision with his vehicle as he made a right turn. Representation at investigation stage resulted in no charges being brought.
Represented off-duty police officer accused of using Disorderly Behaviour towards police officers. Trial involved cross-examination of police prosecution witnesses and detailed presentation of CCTV evidence that proved the client’s innocence. Client acquitted.
Representation of driver charged with causing the death of a motorcyclist by dangerous driving and whilst uninsured. Also, representation of her husband for permitting her to drive whilst uninsured.
Nick has been qualified as a solicitor for nearly 30 years and has specialised in criminal law since qualification. He has been qualified as a Duty Solicitor for much of that time, and has held the solicitors’ Higher Court Qualification since 2006 which allows him to provide continuity or representation in the police station, Magistrates’ and Crown Courts.
As a result, Nick has a wealth of experience and as such is a well-respected and trusted solicitor, not only by his clients but also by his peers and other professional court users.
Nick is known for paying great attention to the detail of the case, coupled with an ability to identify the real and important issues in a case, whether it be for trial or mitigation following plea. This calm and structured approach furthers his aim to make what is often a very daunting experience as easy as possible by taking time to explain what is to happen in a simple and easy to understand way.
Nick is a partner and the departmental supervisor for Nottingham police station and Magistrates’ Court work. He is also a member of the Nottinghamshire Law Society Criminal Business Sub-Committee.
R v M Historic Appeal against Conviction. The client was convicted of a serious wounding of a police officer in the early ‘80’s. The appeal was allowed on the basis that the police conduct in obtaining confessions was, by modern standards, so poor that the confessions should not have been before the jury and therefore the conviction was unsafe.
R v L Sexual Assault. The client was a 13 year old boy of good character facing a charge of sexual assault on an 11 year old girl. The case involved cross-examination of two vulnerable witnesses via the video link, after which the client was acquitted.
R v B Potential Driving Disqualification. The client admitted 4 further speeding offences while already having 12 penalty points on his licence. It was successfully argued that the client would suffer exceptional hardship if the defendant was disqualified and the client kept his licence.
R v S Knife Point Robbery. Careful mitigation meant that an 18 year old of good character avoided what was apparently an inevitable custodial sentence by reference to the guidelines.
R v W Murder. The client faced an allegation of murder having thrown a metal pole at a neighbour during an argument. Thorough preparation, including liaising with the police and home office pathologist to recreate the level of force required to kill using a dead pig, persuaded the prosecution to accept a plea to manslaughter instead.