A letter to a barrister- how to begin?

The title says it all really- I am writing a letter to a barrister and just need some guidance! Say, for example, he was called Joe Bloggs, would I just write "Dear Mr Joe Bloggs QC"? This may sound like a really silly question, but I don't want to appear ignorant!

Reply 1

jnrbox

If you don't know them 'Dear Mr Bloggs', if you do then 'Dear Joe'. Obviously in the second form you would not use the QC (if applicable), and I would lean toward omitting it in the first also, but can see the argument for being safe rather than sorry.

Reply 2

Who'd_Have_Known

Thankyou. I have met him before, but I wouldn't say I know him, so I think I'd need to include his full name. I know what you mean about the QC, I wasn't sure myself- I don't want to sound overly formal but at the same time, I don't want to offend someone who feels their full title should be used! :s-smilie:

Reply 3

Prudy

Who'd_Have_Known

If you've merely met him, imo QC should be used in the first instance, and then see how he signs off in his reponse to dictate further protocol.

Reply 4

FMQ

You just need to write using the standard format you would to anyone. If you have met him you would write Dear Mr Blogs, if not Dear Sir. At the top, the first line of the adress should be Joe Blogs QC. You don't write a full name in a salutation whoever its to, nor do you write QC etc.

ie

Joe Bloggs QC
1 Chambers
London
WC

Dear Mr Blogs

etc

Reply 5

LordGaladar

Proper etiquette for addressing a person with a postnominal, such as QC, is that it supercedes the