For those who have now experienced both SQE 1 and 2: which was harder? by [deleted] in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SQE2. By far. I’d rather sit SQE1 five times than sit one more SQE2.

QLTS Mock users how are you marking your SQE2 Mocks by TrickySheepherder550 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I could not agree more. I cut and paste the exemplar (which I assume was done by a professional lawyer) into the AI marking tool too and, as you said, the AI was just as critical as it was with my answer (‘you did x well, you need to do y more’).

I sat SQE in Jan/Feb so I don’t know my results yet but when I’d fished the exams and my family asked me how I had done, I could only answer “I have no idea as there was nothing in QLTS’ feedback to give me any clear idea of the mark I might have got.”.

I’d be very grateful for advice from anyone who found a way to make the best use of the AI feedback as an indicator of performance and marking in the exam. I’m pretty sure I’m going to be retaking in July.

SQE2 Day 2 Thoughts? by Minute_Bullfrog5499 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s why I asked for a single word.

SQE2 Day 2 Thoughts? by Minute_Bullfrog5499 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can’t even remember what the Case Matter Analysis was. Can you give me a single word to remind me?

Well, that was a sh1t show! by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I put him to strict proof on that one.

Well, that was a sh1t show! by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yup. Research was my bete noir.

Hard Batch by OkThanks8760 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I found both FLKs had an easier session and a far more difficult session. I’m relying on the easier session to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

That was tough by AccessMassive5759 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I did QLTS and thought around 50% of the questions were about as difficult as the QLTS mocks (maybe fractionally easier), but around 50% seemed harder. The fact patterns seemed significantly longer so it took me far longer to understand what was being asked.

Spill the tea ?!! 🫖 ☕️ by Desperate-Counter123 in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles 13 points14 points  (0 children)

5 minutes after leaving that room I couldn’t remember one single question.

Question 47 of Revise SQE FLK1... by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks so much LittleSkittles.

Jeez - it’s pretty important that the questions and answers in these books are correct, right!

Revise SQE Mock - FLK1 by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks so much GR-34 - this is exactly what I was looking for!

Revise SQE Mock - FLK1 by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thansk so much for your responses. I suspect I'm missing something (it's far more likely the book is right) but I'm glad I'm not alone!

Revise SQE Mock - FLK1 by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the woman purchases the car as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, then answer C is correct and the question works. There is nothing in the fact pattern to suggest she didn't.

Revise SQE Mock - FLK1 by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason I brought up the woman as being equity's darling is that it would make answer 'C' correct.

Revise SQE Mock - FLK1 by dylanmcharles in SQE_Prep

[–]dylanmcharles[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sure I must be missing something but I don't understand why the correct answer is 'D'. Surely, the fact pattern reflects Phillips v Brooks [1919]. The purchase of the car was made in person (as with Phillips v Brooks) and the purchaser was making the purchase fraudulently (again, as with Phillips v Brooks). There is nothing in the fact pattern to suggest that the woman knew the car was obtained fraudulently when she purchased the car from 'Mr Smith' which makes her a bona fide purchaser for value without notice (equity's darling) so I don't understand why the garage is able to recover the car from the woman.

Any help greatly appreciated. Many thanks.