Report comment

There will have to be very strict criteria for third party complaints if this is not to give rise to wholesale abuse, and it is difficult to envisage what those criteria might be if they are to limit complaints to exceptional cases.

The professional principles in section 1(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007 requires that lawyers are bound to act in the best interests of their clients. I seem to recall that was a topic of debate before enactment, giving rise to the requirement for protecting and promoting the public interest in section 1(1), the concern being that criminal lawyers would otherwise be required to seek to win at all costs.

This proposal must not be allowed to go through without major debate. Otherwise every debtor who receives a solicitors' letter will complain to LeO and law firms doing debt collection will rapidly go out of business. There is also a risk in matrimonial and child cases.

Is this anything other than a search for work by an ombudsman short of cases? See Gazette article 'Legal Ombudsman cuts spending after caseload falls again' http://goo.gl/tw9GCq

Encouraging complaints for the wrong reasons damages the profession as a whole (and see Gazette article today 'Don’t let lawyers’ reputation go the way of politicians’ – Woolf'). It also imposes an unfair burden on firms which will be exposed to this risk, potentially putting them out of business without any justification whatsoever.

The Law Society should show its mettle and oppose this land grab vigorously.