Letters roundup: 1 April 2022

Get back to your desk

I am writing to express my frustration, as a private client solicitor, with my experiences of dealing with civil servants who are working from home.

First, last October I submitted a paper tax return for one of my small trusts and I asked HM Revenue & Customs to calculate the tax due (just a few pounds). Pre-Covid, I would have received the tax calculation by Christmas and I could then pay the tax due by the end of January. For one of my trusts this year I only received the tax calculation (dated 28 February 2022) on 7 March. I am still waiting for a tax calculation for a second trust where HMRC last week told me the amount of tax due over the phone.

Second, I submitted a ‘matching pair’ of IHT forms (IHT 100 and IHT 400) for a trust where the life tenant has died and where no IHT is due, but due to the value of the trust I had to submit IHT returns. While the IHT 400 team have, apparently, dealt with their part, they are waiting for the IHT 100 team (who are severely understaffed) to do their bit. Eight months on, I am still waiting for confirmation that no IHT is due.

Third, our conveyancing department submitted two forms to the Land Registry portal last October to enter a standard Form A restriction for two separate properties to sever the joint tenancy. They said it could take up to four months (ie until February 2022) for these to be processed. As of 14 March neither has been processed. Again, pre-Covid, these would have taken the Land Registry 48 hours on average to process.

Fourth, our conveyancing department uploaded a transfer form TR1 to the Land Registry portal this month to transfer a property from the trust to the beneficiary. My colleagues have advised me it could take anywhere between four and eight months for the Land Registry to process this straightforward transaction. Pre-Covid this would probably have taken about a month.

This appalling service by civil servants cannot continue. I believe it is about time they returned to their offices, where hopefully they can deal with their work and the backlogs more effectively.

Philip Evans

Graham &  Rosen, Hull

Hired guns

The SRA’s Guidance on Conduct in Disputes of 4 March is long overdue. It should not have taken the furore over SLAPPs and City firms’ embroilment with Russian oligarchs to have been promulgated. The guidance identifies the practice of solicitors ‘making excessive or meritless claims, aggressive and intimidating tactics’. As a practitioner of some 40 years, it has long been apparent to me that such conduct is deemed totally acceptable by a huge section of the profession.

Many firms pursue personal injury claims even where there is manifestly no fault on the part of the prospective defendant in the hope that liability will none the less be conceded in a handful of cases. Commercial law firms can be equally culpable in advancing cases without substance. Just one example: I recently acted for defendants sued through a high-profile firm in a defamation claim that was totally without merit or any evidence that their (extremely large) company client had suffered any resultant actual or potential financial loss (serious or otherwise), despite this being a clear breach of the relevant protocol. Furthermore, in breach of that protocol, the practice direction concerning pre-action conduct and common courtesy, my clients were given just two days to respond to the claim, without explanation or justification. This is legal thuggery where solicitors are reduced to hired guns.

We can only hope that the Guidance ushers in a fundamental change in culture among litigators. I, for one, will start quoting it in response to some of the cases in which I am instructed.

Name and firm withheld on request