Conduct and service

Delays in processing casesThis column has referred before to the need for those who deal with complaints to keep an open mind.

That means not only admitting fault where it exists, but also being prepared to recognise faults that may not have been apparent to the client but which prompted the complaint.Those circumstances commonly arise when the client complains of delay in progressing the case when, in fact, there has been plenty of activity, or where the lack of progress was not the fault of the solicitor, but the client has simply not been told about it.However, a case came to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS) in which the reverse circumstances applied.Mrs A instructed ZY & Co to act in her divorce.

It was not until 20 years later that agreement was reached in resolution of the parties' financial affairs.

Truth to tell, they were relatively simple.

However, it was not until a year later that the court finally approved the consent order.Long before that, Mrs A had raised her complaints, alleging that she was not kept informed of progress.

The firm steadfastly denied the complaint.

Because the matter could not be resolved, the OSS called in the solicitor's file.It revealed that what the firm had been maintaining was, in fact, correct.

They had diligently ensured thatMrs A was told every time something of note or importance occurred.However, it also became apparent that there were several periods of delay, sometimes lasting months at a time, during which nothing happened and for which there was no apparent explanation.These had all been conveniently ignored by ZY & Co's complaints partner, who must have examined the file in order to compile his response to the complaints.The matter was then aggravated, as is often the case, by the solicitors failing to return the complainant's telephone calls when she rang to ask what was going on.

Indeed, it was the solicitor's failure to do so that was the direct cause of Mrs A lodging her complaint and in the terms that she did.Had the complaints partner approached the matter with an open mind, he must have recognised that the firm's service had fallen below acceptable standards and why Mrs A had complained, even if she had not identified the grounds of her complaint correctly.The OSS was not impressed with the way that the firm had dealt with the complaint and ordered a compensatory payment to be made to Mrs A.

This was enhanced to reflect the unsatisfactory way in which the complaint was dealt with in-house.