Conduct and service ;Its good to talk ;Lack of communication lies at the root of the majority of service complaints received by the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS).

;Alarmingly, the solicitor often appears to be totally unaware of the cause of the problem, protesting the complaint is unfounded even when the substance of it is brought to his attention.

;It is this inability or unwillingness to appreciate the clients point of view that exacerbates the existing problem and results in failure to resolve the complaint in-house.

;A stark illustration of this occurred when Mr A protested to the OSS that not only had his solicitor been guilty of delay in progressing his matter but also had not kept him informed or responded to his communications.

;The solicitor vigorously protested his innocence, maintaining the delays were unfortunate but out of his control and he had kept the client informed throughout.

;The file revealed unexpected problems had occurred that were not of the solicitors making.

The caseworker concluded that, while a proportion of delay could be attributed to the solicitor, the bulk could not be put down to lack of service.

;However, although there was evidence a response to a letter from the client was always sent, it was equally evident the solicitor had repeatedly failed to answer the questions raised.

The complainant, frustrated and annoyed by posing the same questions in subsequent letters, resorted to the telephone.

The file revealed these calls were not returned.

;To make it worse, when the complainant sent a formal complaint resolution form it took the firm four months to respond! It was also discovered that the client had received no costs information whatsoever a matter the OSS is entitled to take into account regardless of a specific complaint.

;The firm, belatedly accepting its deficiencies, offered to forgo any charges an offer that was converted into a formal order.

;l Every case before the compliance and supervision committee is decided on its individual facts.

These case studies are for illustration only and should not be treated as precedents.