Conduct and service

Start off on the right footA striking example of how some complaints seem doomed from the start was recently provided by a case that came before the compliance and supervision committee on appeal from a decision by an adjudicator at the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS).The firm had acted for the client in a divorce in 1989, in which an order was made giving the husband a 20% share in the former matrimonial home, which the wife continued to occupy.

There was also a maintenance order in the wifes favour, which had fallen into arrears.Nine years after the divorce had been concluded, the wife and husband agreed that the husband would surrender his interest in exchange for her forgoing the right to any further maintenance and remitting the arrears.

Sensing she had the better of the bargain, the wife then approached the solicitors who had handled the divorce for her and asked them quickly to formalise what she had agreed with her ex-husband.Matters started badly.

The solicitors said they would write to the husbands solicitors once they had retrieved their file from storage.

But searches over a period of two months failed to unearth the file and finally it was concluded it had been destroyed.Meanwhile, the wife was getting increasingly irritated by the delay, particularly because she believed rightly as it turned out that the agreement should be concluded quickly, before the husband had second thoughts.

Therefore, it was doubly unfortunate that when the wife vented her frustration, not for the first time, the firm sent a letter to the husbands solicitors that completely mis-stated the agreement.Now, instead of the husband releasing his 20% interest, the proposal read as if the wife was going to pay him a sum equivalent to his 20% interest.

This was all the more surprising as the solicitors letter to the wife confirming the terms of their instructions had been correct.

The husbands solicitors answered, taking advantage of the mistake, putting forward the figure they maintained should be paid to their client to reflect his 20% interest.That was quite enough for the complainant, who promptly complained to the firm.

This proved impossible to resolve in-house and the complaint eventually reached the OSS, which awarded the wife 300 compensation.

The decision was upheld on appeal.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.