Conduct and service

Beware of complacencyLaw Society Practice rule 15 requires that clients should be given certain information at the beginning of the retainer.

This is essential information required to establish a proper working relationship.

But none of this information has to be given in what has become known as the 'client care letter'.

The rule requires the information to be given in writing.

Provided it is written, it doesn't have to be in the form of a letter.

It usually is, though, because historically solicitors have written to clients at the outset of the retainer to confirm their instructions.When rule 15 originally required information to be given to a client, the natural thing to do was to include it in that letter.

As the rule was expanded to require more information to be given to clients, this also was put in that initial letter, which became universally known as the 'client care letter'.

The rule also provides that if the required information is not given, the onus is on the solicitor to justify the omission.

Such circumstances can be imagined.

For instance, giving costs information when taking instructions for a death-bed will would hardly be sensitive.

Another instance would be long-standing clients who could easily be irritated by repeatedly being provided with the same information.However, practitioners should never allow a long-standing relationship to produce complacency.

Such were the circumstances giving rise to a complaint from clients over instructions to prepare their wills.

Because it seemed to the clients that the firm couldn't get the wills right, they terminated their instructions and asked for their deeds.

At that stage the relationship was not doomed, but it was once the firm had ignored their letter and the four others that followed.One of the clients' complaints was that they weren't told with whom they could lodge a formal complaint.

The firm maintained they should have known because they were long-standing clients.

However, it transpired that the clients had never been told the identity of the rule 15 partner.

He stoutly maintained he had never been told of the complaint.

This suggested there had not only been a lack of information to the clients, but there was also no in-house procedure for dealing with complaints.The firm forfeited its fees for the preparation of the wills and had to pay 200 compensation.

l Every case before the adjudication panel is decided on its individual facts.

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