Conduct and service

GOOD PRACTICE

Stay in touch

Complaints to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors frequently involve allegations that the solicitor delayed in progressing the client's case.

In fact, the correct complaint would often have been that the solicitor failed to keep the client informed.

It frequently turns out that the client had heard nothing from his solicitor for some weeks and so assumed that nothing had been done during that period.

In reality, it is often true that plenty had been happening, but the solicitor failed to tell the client and so he thought, reasonably enough, that no progress had been made.

That situation is then only aggravated when the client telephones to find out the current situation and the calls are not returned.

Another familiar occurrence is that the solicitors say they have no trace of any of the calls.

This was the situation in a case involving the purchase of a leasehold property where one of the terms was to be a rent-free period for the incoming tenant.

The client claimed that the solicitors had delayed progress of his purchase for four months.

His evidence was that, during that period he had not received communication from his solicitor - and on the four occasions that he had telephoned during the latter part of that period - he was never able to speak to the solicitors, and that they did not return any of his calls.

In fact, there had been no delay.

During the period in question, the solicitors had been busy trying to obtain the landlord's consent to the transfer of the lease and negotiating a revised draft of the proposed lease.

The problem was that they had neglected to let the client know any of this.

Therefore, the client thought that nothing was being done.

His complaint was based on that premise.

The solicitors rejected the complaint - illustrating one of the valid reasons why clients should not be required to put complaints in writing, namely that one can all too easily get the wrong idea as to the nature of the complaint and then not address what actually caused the client concern.

The matter of the telephone calls was also aggravated by the fact that, while the client could prove he had called the solicitors' office, they had kept no record of the calls.

The lessons are clear.

Precautions must be pro-actively taken to keep clients informed and lengthy periods must not be allowed to elapse without ensuring there has been some contact with the client.

Also, all telephone calls which come into the office must be recorded.

A note of both the incoming call and the return conversation should then both appear on the file.

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

This case study is for illustration only and should not be treated as a precedent

Lawyerline

Facing a service complaint? Need advice on how to handle it? Contact Mike Frith at LAWYERLINE, the support service offered by the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors, tel: 0870 606 2588.