Conduct and service

Double jeopardy

One of the requirements under rule 15 of the Solicitors Costs Information & Client Care Code is that clients should be told the name and status of the fee-earner who is dealing with their matter.

This is an ongoing requirement.

If the fee-earner changes during the course of the retainer, the client should be told, the new fee-earner identified and any other relevant information, such as any change in the charge-out rate, given.

Clients do not appreciate not knowing who is handling their affairs.

A call from a client asking to speak to a fee-earner who left the firm two weeks before is almost certain to generate a complaint.

How far clients' expectations can go in this respect was illustrated by a complaint which also involved another common cause of discontent - delay in contacting potential witnesses.

The Office for the Supervision of Solicitors receives many complaints where the solicitor has delayed taking a witness statement and then discovered, when it turned out to be necessary after all, that the witness had died or disappeared.

The solicitor's delay might have been for excellent reasons, such as not wanting to incur unnecessary costs where disputed liability was not considered to be an issue, but it is still liable to cause a complaint.

In the case in question, the solicitors were instructed to pursue an appeal from a magistrates' court decision.

They had not acted in the original prosecution.

The trouble arose when the date listed for the hearing had to be vacated because one of the appellant's witnesses could not attend.

The problem was that, despite having been given the names of all of the witnesses four months earlier, the solicitors had not seen them until days before the scheduled hearing.

Only then did it come to light that one of the witnesses would be on holiday.

The client was annoyed that his case had to be adjourned.

Had the solicitor interviewed the witnesses within a reasonable time after being instructed, he would have known that the date the court eventually set was not viable.

The situation was then aggravated when the complainant, who had to go to court to have his bail renewed, was met by a solicitor who was a compete stranger to him.

The lesson is clear.

If the fee-earner who the client is used to is not, for any reason, going to be present at a court hearing, tell the client, explain why and at least tell him who will be present and, where possible, introduce them to each other.

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

LawyerlineFacing 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.