Conduct and service

Keep in touch

Complaints to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS) often show clearly how a problem has escalated, with the client showing obvious signs of increasing impatience at what is perceived as lack of interest by the solicitor.

It is often the case that had signs of the client's dissatisfaction been picked up and acted on, the problem would have been solved before it became a formal complaint.

Such complaints often reveal a failure by the solicitor to send regular updates to the client.

Frequently, that situation is worsened by the solicitor taking too long to respond to the client's consequent requests for information.

For example, take the firm that was instructed to deal with an estate in which a partner in the firm was one of the executors.

He delegated work to one of his partners.

The complainant was the lay co-executor.

There was a slightly complicating factor in that there had to be dealings with the Public Trust Office, but in itself that was no reason to delay the realisation of the estate.

However, there was a period of about four months, when to all intents and purposes the application for probate was ready to be submitted, but nothing happened.

For no apparent reason the property, which constituted the bulk of the estate, was not put on the market until months after it was possible to have done so.

This was despite the co-executor writing to the solicitor three times, first in March, then in June and again in November, asking why it was still not being marketed.

Even then, the solicitor took seven weeks to reply to the last letter.

Examination of the file revealed that on five other occasions the solicitors had taken more than a month to reply to letters from the complainant.

To make matters yet worse, the solicitors had also not complied with their obligations with regard to updating the client about costs, and had rendered only two interim bills - the first eight months after instructions and the second two years later.

Even at that late stage, when the client made a formal complaint, it might have been possible to salvage the situation had a prompt response been sent.

However, an acknowledgement wasn't sent until three weeks after the complaint had been made.

The solicitor explained he was then going on holiday for two weeks and would reply fully on his return.

He did not do so and a further complaint was sent in.

No reply to that was sent for three months and then it was to the effect that the solicitor was going on holiday (again) and would respond on his return three weeks later.

Not surprisingly, the client then referred the matter to the OSS.

The deficiencies in service cost the firm 500 by way of a compensatory payment.

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