Everyone is gunning for the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS).

I was too, until I decided to put my money where my mouth was and make an (unpaid) contribution to the profession by joining the Law Society committee which supervises the supervisors.

Now my view is that it is the profession which must get a grip - because heaping criticism on the OSS is not just a case of shooting the messenger, it is a case of missing the point entirely.The biggest, most staggering and devastating eye-opener was the vast and overwhelming amount of casework.

No wonder Law Society Council members, of whom I am not one, regard the compliance and supervision committee as the short straw.

I simply had no inkling of the vast number of solicitors against whom complaints alleging professional misconduct, or an inadequate professional service have been made.

And no inkling either of the size and complexity of some of the issues involved.

The casework is fascinating, but it is not easy.When I was a managing partner I would have done virtually anything to avoid hassle from the Law Society.

Who can spare the time to engage in lengthy, tedious and convoluted correspondence, arguing technical and silly points? Who can be bothered to write reams of comments, observations, and then comments on comments ad infinitum? Quite a few people, as it turns out.

And not just disgruntled or vexatious clients.

You may gulp if a letter from the OSS lands on your desk.

But take it from me.

There are countless solicitors who will either stretch languidly for the waste bin, or smile wryly as they anticipate a bit of harmless sport - and all at the profession's expense.This is not to say that some complaints do not need to be defended vigorously.

There are some unreasonable clients - or former clients - around.

There are also bandwagon loads of people keen to score cheap political points by making scapegoats of the profession and the and the Law Society.It also needs to be said with deafening loudness and at the risk of boring repetition that the vast majority of solicitors does a good job.But how on earth do solicitors and their clients expect the OSS to deliver a reasonably efficient and fair service when it continues to be deluged by the sort of complaints that should, without a shadow of a doubt, have been sorted out locally? Do you have to complain if the solicitor down the road stands on your toe? Is it a point of principle never to apologise? These are interesting times - with self-regulation of the profession soon to be debated.It is possible that the powers of the OSS will be extended to the award of compensation of up to £5,000, in addition to the reduction or cancellation of a bill and other 'put-it-right' orders.

And that is quite apart from the infliction of reprimands and severe reprimands, or committals to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.You may think the benefits of self-regulation are so insignificant as to be irrelevant.

But think again.

Whoever regulates the the profession, it is you and I who will have to pay for it.And at least the current system allows for the likes of you and I to bring our professional expertise to bear, case by case, on individual adjudications.

When big decisions are made affecting your pocket and your reputation, do you want to be judged by your peers or not?The vultures are circling and axes are being ground.

But it is simply no good blasting the OSS for delay, for losing sight of cases, and making wrong decisions, when too many solicitors do nothing to stem the tide.And then they expect the consequently overworked OSS caseworkers to deliver a top-notch, first-rate service without having to pay for it, and - at the same time - they demand that their particular case be treated as if it were the only one in the office.

I think I have had clients like that.