GOOD PRACTICE

Conduct and service

From tiny acorns...

Complaints that dramatically escalate to frightening proportions often start as relatively minor issues, which are not in themselves significant grounds for complaint.

But once the seeds of dissatisfaction are sown, the result is a complaint involving minor issues which have been inflated into full-scale grievances.

An illustration is the case where the client had been injured in two separate accidents at work.

The solicitors were instructed shortly before the expiry of the limitation period for the first one.

They lost no time in issuing proceedings and obtaining the necessary evidence.

It was anticipated that the matter would be ready to be heard 15 months after the solicitors were first instructed.

It was unfortunate that the client, who was legally aided, had not been told from the outset that the solicitors had a duty to report to the Legal Services Commission (LSC) if they believed that the client's prospects of success had deteriorated since he became legally aided.

In fact, that was what happened and although the solicitors did tell the client they were obliged to send the LSC a copy of counsel's adverse opinion, it appears that, even then, they did not warn him that his certificate might be discharged.

The certificate was discharged, which upset the client.

What followed was an object lesson in what can happen in such circumstances.

The client now not only exaggerated in his own mind minor points of dissatisfaction (for instance, a typing error in a letter) but also blew those up into full scale complaints.

He imagined grounds of complaint that simply did not exist.

He accused the solicitors of delay.

He said they had failed to keep him informed about what was going on.

In fact, the solicitors had written to him with updates every ten days or so.

The client said the solicitors had failed to obtain his consent to disclose his medical records, when he had not only signed a form of authority but repeated his permission in a letter to the solicitors accompanying the form.

Finally, the client said the firm had failed to deal with his complaints.

The firm had actually responded in full to his letter of complaint within seven days.

Equally unfortunately, there were one or two areas where a minor complaint was justified and these attracted a small compensatory award.

But in all probability, had the client been properly informed at the outset, all the subsequent problems, and the time that had to be spent dealing with them, could have been avoided.

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 handling it? Contact Mike Frith at LAWYERLINE, the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors' support service, tel: 0870 606 2588.