Letters to the Editor

EURO CURRENCY

I concur with Michael Renouf's comments and can add to them from my own experience (see [2002] Gazette, 16).

I studied for a masters degree in EU law while working full-time in private practice, and found many clients were well versed in European issues, and delighted to have advice given on how these would affect their businesses.

It added an extra dimension to the service, and built goodwill for the firm.

Unfortunately, when I tried to explain this benefit and the untapped potential to the partners of the firm for which I was working, the reaction was adverse.

There was clear evidence of the 'insular attitude', referred to in Mr Renouf's article.

Having thus found no opportunity for using my EU law skills within private practice, I moved into education in the hope of redressing the balance and training the future generations in the benefits of this pervasive subject.

I should point out that EU law forms an important component of all law courses from GCSE to postgraduate level.

As more adult education centres are offering law-related courses, potential clients are gaining knowledge of EU law, and will expect their solicitors' advice to include this element.

Andrea Cochrane, solicitor, lecturer in law at the universities of Derby and Leicester

TEETHING DELAYS

Rowena Warrington is not the only one experiencing problems with the Public Guardianship Office (PGO) (see [2002] Gazette, 27 June, 19).

We have a number of files where it has taken months to obtain a response.

The PGO could not cope with its move to new premises in January and its service came to a stop.

I have a letter of complaint that I sent on 8 March which remains to be answered in full, though its receipt has been acknowledged.

I understand the Law Society's mental health committee is co-ordinating problems experienced by solicitors to see whether some improvement is possible.

Katherine Jordan, Blacks, Leeds

PAYING THE PRICE

I read with horror the statement in your recent front page 'Indemnity: good firms to pay for bad' that in relation to unpaid premiums due from firms in the assigned risks pool 'the Law Society's indemnity insurance committee is currently deciding how to deal with the problem' (see [2002] Gazette, 27 June).

There is surely nothing to decide.

In my view, any firm which has not paid its premium should be sued for the premium and, until it is paid, required to cease practice and the principals should be the subject of disciplinary proceedings.

If a firm defaults financially with clients' money the Society moves in pretty quickly and transfers the work elsewhere.

Why cannot the same happen to any firm which does not pay its indemnity insurance premium?

W Holmes, solicitor, London W1

HOME FRICTION

In his letter, JLB Thorpe makes reference to the fact that 'solicitors' charges for conveyancing have not risen in line with other costs associated with moving house' (see [2002] Gazette, 13 June, 19).

How true, but interestingly he makes no comment about the possibility of those charges being increased.

Our professional colleagues who are estate agents seem to have little or no difficulty charging 11/2% of the purchase price or more, while we in the legal profession are lucky to achieve a fee of more than 700-800 for the same transaction.

Comparisons are odious, but it cannot simply be a matter of competition between solicitors as there are plenty of estate agents out there.

Why is it that the general public will accept paying a fee of several thousand pounds to their estate agent but seek to drive legal fees into the ground?

While, as Mr Thorpe says, low conveyancing costs are beneficial to the consumer, that is surely a short-term view.

In any case, why should the legal profession be subsidising the conveyancing process?

Christopher McGrorty, The Merriman Partnership , Marlborough, Wiltshire