Letters to the Editor

AN OPEN LETTER

To the profession from the Law Society Chief Executive

I write to ask for your co-operation in tackling a very worrying trend in complaints-handling.

During the first six months of 2002, the number of complaints received at the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS) increased significantly more than anticipated.

I know that you will agree with me that it is essential for the reputation of the profession that the number of complaints about solicitors is brought under control speedily.

Despite the introduction of faster and better ways to handle complaints at the OSS, of course the volume of complaints itself is largely outside our control.

We are dependent on the profession to resolve as many complaints as possible in-house, and there are significant incentives for firms to do that.

Many firms have good procedures and try to avoid complaints having to be dealt with at the OSS.

But from the number of complaints we receive it is evident that too many firms do not.

You will want to know that we are taking action against those firms and that we are also considering a range of other initiatives which will concentrate on those presenting most risks to the reputation of the profession.

These include identifying and targeting firms that have more than their 'fair share' of complaints being dealt with at the OSS.

We are expanding our practice standards unit to ensure that such firms receive inspection visits and the cost of such visits may in some cases need to be borne by those firms.

We have already introduced some recharging.

As you will be aware, from February this year, if complaints go to an adjudication and a finding is made against a firm, the firm will be required to pay the cost of dealing with the matter, up to 840.

A description of this new power was published in the Gazette (see [2002] Gazette, 7 February, 40, and [2002) Gazette, 21 March, 43).

It is also the case that if the OSS considers a complaint should have been dealt with better by the firm's own complaints-handling procedure under practice rule 15, this may be reflected in any compensatory award made to the client.

Where rule 15 has been consistently ignored we have established a procedure to fast-track matters to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

An analysis of recent referrals to the OSS indicates that the most common reasons for complaints about quality of service are: failure to reply to the client or keep them informed of progress; delay; failure to follow instructions, and failure to provide adequate costs information.

More than 20% of complaints relate to conveyancing.

These are all issues that need not be escalated into complaints to be dealt with by the OSS.

There are a number of things which firms can do, including:

- Checking how many complaints your firm has and ensuring that they are being effectively resolved in-house;

- Ensuring that your firm has an effective and up-to-date complaints procedure and that all partners and staff understand their roles in relation to it.

And there are ways in which we can help you.

- Our booklet Handling complaints effectively gives practical advice on how to go about this.

It is available by calling 01527 883264;

- If you need advice on dealing with a complaint about service, consult our Lawyer Line service on 0870 606 2588;

- If you need advice on improving your complaints-handling procedures, contact the practice standards unit on 01527 883264, and;

- If you have been unable to resolve a complaint in-house and a client has gone to the OSS, please make every effort to deal with the OSS's staff constructively and properly so that the issue can be resolved speedily.

Our front-line staff are trained to mediate.

Help them succeed in finding a fair solution by avoiding adversarial attitudes.

I am sorry to have to write to you in this way, but an increase in complaints against solicitors is damaging the profession's standing with the public and with key stakeholders including the Lord Chancellor's Department, the Office of Fair Trading and the Legal Services Ombudsman.

This is giving us great difficulty and inevitably weakens the profession's case for retaining self-regulation at a time when the future regulation of legal services is the subject of a national consultation by the Lord Chancellor's Department.

I look forward to your co-operation.

Janet Paraskeva, Chief Executive, Law Society

COSTLY ATTITUDE

As a firm of claimants' solicitors costs consultants, we can sympathise with the 76% of solicitors who, in principle, oppose the idea of fixed costs (see [2002] Gazette, 22 August, 3).

However, some firms of costs negotiators which are instructed by insurers for defendants seem to be embracing the idea of a fixed-costs regime, so much so that they have unilaterally introduced their own scheme.

One particular firm of defendants' costs negotiators has a policy of offering five hours (including time spent on attendances, documents, letters and telephone calls) if the case spanned up to 12 months.

Apparently, this is not negotiable which makes one wonder why 'negotiators' are even instructed.

If an arbitrary approach of this nature was considered sensible, the insurers could save time by making the offer themselves.

We are in the business of resolving matters without troubling the courts.

This saves everybody time and money.

However, if negotiators are taking it upon themselves to introduce their own system of fixed costs, we and a number of costs negotiators acting for claimants solicitors will refuse to deal with defendants' costs negotiators.

The consequence of this will be that the courts become overrun with detailed assessment hearings.

This cannot be in anybody's interest.

Guy Platt-Higgins, managing director, Law Costing, Birkenhead, Wirral

STICK TO THE FAMILIAR

Trevor Wheatley's letter (see [2002] Gazette, 8 August, 19) was both perceptive and timeous coinciding as it did with your article on page one of the same week, 'High street firms to face free-for-all'.

I am, thank goodness, now retired from the solicitors' profession but it is from that perspective that I can recall the then chief executive of a building society saying that his organisation and others within the movement could 'do' conveyancing cheaper, better, more quickly etcetera.

That organisation under its new guise is in the doldrums.

I can recall insurance companies and others falling over themselves to buy up estate agencies because 'anyone can sell houses'.

Were there not mind- blowing losses in that sector? We have seen accountants producing accounts verging on the shoddy, going onto incompetent right through to complicit with fraud.

We have seen good companies embracing other 'sure to be profitable' activities because they make money, only to revert to common sense and their core.

Mr Wheatley refers to the tale of the piper - cobblers have produced two sayings - one is to stick to the last.

The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 may well produce a load of something else.

G Young, Fairford, Gloucestershire

VINTAGE WORK

There is no surprise in your article 'Facing the fire' (see [2002] Gazette, 22 August, 28), referring to London firms cutting down or ceasing their recruitment of young solicitors.

But I was disappointed that working with the elderly was not mentioned as an area to consider as a speciality.

There is little doubt that this is a growing area of work for all firms and there is, sadly, a scarcity of those who are specialising.

For young solicitors who wish to combine compassion with intellectual challenge - and know that there will always be a market for their skills - I suggest that an approach is made to Solicitors for the Elderly, whose administrator can be contacted by telephoning 01733 326769.

The profession seems to be extraordinarily slow in waking up to this extremely important area.

I believe that firms which do not develop the expertise of some of their own solicitors or take on someone with this expertise will later on very much regret it, as will the elderly population in their area.

Liz Holdsworth, member of Solicitors for the Elderly, Wace Morgan, Shrewsbury

EXCHANGE OF VIEWS

I am a practising chartered accountant, specialising in personal tax.

This means that every year I have clients who have sold properties which are wholly or partly subject to capital gains tax.

Most of them send me the completion statements for the sales, an encouraging number do the same for the purchases - but alas, that is not enough.

I need to know the dates not of completion but of exchange of contracts, which have to be disclosed and which often affect the amounts of indexation and or taper relief.

There tends to follow a period, tedious for all concerned, while ancient records are unearthed and have to be looked through - at far from negligible cost.

It would be a great help all round if the date of exchange of contracts were automatically noted on the completion statement.

Those who think it is not worth bothering with if the property being purchased is to be the principal private residence should note that, more often than you might expect, an owner lets out part of it, spends years away, or buys a second residence.

J Denza, chartered accountant, London NW3

BUMPY RIDE

A recruitment advertisement by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) (see [2002] Gazette, 30 August 36), shows a piece of luggage in an airport, presumably that of a CPS lawyer, taking advantage of what the text calls employment 'flexible enough to suit a range of lifestyles', and jetting off to an exotic place for the weekend.

The owner of the bag is nowhere.

If the CPS really wishes to attract people who are so daft as to leave luggage unattended in an airport, in this day and age, no wonder it has got problems.

John Edwards, solicitor, Heswall, Wirral

NORTHERN LIGHTS

Your Editorial (see [2002] Gazette, 8 August, 16) rightly praises the success of the Commonwealth Games for Manchester.

However, it missed the opportunity to remind readers that they can enjoy our sights, hospitality and sunny weather by visiting the Solicitors Annual Conference on 27 and 28 September.

After all, the photos of my predecessor in the same edition show that all the stars come here.

For those still wavering, the deciding factor must be the Star Trek: Federation Science Exhibition at the Museum of Science and Industry.

Geraldine McCool, President of the Manchester Law Society

AIDING WORD GAME

I see that Lord Woolf has challenged the profession to come up with a plain English version of the words pro bono (see [2002] Gazette, 8 August, 5).

It seems the words are not readily associated with the provision of legal services.

If pro bono is a service which is free to the recipient and for which the lawyer's reward is more altruistic than financial, would 'legal aid' fit the bill?

It is a shame to duplicate efforts.

John F Campbell, Toller Hales & Collcutt, Northampton

NEW LEAF?

Will the reclassification of cannabis mean the end of the single joint expert?

Mark Solon, Bond Solon, London EC1