Letters to the Editor

DOUBTS ABOUT DELAYS

I have received the Legal Services Commission's (LSC) notification of changes to the costs assessment limits.

It is comforting to note the assurance that only its 'existing experienced staff' will be dealing with the claims between 1,000 and 2,500 - and that any delays in dealing with this additional work after 1 July will only be temporary.

I am confident that the switching of experienced staff to this work will lead to no more delays above those we are experiencing in other areas.

I anticipate the LSC will also have made preparations to handle all the extra appeals against its assessments that can be expected.

I currently have a case where I objected to an assessment by the LSC last October - the review is to be heard next month.

(Incidentally, the notification of the hearing told me I had no right of appearance.

On checking, I was told to ignore that part of the letter, that it was wrong, and that there was no control over the way the computer worded the letter sent.)

I am confident the LSC will assure us that it will be working hard to address such delays and that they will soon be a thing of the past.

One would like to think so, but may I be permitted to express some doubt?

Peter Wilkinson, Kirby Simcox, Bristol

RIGHT TO DIE FOR

I understand the position of Deborah Annetts, but I believe she is profoundly mistaken (see [2003] Gazette, 30 May, 15).

Those propounding euthanasia in the name of human rights forget several points.

No one need die in pain thanks to the hospice movement.

Rather than put resources into funding euthanasia, the government should be urged to fund properly our hospices.

It is difficult to have faith in any proposed safeguards.

The fact that the existing law is not properly enforced is no excuse for diluting it further.

It is a topsy-turvy world which argues for the weak and vulnerable to be killed as a human right.

It was well said that when people cease to have any meaningful belief in God, they do not believe in nothing - they will believe in anything.

Philip Martin-Summers, Higgs & Sons, Kingswinford

FARMYARD POLITICS

The working day after The Accident Group collapsed, I received a call from one of the unfortunate 2,500 ex-employees laid off without notice on pay day, offering to pass on to me 100 'gold-rated' cases, or 'certs' as he put it.

The day of the collapse, readers of the Insurance Times concluded in an e-mail poll that this, even after the collapse of Claims Direct, did not mark the end of claims farmers' activities.

Will the Law Society now demand that the government get rid of claims farmers? The Society should take this opportunity to restore public confidence by working to end a nasty and dehumanised system, which treats both its customers and employees so badly.

Anthony Coombs, John Pickering & Partners, Manchester

FAX AND DELIVER

Can anybody explain to me why many firms still adopt the practice of sending letters by fax and by post where there is no statutory or regulatory requirement to do so? I recall in the late 1970s and early 1980s listening in awe to a client who described to me how he could put a document on what appeared to be a photocopying machine - and this document would appear at the recipient's address within minutes.

In those days, lawyers were inclined to be distrusting and also sent the document by post.

More than 20 years have elapsed since this demonstration - and I have only ever had one query as to whether a fax had arrived.

The practice incurs additional expense for both sender and recipient.

Often a file is got out when a fax is received, dealt with and put away, only for the process to be repeated some days later when the hard copy arrives.

Nobody sends their e-mails by post....

or do they?

David Downton, David Downton & Company, Old Stratford, Milton Keynes

ALL WHITE ON THE DAY

As acting secretary of the Law Society Cricket Club, I have to defend Miles Harbot following Richard White's letter (see [2003] Gazette, 30 May, 17).

The photograph of Miles which you published was taken just after he was dismissed, having scored 92 on a scorching day in 2001.

As such, I think that he is justified in looking more than a little dishevelled.

However, I make no excuses for the hat that he was wearing.

We are normally a sartorial bunch at the club, and I invite Mr White and any others who are interested in cricket to join us and find out just how well turned out we can be.

Richard O'Hagan, Rowberry Morris, Reading