Report comment

John, your articles are great and I like reading them but on this occasion, I have to differ with what you say. I worked in a small firm where every fee earner's hard copy correspondence to clients was put in a signing book before it went out later that evening. It was a pain for everyone - secretaries, fee earners and the partners - but that was the system, along with partners reading every single item of incoming post before it was distributed. The point is they made the effort to do it. The reason given at the time was the PI policy required direct supervision by the firm's principals or it was a breach of the policy with no indemnity offered. They had a good idea of what was going on in files. These days it takes no time at all to go into a fee-earner's database and look at all of the draft letters on their screen if you're a supervising partner and then ok them to go out. How many firms or partners do this ? The regulatory reporting system requires partners to report problems to the SRA but how many partners really know what's going on in all the files under their supervision ? Some would say that it's an impossible task and that those under their supervision have to be trusted. Today, there's no excuse with the variety of practise and file management software available. Contrary to what you've said, John, the efficiency factor makes it easier for partners to supervise, rather than more difficult. How many firms have the right software - or any software for doing this ? And so, while the SDT have been quick to destroy someone's career, the main question remains unanswered - what is the duty of a supervising principal and what must be expected ? If you're a partner, then the buck stops with you - literally.