377 / 432
GAZETTE
V I I
E W P 0 I N T
AUGUST/SEPTEMBER
1994
The beginning of November saw the
publication of the first report of the Lay
Observers on the Registrar's Committee.
In keeping with the Law Society's policy
to be open and transparent, the decision
to appoint Lay Observers was taken by
the Council of the Law Society to
address the perception that, as complaints
from members of the public regarding
solicitors were dealt with by a Com-
mittee comprised solely of solicitors, the
i process could not be objective. The Law
Society welcomed the publication of the
| report and sought to put it in perspective
- particularly the Lay Observers'
comment that the incidence of
j complaints was "disturbing",
j Nevertheless, it was disappointing to see
i that the media (particularly in their
headlines) picked up on the negative
aspects of the report, choosing in the
main to ignore the positive side.
In their remarks, the Lay Observers
complimented the manner and spirit in
which their appointment was received
by all concerned. They said: "from the
beginning, a willingness to give
information on all aspects of the
workings of the Committee was
extended to us and we were encouraged
to participate fully in case discussions."
They were afforded the opportunity to
ask questions, challenge views and
express views on the course of action to
be taken, notwithstanding voting
restrictions. But surely the most positive
aspect was, perhaps, the fact that the
Society had thrown open 'the books' to
I two non-solicitors who had been
j independently nominated to sit on the
Registrar's Committee and who, after a
full year, had found nothing untoward in
I the Society's handling of complaints.
i In some cases, the media coverage
actually misrepresented the facts. The
I report states that 1,200 complaints were
| received by the Law Society in the
| period covered. However, of these 1,200
complaints, only 190 were referred to the
, Registrar's Committee and, of these,
only 30 (involving 9 solicitors) disclosed
| a
prima facie
case of misconduct and
were referred to the Disciplinary
Committee of the High Court. So, of the
Change f r om Wi t h in
1,200 complaints, approximately 1,000
were determined by the Law Society
staff - a matter also commented on
favourably by the Observers. This figure
is made up of three broad categories:
complaints that on investigation showed
no valid case against the solicitor;
complaints which did reveal some basis
for complaint but were of a minor nature
and complaints which had reasonable
grounds but were resolved by the Law
Society staff to the satisfaction of both
parties.
Not unreasonably, the Observers had
some critical things to say. They pointed
out that "the biggest single contributor to
complaints against solicitors is lack of,
or inadequate, communication." This is,
of course, nothing new. The Law Society
has been aware for many years that
communication with clients was not
always what it should be. It is clear,
therefore, that the profession needs to
address this issue urgently.
Concern has been expressed in recent
years over the public perception of the
legal profession and the public relations
of the Law Society has been criticised at
Annual General Meetings. New Council
members identify public relations policy
as one of the matters to be addressed
during their time on the Council and
individual members feel it is a serious
issue. Public relations is a broad term. It
covers more than being accessible to the
press and issuing press releases on behalf
of the profession. The best public
relations stems from an
acknowledgement of the need for change
from within and the resolution to do
something about it. To improve the
public relations of the profession, we
must look at the problems at source,
while not minimising the importance of
improving external relations.
i
i
The importance of communicating with
j clients cannot be overstated. Individual
solicitors must learn to communicate
better. They cannot presume that clients
know what the solicitor is doing on their
! behalf. Taking time to explain matters to
a client at the outset is important. Better
communication with clients would go a
long way towards reducing the number
of complaints. The new President of the
Society believes that communication
techniques should feature as part of the
professional stage of a solicitor's
training and we believe that this is vital.
According to the Lay Observers, the
other major source of complaint is delay
by a solicitor in progressing a case. It is
accepted that some cases can, by their
nature, take considerable time to com-
plete. The solicitor is often at the mercy
of delay in the systems within which he
or she operates. However, there is no
excuse for not keeping clients informed
about such delays and their source. The
Lay Observers say "whether delay is
unavoidable or not, if it occurs, the need
for improved communication is vital."
Again, better communication is the key.
A client cannot genuinely have a com-
plaint against a solicitor for delay if the
delay is through no fault of the solicitor.
As well as improved communication,
one way of reducing the number of
complaints would be for practices to
have their own complaints-handling
procedure. The Law Society of England
and Wales has had, since May 1991, a
statutory 'client care' regulation
otherwise known as Rule 15. The
English regulation provides that every
principal in private practice must operate
a complaints-handling procedure which,
inter alia
, ensures that clients are
informed whom to approach in the event
of any problem with the service
provided. The adoption here of a similar
regulation should significantly reduce the
number of client complaints made to the
Society. It would also mean that
problems could be dealt with quickly and
thereby prevent the problem at issue
from festering and resulting in an
irretrievable breakdown in the
client/solicitor relationship.
If the issues outlined above are
addressed in the coming year, the result
should be a decrease in the number of
complaints and more favourable
comments in the next Lay Observer's
Report.
•
353