Friday, October 02, 2009

Legal Services Bill promises nightmare complaints scenario for consumers as Law Society campaigns to control regulation over ‘Tesco Law’ reforms

Debating chamberHolyrood's Justice Committee will consider MacAskill's Legal Services bill as arguments grow over who will regulate legal sector. Scottish consumers will be given a wider choice of who will represent their legal interests with the introduction of the Legal Services Bill, which seeks to promote alternative business structures within Scotland’s legal services sector. However, a gigantic flaw in the Scottish Government's proposals reveals confusion and poorly thought out plans to appoint ‘a regulator of its choice’ to regulate an expanded legal services market, leading to expectations the Law Society of Scotland will end up engineering its own appointment to regulate and manage anyone who seeks to enter Scotland’s legal services sector, irrespective of their professional background.

Approved Regulators for ABSRegulation nightmare for consumers predicted as Scottish Government 'to choose' a regulator with the help of the Lord President, the OFT and others. A Consumer affairs insider while welcoming the improvement in choice of legal representatives, condemned the proposals over regulation, calling them "half baked" and claiming there will be little change in the usual closed shop complaints system run by the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. She said : "The Scottish Government's proposals over appointing a regulator to oversee the expanded legal services market after the bill becomes law are a bit of a joke, given it is widely expected the Law Society of Scotland will end up as the sole regulator of the entire industry yet again. I doubt consumers would benefit from any such arrangement when it is clearly evident consumers have never benefited from the Law Society's regulation in the past."

She continued : "There are some competent proposals to widen public choice in the legal services market, however, the Legal Services Bill as it currently stands is a long way off from the expectations of consumer organisations and doubtless the many law reformers who are calling for the full opening up of Scotland's monopolistic legal services market."

The Scottish Government’s Press Release described the main points of the Legal Services Bill as being to allow solicitors to secure external investment and business expertise and to combine with other professionals to offer legal services to the public in new ways, to allow the removal of restrictions on solicitors entering into business relationships with non-solicitors, to make it easier for Scotland's leading commercial law firms to compete effectively with other UK firms and internationally, while also allegedly (and laughably) creating a robust regulatory framework in which the Scottish Government will appoint approved regulators who will regulate the new business structures

MacAskill tight lippedJustice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has chosen to concentrate on beefing up the legal profession's profits, sidelining the long standing problems of poor regulation. Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said: "A strong and independent legal profession is part of the institutional framework of a modern democracy. The legal profession also contributes to the Scottish economy with an estimated turnover of over one billion pounds per annum. This new legislation will help Scotland's legal profession to grow and compete both in the UK and internationally.In developing these proposals, we have worked closely with the profession to ensure that we protect the profession's core values,at the same time as freeing solicitors to offer new services in new ways. Our proportionate and flexible approach will allow the profession to move quickly to respond to changes in the market by removing outdated restrictions on business models."

Scotland’s Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill again puts lawyers £billions before consumer protection & independent regulation.

The Government’s proposals for regulation laughably state : “There are six such principles to which persons providing legal services should adhere. These principles do not differ substantially from the professional principles by which solicitors and other legal professionals act, and are intended to ensure that the current standard of quality in the delivery of legal services is safeguarded. Licensed providers would be expected to “act in the best interests of their clients” meaning that they should, for example, observe the duty of confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest and safeguard a client’s money and property. Licensed providers would be expected to maintain good standards of work, meaning that they should act competently, communicate effectively, be diligent and show respect and courtesy.” Surely these claims must relate to another country, because they certainly do not describe the Scottish legal services market !

A representative of legal services users today branded the Legal Services Bill 'little more than window dressing for the legal profession which contains nothing for consumers'. He said : "This is all about bringing new money into law firms and giving regulatory control back to the Law Society of Scotland. I don't see anything beneficial or productive for consumers in these legislative proposals."

Jane IrvineSLCC's Chair Jane Irvine offered no view on the new proposals. The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission's Chair, Jane Irvine was asked for comment, and replied : "I have not studied this yet." However, an SLCC insider said : "The Government's proposals over regulation of abs are messy and will cause more confusion for clients over who to make a complaint over problems with their legal representatives. The SLCC was given the role as single gateway for all complaints regarding legal services and funding that role comes from levying all entrants to the legal services market. It now looks as if the Government are now trying to undo the Commission's remit and hand regulatory power back to the profession which will be a bad thing as far as consumers are concerned."

A client with a complaint currently being investigated by both the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission rounded on both organisations, branding them "useless, prejudiced, anti-client, against the public, and part of the problem of crooked lawyers, rather than a solution to cleaning up the profession."

Ian Smart Law Society PresidentPresident Ian Smart of the Law Society of Scotland is campaigning hard to become the sole regulator of the expanded legal services market, by any means possible. Quick off the hoof, Ian Smart, President of the Law Society of Scotland reacted to the Justice Secretary's proposals, saying “The Society believes that Scotland’s legal profession should be able to adapt to best meet the needs of modern society and a global economy. Scots lawyers are well respected around the world and we want to ensure that our members have access to the opportunities that ABSs could present to adopt new practices, to deliver the services their clients expect and develop their businesses in Scotland, as well as elsewhere in the UK and overseas.”

"However it will be vitally important that the Bill ensures the independence of the legal profession, promotes access to justice and maintains robust consumer protections and high standards among those delivering legal services. Effective regulation will be key to any plans for change. We look forward to engaging with the Scottish Government, the Parliament and other interested parties in the future development of legal services in Scotland.”

An analysis of Ian Smart's comments of how the Law Society has handed the debate on alternative business structures indicate his claims are pure fantasy. In reality, the Law Society attempted to vote down the abs proposals, which only passed into the profession's overall policy after legal firms themselves took the initiative and demanded changes. Where Mr Smart speaks of 'promoting access to justice and maintaining robust consumer protections and high standards among those delivering legal services', the simple fact as we all know is these fanciful 'consumer protections and high standards of service’ have never existed in Scotland's justice system, nor has unrestricted access to justice, a fact which Lord Gill's Civil Courts Review more than adequately attests to, alongside the Lord Justice Clerk's own condemnation of Scotland's Justice system as being that of a Victorian justice system stuck in the past.

With Ian Smart's call for ‘effective regulation to be key to any plans for change', readers can take that to mean the Law Society of Scotland will be cracking the whip over Kenny MacAskill to ensure it is conveniently appointed as regulator of choice, and internal memorandums seen by this reporter do seem to suggest that will be the case, even before the bill has been debated at the Scottish Parliament's Justice Committee.

Make no mistake, the Law Society of Scotland do not deserve any further regulatory function over the Scottish legal services market. This has been proved time and again over the decades, which have seen average complaints figures of around 5000 individual complaints a year made against less than 10,000 solicitors, leaving a trail of literally thousands of clients who have fell victim to crooked lawyers who mostly remain in practice to this day, through the protection of the Law Society's considerably corrupt system of self regulation, brutally enforced by its sinister Client Relations office.

Which logoConsumer group Which? criticised the Scottish Government for failing to bring in an independent regulator to protect Scots consumers. Which? principal public affairs officer, Julia Clarke, said : “This legislation will improve access to justice for people in Scotland and sweeps away outdated restrictions on how lawyers work.The Bill promises to breathe new choice and competition into legal services, which should lead to economies of scale and costs, and possible one-stop shops offering better service to consumers.”

She continued : “While we would have preferred an independent regulator, we are pleased that the Law Society of Scotland’s regulatory committee will have a lay majority and a lay Chair, introducing a much-needed consumer voice in this sector. It is disappointing that Advocates are not included in the new legislation, as we see no reason for them to be exempted from the opportunity to offer more choice to consumers.”

Consumer Focus ScotlandConsumer Focus Scotland broadly welcomes the Legal Services Bill. Sarah O’Neill, Head of Policy and Solicitor at Consumer Focus Scotland, said : “We have long campaigned for a more open market in legal services in Scotland and the creation of new ways of delivering them. The Legal Services Bill paves the way to open up competition in the market and widen choice for users of legal services.”

Clearly the Legal Services Bill is flawed, in respect of regulation, and the number of alternative choices it offers Scotland's consumers in terms of who we wish to represent our legal interests. You can read two of my earlier reports on the flaws of the Legal Services Bill, here : Scottish Govt's Legal Services Bill 'must do more' to break Law Society's grip on legal marketplace & give public wider choice over access to justice and a topical one on the subject of the proposals over regulation, here : Consumers & Govt insiders brand Law Society ‘too crooked’ to regulate ‘Tesco Law’ expansion of legal services in Scotland

You can download the Legal Services Bill from the Scottish Parliament’s website using the following links :

The opportunity to debate the Legal Services Bill, make submissions on personal experiences on dealings with the legal profession, and suggest changes & improvements to the Scottish Government's proposals should not be missed by the public, who can contact the Scottish Parliament's Justice Committee when bill begins its path through the Parliament.

You can contact the Justice Committee by email on the subject of the Legal Services Bill, offering your thoughts, submissions and suggestions on the Legal Services Bill, here : justice.committee@scottish.parliament.uk or use their online communication form.

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

Take me awhile to read this but it looks good

Anonymous said...

Yes I can imagine the Law Society wishes to remain as prime regulator of everything it sees.
Smart is so typical of the LSS crowd - of no real benefit to the profession as a whole.

Anonymous said...

A client with a complaint currently being investigated by both the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission rounded on both organisations, branding them "useless, prejudiced, anti-client, against the public, and part of the problem of crooked lawyers, rather than a solution to cleaning up the profession."

GIVE THAT CLIENT A MEDAL FOR ALL THEY ARE HAVING TO GO THROUGH WITH THE LAW SOCIETY/SLCC

Anonymous said...

'Compassion' is a word which McAskill seems to have discovered recently - not for anyone in Scotland of course - and only as international circumstances dictated. Clutching the word to his chest, much as a drowning man might clutch a straw, McAskil curiously forgot to investigate the meaning of another word beginning with the letter 'A' - for ACCOUNTABILITY.

Anyone who places that within a mile of the control or pernicious influence of the Law Society of Scotland - and scoundrels like Mr. Mill - is clearly not to be trusted.

Anonymous said...

Jane Irvine on £350 a day hasn't studied it yet ???

Anonymous said...

Mr Cherbi
I will write to the justice committee about this because I had a problem with a local solicitor many years ago the Law Society completely covered up and did nothing to him and he still works today still ruining people and getting away with it.

Anonymous said...

Licensed providers would be expected to “act in the best interests of their clients” (THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN IF THE LAW SOCIETY SLCC CONTROL THE COMPLAINTS SIDE, BECAUSE LAWYERS CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING) meaning that they should, for example,

observe the duty of confidentiality,

avoid conflicts of interest (INPOSSIBLE, A LITIGATION LAWYER TAKING ON A CASE WHERE SOMEONE HAS NON VISIBLE INJURIES CAUSED BY THEIR EMPLOYER. THE LAWYER AND EMPLOYER ARE INSURED BY THE SAME COMPANY ROYAL SUN ALLIANCE, THERE IS A GIANT CONFLICT OF INTEREST) THE COMPANY WILL NEVER BE GUILTY BECAUSE THEY LAWYER DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE HIS INSURER PAYING THE CLIENTS DAMAGES.

and safeguard a client’s money and property. (LORRNA JACK WILL PROTECT LAWYERS WHO STEAL CLIENTS MONEY).

Licensed providers would be expected to maintain good standards of work, meaning that they should act competently, communicate effectively, be diligent and show respect and courtesy.” (THEY DO NOT HAVE TO DO ANY OF THESE THINGS, POOR QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES ARE THE NORM BECAUSE LAWYERS REGULATE THEMSELVES).

THE LAW SOCIETY HAS ENSURED THESE MEASURES DO NOT WORK IN THE PAST, SO WITH THEM IN CONTROL WE EXPECT MORE OF THE SAME.

Anonymous said...

The Law Society of Scotland and the Complaints Commission are the sworn enemy of every client in Scotland.

If they remain in control of this market nothing will change.

Anonymous said...

This is like expanding an army but keep the same command structures in place. Barking mad, a situation that spells disaster as far as clients are concerned.

Anonymous said...

The Law Society & SLCC are "useless, prejudiced, anti-client, against the public, and part of the problem of crooked lawyers, rather than a solution to cleaning up the profession."

Correct, these people are lawyer loving anti client bastards. A modern democracy as MacAskill put's it should be free from dictatorial totalitarian power. These organisations have that power. Set up a site, called rate your lawyer, the same as E bays feedback system, and drive the most crooked out of the industry.

If we clients refuse to go through for example Ross Harper's or HBM Sayers doors they will go out of business. If the lawyers move to other firms, we can find out their names earlier. Cut off the supply of clients, that is how to deal with many of these ruthless filthy bastards. It is the lawyers who are untermenschen.

The Germans at Stalingrad, had their supply lines cut by the Russian Partisans. After the 6th army was surrounded they capitulated. Now we are at war, but it is a war of words, and we need to use the internet to expose habitally corrupt lawyers and then treat them like they have smallpox, stay well clear of these individuals. The Law Society SLCC will support them, we must collectivley avoid the Penman's Howitts, McBrides, because he supported Haggarty, and the rest. That is what should be done, en masse.

Anonymous said...

President Ian Smart of the Law Society of Scotland is campaigning hard to become the sole regulator of the expanded legal services market, by any means possible. Quick off the hoof, Ian Smart, President of the Law Society of Scotland reacted to the Justice Secretary's proposals, saying “The Society believes that Scotland’s legal profession should be able to adapt to best meet the needs of modern society and a global economy.

Scots lawyers are well respected (oh no they are not) around the world and we want to ensure that our members have access to the opportunities that ABSs could present to adopt new practices, to deliver the services their clients expect and develop their businesses in Scotland, as well as elsewhere in the UK and overseas.”

"However it will be vitally important that the Bill ensures the independence of the legal profession, (He means we keep self regulation) promotes access to justice (As long as the justice will not ruin a lawyer) and maintains robust consumer protections (Is he pissed, maintain standards of covering up crooked lawyers conduct) and high standards among those delivering legal services. (Cannot happen if the SLCC and law Society are in charge). Effective regulation will be key to any plans for change. We look forward to engaging with the Scottish Government, (who protect us) the Parliament and other interested parties in the future development of legal services in Scotland.”

End self regulation Smart, because it is a liars charter.

Anonymous said...

The Legal Services Bill is a green light for lawyers to carry on as before. No protection for clients whatsoever.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton social work, baby P could happen here.

Anonymous said...

If some in Scotland's 'Government' constantly claim the country should stand on its own two feet and be independent, then why not also give every person in Scotland the independence to choose their own independent legal services representative, safe in the knowledge that an equally independent regulator will ensure that if anything goes wrong, the consumer is always placed first but is that is an independence too far for some ?

Anonymous said...

A very effective report compared with some newspapers versions of whats going on with abs.

Anonymous said...

Item 50 of the Legal Services Bill - Factors as to Fitness - disqualify the Law Society of Scotland and its disgraced insurance provider Marsh from playing any part whatsoever in the process, least of all regulation.

What we have here is yet more window dressing from the SNP, part of a desperate attempt to cover up its continuing deference to vested interests and an insurance monopoly controlled by a company whose 'shameful' and 'unlawful' behaviour is a matter of record.

Anonymous said...

Scotland’s Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill again puts lawyers £billions before consumer protection & independent regulation.

The principle here is that a justice minister cannot be a lawyer, and the electotrate have no chance of self regulation being abolished if this situation remains. Mr MacAskill is doing what lawyers do best, protecting the profession.

Anonymous said...

Ian Smart is blowing his usual smoke, he is anti client and no different from Yelland. A pair of control freaks, who line their pockets on the back of client agony.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Hamilton social work, baby P could happen here.

Yes Hamilton South Lanarkshire.

Anonymous said...

Ian Smart and everyone else on the lawyer side should never be trusted, they must hate you Peter, but we hate them, a bunch of criminals who are immune from prosecution because they are cover up specialists.

This bill should be ending self regulation, the lawyers cannot keep control of complaints from clients.

Anonymous said...

Desperate Dan, oh how silly of me, I mean President Ian Smart of the Law Society of Scotland. Campaign hard Ian, so that the Law Society can be the sole regulator of the expanded legal services market, by any means possible.

Good evening Ian, you remind me of that tit Douglas Mill, a desperado, a power obsessed terrified man who is so imbalanced he cannot put himself in one clients shoes. Imagine being in charge of the Law Society and complaining lawyers human rights will be undermined if self regulation was obliterated. At least you won't try that stunt. But it demonstrated one thing, Mr Mill, let us be polite, had used all the weapons at his disposal. He is clearly a man of dubious intelligence, ranting on like this, and as John Swinney demonstrated , a dishonest man. Now Ian I would trust you with my documents as much as I would trust a fox not to eat my chickens. Ian you better be able to control the expanding legal services market, because if you do not, I will see you in the jobcentre in Edinburgh, where we can discuss self regulation.

I tell everyone I meet about you Ian, old Dougie, Yelland, Pritchard, what a lot of crooks you are. Complaining to a self regulator is pointless, you people will never change your ways. What is it like to ruin a client and be above the law Ian? I am sure you will know. The tentacles of the law Society keep spreading, so people out there, TRUST NO LAWYER, THEY ARE ROBBING FILTH.

Anonymous said...

Herald seems to agree with you :
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/macaskill-no-tesco-law-for-scotland-1.923372

MacAskill: no Tesco law for Scotland

heraldscotland staff

Published on 1 Oct 2009

Lawyers may be allowed to set up practice with non-legal firms such as supermarkets as part of a shake-up in legislation published yesterday.

The Legal Services Bill proposes to allow firms such as banks and shops to invest in legal practices and even own them.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said: "A strong and independent legal profession is part of the institutional framework of a modern democracy.

"The legal profession contributes an estimated £1bn in turnover to the Scottish economy annually. This new legislation will help it grow and compete in the UK and internationally."

The new business structures have been branded "Tesco law" in England but Mr MacAskill denies this will be the case in Scotland.

The removal of restrictions on lawyers going into business with non-legal firms was instigated after a "super-complaint" by consumer group Which? to the Office of Fair Trading.

It claimed the current regulation of Scottish legal firms restricts choice for consumers and prevents alternative business structures being formed. But traditional models for law firms will still be an option for lawyers.

The Bill also proposes a new regulatory framework for the legal profession. The Scottish Government will appoint approved regulators for the new business structures.

Mike Dailly, principal solicitor at the Govan Law Centre, said: "This Bill seeks to commodify access to justice in Scotland, and in so doing strikes at the heart of justice, the rule of law and the principles of a fair and democratic society."

Ian Smart, president of the Law Society of Scotland, said: "It will be vitally important that the Bill ensures the independence of the legal profession, promotes access to justice and maintains robust consumer protections and high standards among those delivering legal services."

Victim Support Scotland said it welcomed moves to extend financial eligibility for civil legal cases.

Anonymous said...

A client with a complaint currently being investigated by both the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission rounded on both organisations, branding them "useless, prejudiced, anti-client, against the public, and part of the problem of crooked lawyers, rather than a solution to cleaning up the profession."

We know what this client is up against, self regulators self obsessed with self protection.

Lawyers are bad news, they do not care how clients are left, I would send all lawyers to the electric chair, no mercy for these people. I would show them the same compassion as they show clients.

Anonymous said...

Scotsman claims Law Society and Institute of Chartered Accountants will bid to become regulator.

Thats like having the choice between Hitler and Stalin !

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Moves-to-allow-nonlawyers-to.5697677.jp

Moves to allow non-lawyers to run law firms welcomed

Published Date: 02 October 2009
By Christopher Mackie

LEGISLATION allowing non-lawyers to run law firms has been welcomed by professionals and consumer organisations, despite uncertainty over regulation of the new structures.

The Legal Services Bill, published yesterday, will remove rules that state firms must be wholly owned by solicitors and permit outside investment from organisations such as supermarkets and banks.

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill said the legislation would "help Scotland's legal profession grow and compete in the UK and internationally".

Law Society president Ian Smart, said he was pleased by the Bill's publication but warned "effective regulation will be key".

His concern comes after Scottish ministers invited applications from bodies wishing to be regulators. The Law Society and the Institute of Chartered Accountants are expected to bid.

Which? magazine said the bill would improve access to justice.

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission chairwoman Jane Irvine warned of the danger of imposing a complicated regulatory framework.

Anonymous said...

You rotten corrupt lawyers, keep ruining clients, ten thousand lawyers cannot retain self regulation against five million scots.

I have never had the pleasure of meeting Peter Cherbi, and our backgrounds are a bit different. I totally agree with his views on the legal profession, and also that self regulation must end for all professions. Keep up the great work Peter, all the best.

Anonymous said...

Good morning readers, I do not know about others but I like to go back to earlier articles of Peters, and dig a little. It is facinating, for example the

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission refused to look at Law Society’s corruption for fear of revealing too much. That tells us a lot about the problems of including masterman and her entourage in the commission, and the fact that the commission is anti client.

New readers look back, you will find articles demonstrating the anti client culture of the law Society SLCC, but also the justice committee, MacAskill's activities, etc. They are a nasty crowd, out to line their wallets with no regard for ordinary Scots. Have a look.

Anonymous said...

Suicides, illness, broken families and ruined clients reveal true cost of Law Society's Master Policy which 'allows solicitors to sleep at night'

I see more of this with this bill Peter, people being tortured to take their own lives, so lawyers can sleep at night. Do you care Mr Ian Smart? There is a direct question for you.

Anonymous said...

Mr MacAskill, do you care about client suicides caused by Mr Yelland's dirty tactics, looking after lawyers and the insurers? You should answer, after all you are an elected member of the Scottish Government. You are answerable to the people of Scotland as their so called Justice Minister.

Peter Cherbi said...

Thanks for all your comments and suggestions so far.

Also thanks for the newspaper links.

In view of the fact ICAS (The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland) may make a bid to become regulator of the expanded legal services market, I would like to hear from anyone with experiences of complaining against crooked accountants.

It is my experience concerning ICAS, and taking into account other cases brought to my attention, the accountants regulator is just as corrupt and dangerous as the Law Society of Scotland.

I have for instance, seen first hand in ICAS investigations where criminal activity carried out by its members, was deliberately not reported to the Police and omitted from papers sent to complainants.

I dont think the expanded legal services market needs another crooked regulator like ICAS ... and I would encourage anyone who feels the same to point this out to the Justice Committee at the Scottish Parliament.

Keep your suggestions & comments coming in, and I will revisit the issue of the Legal Services Bill sometime next week, as much needs to be done to combat ICAS and the Law Society's influence in the Scottish Parliament.

After all, Consumer power should win against dirty regulation - every time ...

Anonymous said...

ICAS or The Law Society, both evil incarnate. A friend of mine told me the ICAS is every bit as corrupt as the Law Society, as someone said, a choice between Hitler and Stalin, or cyanide and prussic acid.

If any one of these organisations control the expanding legal services market, this will be bad news for clients. Politicians who want to maintain or increase the power of self regulators, are traitors to their constituents.

Anonymous said...

I dont think the expanded legal services market needs another crooked regulator like ICAS ... and I would encourage anyone who feels the same to point this out to the Justice Committee at the Scottish Parliament.

Cant argue with that!
I will write in to the Parliament and have a go for you.Good luck and keep up the pressure!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...DO NOT TRUST THE TELEVISION LAWYER AUSTIN LAFFERTY. YOU SHOT YOURSELF IN THE FOOT WITH THIS STATEMENT AUSTIN, BIG MOUTH, LOW INTELLECT, DEADLY COMBINATION.

"let's rip off the old people ! - after all - he said it ! - the famous Austin Lafferty" !

This man used to give advice to viewers in Scotland at lunchtime, a man who wants to rob old people.

How many holidays have you had to the Bahamas, Austin from the proceeds of ripping off old people, what a criminal you are.

Anonymous said...

If anyone belives allowing accountants to regulate anything is a good idea they must be out of their skulls.

Didn't Salmond and his chums in Scotland take any notice of the fact the FSA were full of accountants who just sat there and allowed RBS,HBoS,LLoydsTSB etc to do as they pleased and then sit by while teams of accountants tried to justify Goodwin,Hornby,Crosby as being in the clear when clearly they were in the wrong ?

Also doesnt all this show up your timid Scottish newspapers that bloggers have to expose financial and legal corruption while the newspapers sit on the sidelines ?

Accountants ? You couldn't regulate a cashbox just as much as lawyers cant regulate a simple house purchase.

Anonymous said...

Its almost like Scotland is occupied by a controlling force of crooked lawyers and there is that jerk MacAskill mouthing off the SNP owe their electoral success to the legal profession !!!

Anonymous said...

Hootsmon on Sunday :
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/6983/Rivals-battle-for--39Tesco.5681769.jp

Rivals battle for 'Tesco law' watchdog role

Published Date: 27 September 2009
By Rosemary Gallagher

ACCOUNTANTS and solicitors will go head-to-head over who will regulate firms that decide to take advantage of new ownership structures when "Tesco law" arrives.

The long-awaited publication of the Legal Services Bill due this week will spell out the "alternative business structures" (ABS) which have already been backed by the Law Society of Scotland.

ABS will allow non-lawyers to become equity-holding directors or investors in law firms, pave the way for partnerships between solicitors and non-solicitors, and allow organisations such as banks and supermarkets to offer legal services – hence the term "Tesco law".

The introduction of ABS follows recommendations from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to offer consumers more choice of legal services following a Which? magazine complaint.

The Legal Services Bill, which is scheduled for Royal Assent next summer, is expected to contain a section on regulatory issues surrounding ABS.

Lorna Jack, chief executive of the Law Society of Scotland, said she hopes the bill "will give us something sensible on what will be expected of a regulator".

She said: "I expect we will want to be a regulator."

However, Jack said the Law Society was only one body determined to assume the mantle of regulator. "We have to be quite humble about it," she said. "We might not be the only folks wanting to be regulators – the chartered accountants might want to, or the Financial Services Authority."

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) has already thrown its hat into the ring. Vivienne Muir, its executive director of regulation and compliance, said: "We're definitely interested." She added that its next move was "very much dependent" on what is in the bill.

Muir said there could be two tiers of regulation, with individuals still being overseen by their professional body and a separate "entity" regulator for firms.

However, Jack has said in earlier consultation on ABS that Scotland is not "large enough to sustain a huge number of regulators". She wants the Scottish Government to decide who should be a regulator.

She added: "The Law Society is seen as regulating individuals rather than businesses at the moment. That masks what we actually do. We inspect firms, our accounting rules are set around firms, our indemnity insurance is around firms. It's not strictly true to say we only regulate individuals."

According to Jack, the impact of recession means many firms will not be focusing on ABS. "Uppermost in most of our members' minds is the economy and survival."

She said that of around 10,000 Law Society members in Scotland, 300 are registered as unemployed. "We hear stories about hundreds of job applicants for every solicitor role advertised," she said.

However, some larger firms are prepared for ABS.

Douglas Connell, joint senior partner with Turcan Connell, said: "The publication of the bill is an important and very welcome milestone. It will bring opportunities we're keen to grasp as a firm."

He explained the firm will be positioning itself as a provider of multi-disciplinary professional services, including legal advice, tax advice and investment management in its offering.

Connell said it would help firms such as his attract and retain top talent as it would be able to promote non-solicitors to partnership status.

A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The Legal Services Bill, to be published on Thursday, aims to allow Scotland's legal profession to grow and compete, by removing outdated restrictions on business models while protecting the core values of the profession. Our proportionate and flexible approach, which has been developed in consultation with the Scottish legal profession, will allow the profession to move quickly to respond to changes in the market."

Anonymous said...

It is about time that Which magazine stood up again and stated that the present system is, and has not, properly or honestly served the Scottish Public for many years - and nothing short of an end to self regulation will suffice.

Then it is a matter of lobbying to ensure that others with a vested interest in keepin lawyers 'sweet' such as accountants - who prepares estimate of loss in personal injury claims etc etc? - have no role whatsoever in 'regulating' their paymasters.

Anonymous said...

accountants and lawyers are as crooked as each other

definitely not to be trusted on looking after their own complaints !

Anonymous said...

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill said the legislation would "help Scotland's legal profession grow and compete in the UK and internationally.
-------------------------------------
End self regulation Kenny, you would pour petrol on clients and burn them to death before you would see a crooked lawyer prosecuted.

Anonymous said...

The once Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman Linda Costello Baker, stated that a complaints handling body must be free of lawyers for it to work. I totally agree with her and it is time this was set up. You know if this happens we will see a lot of lawyer suicides, because of the mess they have left.

Tesco Law is fine, but no self regulator must be allowed to control it.

In October 2009, Scottish lawyers still control access to justice, and condone clients suicides for profit.

Just demonstrates what ruthless evil bastards they are. Trust none of them.

Anonymous said...

It might be worth writing to the Office of Fair Trading and ask them to apply as regulators, that or approach the Serious Fraud Office.

Anonymous said...

A jury is a group of people who have been chosen to listen to all the facts in a trial in a law court and to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty, or whether a claim has been proved.

The Court should always have trial by jury and persons selected for jury duty have to answer questions one of which is, do you know the defendant?

This is clearly to eliminate any bias. Self regulation overlooks this and allows lawyers to decide if another lawyer is guilty of ruining a client. That is why legal service is poor in Scotland, the practitioners never get condemned by their own.

Imagine a trial in one of our courts, the press are not allowed access, only lawyers have access. One lawyer is on trial for embezzlement, and the committee or jury are all lawyers. It is the ultimate corrupt trial, the verdict is a foregone conclusion and the client has no legal remedy, because lawyers do not ruin other lawyers.

There would be public condemnation if lawyers were jurors when a lawyer was on trial, but this is exactly what happens behind closed doors at the Law Society. No wonder is it infamous for it's corruption, it is an unjust corrupt setup where lawyers can destroy lives and get away with it.

Finally Tesco law, The Law Society and or ICAS, let them regulate this market and we will have more of the same corruption, with larger profits, and ruined clients.

Anonymous said...

If anyone is daft enough to use some lawyer in Scotland after reading this they deserve everything they get.
As for me I will steer clear of any tie wearing leeches.

Anonymous said...

BBC NEWS ELECTION DEBATE

The SNP said Alex Salmond had the right to be included as a party leader.

The SNP may take legal action if Alex Salmond is not allowed to take part in a UK party leader TV debate ahead of the next General Election.
=====================================
At least Mr Salmond can get legal representation, something many people in Scotland cannot get because they want to sue their original lawyer. Descrimination is alive and kicking Alex.

Anonymous said...

Complaining against any lawyer is always a nightmare and from that video clip I dont think MacAskill wants to make it easier with this new law.

What a sh*t anyway standing up and saying that about the Scottish Government owing lawyers a big favour !
Who the hell does he think he is ?

Anonymous said...

Douglas Mill's vendetta against Peter Cherbi - we have to prevent claims against solicitors at all costs.

Mill has gone because he was crooked, but the Law Society keeps on protecting crooked lawyers. Mill preventing claims against solicitors at all costs, why Mr Mill, are the underwriters of the Master Policy filling your bank account with nice bonuses, do you have shares in RSA?

Mill is a typical example of a self regulator, corrupt, complacent, with contempt for clients.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

If anyone is daft enough to use some lawyer in Scotland after reading this they deserve everything they get.

True my friend, and we fight for justice and warn others of the teflon filth that lawyers are, the SS protected Adolf Hitler, self regulation protects lawyers, doctors and accountants. If people will not be taken to court, because their reputations are more important to the professions than their patients or clients, the professions can do as they please. A dangerous situation, but that is SCOTTISH JUSTICE FOR YOU.

You are right, stay well clear of this scum as much as possible. There are people out there reading this who like many Scots already will be victims through no fault of their own. We know the power these bastards have, take heed you may be next. If something happens and you need legal services you HAVE TO GO TO A LAWYER, if a car dealer treats you badly, you can go to a competitor.

Lawyers victims remain victims, because lawyers look after lawyers, and there is no alternative, unlike car dealers.

Self regulators are so warped in their minds they cannot look at a clients viewpoint, bastard lawyers have taught me the most serious lesson of my life. Warn others so they know what they may be up against.

Anonymous said...

Ian Smart'ass' is bullshitting you all with the 'Scottish lawyers are respected all over the world' line.They most certainly are not.
Smart can deliver the crap for domestic consumption but the fact is Scotland is in the top 5 jurisdictions least likely to produce results and by the looks of your blog has to be #1 for complaints and "crooked lawyers".

Anonymous said...

That clip of MacAskill says it all - what a crook.
This Legal Services Bill is just a MacAskill carve up to give lawyers more money and LIMIT access to justice instead of expanding it.
Be warned all Scots you are going to get stuffed if this goes through!