Legal Ombudsman for England & Wales is expected to decide on naming & shaming before end of the year. AS DEMANDS GROW from consumers of legal services in Scotland & throughout the UK for an independent and transparent ratings system for lawyers & law firms, insiders from the consumer world report the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) which regulates complaints against the legal profession in England & Wales is expected to decide by the end of the year at the latest on how it will finally proceed to identify ‘crooked lawyers’ who have been found guilty of failing their clients after being subjected to investigations by the independent law complaints regulator.
Kenny MacAskill’s Scottish Legal Complaints Commission are determined not to identify crooked lawyers, even ones who steal legal aid funds. Yet while consumers in England & Wales will have the added protection of knowing exactly which solicitors & law firms fail their clients, and in what particular types of cases, giving clients the chance to dodge a potentially explosive, expensive bullet of a serial crooked lawyer, there is to be no similar move in Scotland by the Law Society ‘controlled’ Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) who have kept firmly out of the debate of identifying Scotland’s worst lawyers who continue to rip off multiple clients who are given a chance to walk away from a ruined client with as little as a £10 fine, regardless of the true financial loss to their client.
I reported on the Legal Ombudsman’s plans to name & shame poorly performing law firms & solicitors earlier in March, here : Name & Shame : Complaints data on law firms to be published in England & Wales, Scots solicitors complaints history to remain secret, for now however, the road to publicly naming the worst elements of the legal profession in England & Wales has been a rocky one, with consultation after consultation, more on which was reported here : England & Wales : Legal Ombudsman criticised as ‘name & shame’ policy hit by lawyers protests over insurance costs, second consultation now underway and alleged secret threats of legal action by the Law Society of England & Wales if the LeO’s plans went ahead.
Legal Ombudsman for England & Wales, Adam Sampson has backing to name rogue lawyers & law firms.As the LeO’s plan to identify solicitors & law firms in complaints judgements has the backing of consumer organisations such as Which?, and the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), the UK Government and the Legal Services Consumer Panel, more of which cab be read in an earlier report here : Legal Ombudsman moving to name & shame crooked lawyers in England & Wales, crooked Scottish solicitors records to remain protected by secrecy for now, observers in the consumer world say the time has now come for the LeO to act on the matter at hand, as consumers are being put at an ever increasing risk of using the wrong lawyer they know nothing about, particularly in these tough financial times where clients cannot afford to get into long running & costly spats with their legal representatives over misrepresentation, negligence, or even fraud.
One client who spoke to Diary of Injustice said it was imperative the LeO identified lawyers who fail their clients so that others can avoid the same fate.
He said : “The Legal Ombudsman has to get on with this now rather than waiting until its too late. I have spoken to people I know who used the same lawyer as I did and ended up with a huge bill and the same failure to do anything in their case. They said if they had known of what happened to me they would have avoided using the same lawyer.”
He continued : “Everyone should know the names of useless lawyers who mess up their clients cases and there should be some sort of online directory where we as clients can write about what really happened so nothing is missed out. I really wouldn't want what happened to me at the hands of a crook in a suit, happening to others.”
There is no announcement yet from the Legal Ombudsman on how the naming & shaming policy will be implemented, however Diary of Injustice will report on developments as they occur.
RATE YOUR LAWYER – GOOD, RUBBISH, OR CROOKED :
In the meantime, Diary of Injustice has received considerable contact from clients across Scotland and in England & Wales on the subject of implementing a ratings system allowing clients themselves to rate their own lawyer. Many ideas have been expressed on who should be in charge of overseeing such a ‘directory’ with many readers pointing out the legal profession cannot be trusted to maintain any kind of book or register on their own abilities as seen from the client perspective. I agree.
Solicitors from Hell website allows clients to comment on their experiences with lawyers. While the Legal Ombudsman takes the time to decide on how to proceed with naming & shaming ‘crooked lawyers’, the website “SOLICITORS FROM HELL” currently offers clients an opportunity to write about their own experiences with their lawyers, whether good or bad. I suggest consumers use the SFH facility. However, as readers will also be aware, the Law Society of England & Wales, apparently supported by their Scottish counterparts the Law Society of Scotland, are trying to close down Solicitors From Hell on the basis the SFH website gives too much free speech to consumers to name & shame their lawyers over failures we should all have the right to know about.
Diary of Injustice earlier reported the legal profession’s battle against Rick Kordowski & Solicitors From Hell, here : English, Scots Law Societies ‘team up’ in legal moves against “Solicitors from Hell” in bid to stop Legal Ombudsman ‘Naming & Shaming’ crooked lawyers after an investigation in Scotland turned up discussions at the Law Society of Scotland who were keen to support moves to kill off Solicitors From Hell in a joint attempt with the Law Society of England & Wales to ‘scare off’ the Legal Ombudsman’s intentions to identify poorly performing solicitors & law firms in published complaints decisions & investigations. The Law Society of England & Wales battle to undermine the owner of the Solicitors From Hell later took a highly personalised twist as Diary of Injustice reported during mid September : Naming crooks is criminal ? Law Society of England & Wales Chief Des Hudson to face legal action from Solicitors From Hell owner over "criminal" jibe.
Further developments in the Law Society v Solicitors From Hell battle will be reported later this week.
HUSH MONEY MAKES THE CASE FOR NAMING & SHAMING STRONGER THAN EVER :
Since reporting on the naming & shaming issue, Diary of Injustice has been approached by a Scottish solicitor acting on behalf of others who is apparently keen to steer this reporter away from further reporting on the Legal Ombudsman’s moves to identify law firms & solicitors who fail their clients. Additionally, a financial incentive was offered in an apparent attempt to persuade Diary of Injustice to drop reporting on the Solicitors from Hell case. Readers can rest assured, neither of the two incidents will have any effect on this journalist’s reporting on the legal profession or campaigning for reforms of consumer protection against the closed shop world of lawyer regulating lawyer and lawyers covering up for their colleagues, all the way up to the highest positions in the judiciary.
You, the Scots consumer of legal services have a right to know the full regulatory history of those in the legal profession you choose as your legal representatives. Given consumers in England & Wales will eventually be able to find out much of this same information, you should begin writing to your MSPs and the Scottish Government now to ensure YOUR RIGHTS are placed above vested interests.
After all, YOU are paying for your legal services, YOU have the right to know exactly who they are, what they are capable of, and whether they have damaged any clients in the past.
'Transparency and Accountability' are what the 'ConDems' have - together withe every other mainstream UK political party - promised the electorate.
ReplyDeleteInstead the SNP under Salmond et al are determined to remain wedded to the well trodden path of keeping everything hidden regarding their self 'regulating' friends in the legal profession.
The usual Hypocrisy once again from the SNP and their useless (in)justice minister.
MacAskill's SLCC must be getting some bungs to stop this in Scotland dont you think?
ReplyDeleteobservers in the consumer world say the time has now come for the LeO to act on the matter at hand, as consumers are being put at an ever increasing risk of using the wrong lawyer they know nothing about, particularly in these tough financial times where clients cannot afford to get into long running & costly spats with their legal representatives over misrepresentation, negligence, or even fraud.
ReplyDeletePrecisely.
What is Sampson waiting for?More ruined clients?
Get on with it and name these crooks so we can all give them a wide berth!
I see the offer of the bribe had the opposite effect.Good for you Peter its nice to know there's at least one person around in the press who cant be bought off!
ReplyDeleteYou can already find 'name and shame' sites for lawyers in Ireland at;
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rate-your-solicitor.com/
and
http://www.d1041561.dotsterhost.com/index.php?s=wst_page5.html#case2
While as usual the allegedly advanced 'democracy' in Scotland can be seen obstructing progress.
What gives lawyers the right to stop anyone criticising them when they do all this terrible stuff to their clients and what gives MacAskill the right to stop us Scots finding out which bastards among the legal profession we should all be avoiding?
ReplyDeleteGet your finger out Kenny and serve your voters not your colleagues.
If anyone has any sense in Scotland they will up sticks and take all their files out of their lawyers office right now otherwise be warned you are letting yourself in for bills and frauds you cannot even begin to imagine!
ReplyDeleteSince reporting on the naming & shaming issue, Diary of Injustice has been approached by a Scottish solicitor acting on behalf of others who is apparently keen to steer this reporter away from further reporting on the Legal Ombudsman’s moves to identify law firms & solicitors who fail their clients. Additionally, a financial incentive was offered in an apparent attempt to persuade Diary of Injustice to drop reporting on the Solicitors from Hell case.
ReplyDeleteTell this solicitor to go to hell themselves OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE CORRUPT!
Readers can rest assured, neither of the two incidents will have any effect on this journalist’s reporting on the legal profession or campaigning for reforms of consumer protection against the closed shop world of lawyer regulating lawyer and lawyers covering up for their colleagues, all the way up to the highest positions in the judiciary.
I NEVER DOUBT YOU FOR A SECOND!BRILLIANT!
Ask yourselves everyone why are the SNP protecting the legal profession from proper accountability?
ReplyDeleteWhy does any politician protect an industry from scrutiny?
The answer is usually money and influence flowing from that industry to whichever political parties are in Government.
By the end of the year?
ReplyDeleteIts about time the Legal Ombudsman got up and did something instead of talk talk talk.You've already said he has the backing of everyone to get on with it so why the two consultations?
Stop faffing about Mr Sampson and get on with it!
As well as naming and shaming this scum they should also be made to do community service and wear the jackets letting us all know they are thieving robbing lawyers who ruined someone's life just to get ahead.
ReplyDeleteGood for you Peter for continuing to report on these crooks!
Kenny's little club at the slcc dont want us finding out which of his favourite lawyers are crooks.Well how about we name them all anyway all those lawyers the justice minister says he admires just crooks nothing less
ReplyDeleteInteresting to note yet another SNP cover up going on here!
ReplyDeletePurely coincidentally several MSPs are also lawyers.
ReplyDeleteIf this ever comes to Scotland there probably wont be any lawyers left to use because I suspect most of them have fiddled their clients one way or another and got away with it because the Law Society look after them.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAs well as naming and shaming this scum they should also be made to do community service and wear the jackets letting us all know they are thieving robbing lawyers who ruined someone's life just to get ahead.
Good for you Peter for continuing to report on these crooks!
19 October 2011 22:02
TOTALLY AGREE MAKE THESE CROOKED LAWYERS DO COMMUNITY SERVICE AS WELL AS HAVING TO PAY BACK EVERY PENNY THEY STOLE!
Nice to see you giving the English a little push they are obviously needing on this naming and shaming idea!
ReplyDeleteCan I second the author's recommendation that folks continue to post on Solicitors From Hell?
ReplyDeleteAny official site will be censored and the worst stuff removed. Folks still need genuine eye-witness accounts from the public to build a full picture.
Tha Law Society wants all the data on SFH destroyed. I think this is beyond the ability of ANYONE. So keep using it and let's get a full range of data about the worst scum around.
One thing is for sure - if the LeO holds yet another consultation on naming & shaming and delay it even more they are going to look cowards
ReplyDeleteThe SLCC was created by the Law Society to keep control of complaints by lawyers this much is evident in their hostility against anyone who makes a complaint about their lawyer.
ReplyDeleteSomeone I know very well in the SNP is one of your fans according to a long convo we had.He also believes MacAskill is holding back tougher regulation on lawyers and he told me he fully agreed with Ian Hamilton's withering assessment of MacAskill at justice in a BBC interview which I'm sure you probably have seen.
ReplyDeleteIn a nutshell MacAskill is the problem not all the SNP.
Its the Law Society of Scotland and the SLCC who are the problem.They should be locked up all of them for protecting the worst scum of the legal profession ever!
ReplyDeleteYes I agree isnt it nice to see a Scots man (I wont join up the two words due to the newspaper) helping out or perhaps helping to remind the English ombudsman he should be naming all these thieving lawyers!
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work Peter!
So they tried to buy you off - and failed - just shows how desperate some are to keep the lid on this scandal.
ReplyDeleteExcellent reporting as always.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteOne thing is for sure - if the LeO holds yet another consultation on naming & shaming and delay it even more they are going to look cowards
20 October 2011 16:38
or like they have been bought off with a legal threat or some ridiculous promise of reform from the English Law Society?
Someone I know very well in the SNP is one of your fans according to a long convo we had.He also believes MacAskill is holding back tougher regulation on lawyers and he told me he fully agreed with Ian Hamilton's withering assessment of MacAskill at justice in a BBC interview which I'm sure you probably have seen.
ReplyDeleteIn a nutshell MacAskill is the problem not all the SNP.
20 October 2011 19:35
IT IS ALL THE SNP'S PROBLEM UNLESS YOU GO TO THE HEADMASTER AND SAY THAT ONE OF YOUR NUMBER IS MAKING THE SCHOOL PERFORM BADLY AND NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
THE JUSTICE SYSTEM NEEDS ALL OF THE DEADWOOD SHAKEN OUT OF IT BEFORE THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE CONFIDENCE IN IT BEING AT THE CENTRE OF A NEW SCOTLAND, INDEPENDENT OR DEVOLVED.
SCOTLAND'S PEOPLE ARE GETTING TREATED A SECOND CLASS CITIZENS, COMPARED WITH THE REST OF THE UK.
SCOTLAND'S PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER AND WILL VOTE ACCORDINGLY, ONLY IF BETTER IS ON OFFER!
A NEW NON-LAWYER JUSTICE MINISTER, WITH NO LEGAL CONNECTIONS, WITH FRESH, BOLD IDEAS FOR A FRESH BOLD SCOTLAND
IF YOU DO NOT TAKE THIS ACTION THEN SCOTLAND WILL CONTINUE TO BE FAST-TRACKED TO A SPLIT SOCIETY TO THE HAVE'S AND HAVE NOT'S, WITH THE MISERY AND SOCIAL UNREST THAT COMES WITH IT.
POSSIBLY NOT EVEN A NICE PLACE FOR THE HAVE'S TO LIVE?
The Law Society of Scotland have become too powerful.
ReplyDeleteThey now see their role as to lobby the Government on every aspect of Society, through their Committees.
They have power, influence and can pick and choose which, if any, of their member solicitor have to answer to the Law of the Land.
Given that they have abused their position to their own and their members ends for years, it is not surprising that they do not want to reveal the truth for fear that their artificial house of cards will fall down around them.
I wonder if the SFH website would also consider opening up a section or sister website on the 'good lawyers' because there must be some?
A recent investigation into the Scottish Christian Lawyers Society revealed a membership of 2.
So presumeably there are at least two individual Scottish Lawyers who you can be guaranteed to at least be honest?
Maybe this sister website could aknowledge a list of Scottish Lawyers who had absolutely no previous regulatory history, along with recommendations, % ratings and their specialisms.
I am sure those Good Scottish Lawyers would be happy to register with such a website as no doubt it would be tremendous for their business, for the consumer to be able to clearly compare them to a dishonest Scottish Lawyer?
I am pretty sure also that as well as being good for the 'Good Scottish Lawyers' and the Scottish consumer it would also be an easy 'sell' to the Information Commissioner, as he would be sanctioning/demanding only the release of the Lawyers with absolutely zero claims against/settled record from the Law Society of Scotland.
This would also be a useful barometer for the Scottish Public, Government and stake holders to see just how sick or otherwise the system really is, instead of listening to the Law Society of Scotland who have shown the remarkably easy ability to lie to the Justice 2 Committee in the past.
EG. If this exercise shows that there are NO GOOD SCOTTISH LAWYERS (those with zero regulatory history) in a particular specialism, then the University Faculties in conjunction with Scottish Legal Experts in Practise can design Scottish Legal Degree Courses that are relavent to CURRENT NEED within Scotland, instead of the Law Society of Scotland influenced same-old sameold!