Lawyers regulator suggests three years to complain about a crooked lawyer. FIVE YEARS on from the creation of an ‘independent’ regulator to take the sting out of lawyers dealing with their own complaints, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) has launched a consultation on rules changes which also contains a proposal to raise the current, and controversial one year time bar on client complaints against rogue lawyers to three years.
The consultation will close on November 17th 2014. Anyone wishing to respond to the consultation should contact the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission via contact information provided in the letter sent out by the SLCC: David.Buchanan-Cook@scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk or enquiries@scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk
Any changes to the rules can only be enacted once approved by Scotland’s top judge, the Lord President, Lord Brian Gill - who is currently waging a war against calls for judges to loosen their grip on their own complaints system – dubbed “Window Dressing” by Scotland's first Judicial Complaints Reviewer, Moi Ali.
SLCC Rules Change Consultation October 2014:
The SLCC has launched a consultation on a number of proposed changes to our Rules.
There are a number of reasons why our Rules need to be reviewed.
Firstly, with the exception of some clarification around the time bar provisions and the removal of the requirement for a draft determination decision, the Rules have not been reviewed since 2009. With the benefit of five years’ operating experience, we are taking the opportunity to ensure that our Rules are fit for purpose. In particular, we are including sections relating to oral hearings and handling complaints which have not previously been part of our Rules.
Secondly, there have been changes made to the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007. A stakeholder group made up of consumer interest groups and the relevant professional organisations wrote to the Scottish Government in Autumn 2013 to suggest changes which it was agreed would improve the 2007 Act. The Scottish Government conducted a further consultation on these proposals which were subsequently approved by the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament in August 2014. These changes have an enactment date of 1 January 2015 and some of them require to be reflected in the Rules. A link to the relevant Justice Committee papers is below, since these provide fuller background on the changes.
Thirdly, the Commission proposes to change the time bar provisions. Additional detail is set out in the attached document and the proposal is that the Commission moves from a one year to a three year time bar. A comparison with time bars operated by other professional bodies and an analysis of the high number of complaints currently excluded by the time bar are strong arguments for change. The proposal aims to encourage swift and transparent complaint handling by practitioners in the first instance. It introduces a shorter six month time limit where the practitioner makes it clear to the complainer that they will take no further action on a complaint and provides details of how a complaint may be raised with the Commission.
Under section 32 (5) of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007, the Commission must, before varying its rules, consult with the Lord President of the Court of Session; the Scottish Ministers; the relevant professional organisations; such groups of persons representing consumer interests as it considers appropriate, as to the proposed content of the rules to be varied.
The SLCC’s latest attempt to redefine itself as less of an anti-client regulator comes after several changes in the SLCC's powers in the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (Modification of Duties and Powers) Regulations 2014 – among which awarded solicitors involved in conduct complaints a new right to complain about the manner in which the complaint was dealt with by the relevant professional organisation.
The earlier changes were promoted by Cabinet Secretary for Justice Kenny MacAskill at the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee.
Justice Committee Scottish Parliament 5th August 2014 SLCC Rules change
Although the Justice Secretary argued a range of consumer groups took part in the modification of the SLCC’s rules, suspiciously, none chose to, or were called to appear before MSPs to explain themselves. Scotland’s top judge, who must also approve any changes to the legislation which governs the SLCC, also did not appear at the Justice Committee.
Legal observers expect the reforms to cause little change to the current way in which a mainly lawyer orientated body investigates complaints against other lawyers.
In a previous investigation by Diary of Injustice it was revealed much of the SLCC’s staff are qualified solicitors or have served at the Law Society of Scotland. The SLCC admitted: 15 members of staff qualified as solicitors, 5 members of staff held a previous position at the Law Society of Scotland, 8 members of staff held a previous position at a law firm and 5 members of staff have held previous positions at a law firm and Law Society of Scotland.
From one year to three - they are very generous not.
ReplyDeleteTime bar is usually set at three years,five at a stretch so perhaps they were a bit worried over being challenged on this.Not that anyone would be able to challenge it as you have to get a lawyer to sue a lawyer first and we all know this is impossible.
This may be because the Law Society of Scotland have just been involved in a case where they broke the law by failing to report their lawyer to the police or to the SLCC and when they were forced to finally report this crooked lawyer, they did so years out of time bar?
ReplyDeleteIf the Public only knew what crimes were being committed in secret behind their backs?
The SLCC is a SHAM organisation that colludes with the Law Society of Scotland to give them the result that they want?
ReplyDeleteThey have zero credibility and anyone silly enough to still use them is risking further humiliation and criminality on top of that already suffered at the hands of their crooked Scottish lawyer?
Do not say you were not informed?
Not very independent if all of its workers are ex Law Society or lawyers?
ReplyDeleteI hope some of those who will comment here take up the suggestion to email the slcc and give some input so they cant say they never heard what the public felt about these reforms!
ReplyDeleteThe reasoning behind this 'reform' is simple - it allows the SLCC to procrastinate and prolong investigations in the hope that the complainants will either die or go away.
ReplyDeletePretty soon we will end up with a mirror image of Scotland's 'Victorian' civil justice system, notorious for its repeated and often scandalous delays.
It sounded good until I watched the MacAskill video clip now I realise this is more Law Society sponsored bullshit destined to go nowhere.
ReplyDeleteI suppose if it were anything to actually help real people against these thug lawyers it would never have got off the ground.
Thanks for your honesty as always!
If they get it.
ReplyDeleteYou are probably aware some in the profession oppose this extension of time bar and may fight it in court regardless of LSoS policy.
They can raise it to twenty years. The SLCC will never protect the public.
ReplyDeleteIf Gill has to pass the law or approve it (sounds totally bonkers doesn't it!) he should also be forced to go along to the committee and testify in public about how great this will be for everyone who complains about their lawyer and justice will be done etc
ReplyDeleteHe wont because he knows himself we will all be talking about a rotten corrupt SLCC stacked with lawyers looking after their own 10 years from now and no change maybe even worse.
all down to your coverage I suspect otherwise no one would know what the slcc is until they ended up needing to use it
ReplyDeleteI have never seen people in a parliament video so glad to get away than that three they nearly ran for christ sake. Guilty Guilty Guilty.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know who the shifty guy is behind MacAskill he seems to know the speech well enough perhaps he wrote it.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI hope some of those who will comment here take up the suggestion to email the slcc and give some input so they cant say they never heard what the public felt about these reforms!
31 October 2014 16:09
()()()()()())()()()()()()())()()()(
This is all pointless window dressing.
The SLCC is the Law Society of Scotland.
This is just perpetrating the fiction that the SLCC are independent of the Law Society and that they are trying to do the right thing.
The SLCC are totally and irredeemably against the Scottish Public because they are the Law Society of Scotland
The thing is though, that the MSP's know that the Scottish Public are being lied to and deceived in this way but are powerless to do anything about it because of how powerful the Law Society of Scotland have become through favours handed out to protect individuals and by coercing others into doing their unlawful bidding?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteIf they get it.
You are probably aware some in the profession oppose this extension of time bar and may fight it in court regardless of LSoS policy.
31 October 2014 19:23
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Utter claptrap and a failed sneaky attempt at misinformation for your paymasters?
If there were any good moralistic Scottish lawyers left, the Law Society of Scotland would put them out of work (with no recourse) by withdrawing their Practice Certificate on a made-up excuse like the Scottish lawyer they Struck-Off for not replying timeously with the Law Society of Scotland?
If you compare this with the usual crimes where they let crooked Scottish lawyers off, for no reason than they can, which is recorded on the SSDT's website for everyone to see?
That is before the SSDT mysteriously removed their website from the Scottish Public's scrutiny over two months ago?
Try for yourself at www.ssdt.org.uk
So much for transparency and the Rule of Law?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThey can raise it to twenty years. The SLCC will never protect the public.
31 October 2014 23:39
duhduhduhduhduhduhduh!
This is another classic mind-manipulation technique employed by the Law Society of Scotland called a Phoney-Bone-Of-Contention?
To seek to trick the Scottish Public into thinking that if they comply with them that they could effect change, when of course there is zero prospect of change because the SLCC is controlled by the Law Society of Scotland?
If you comply with their game of humiliation, all you will achieve is to participate with their own private wet-dream?
This is just a con.
ReplyDeleteThe SLCC simply do not recognise any time-bar unless it is being used as a tool to try to get rid of a complaint.
This media directive has come from the Law Society of Scotland who are tripping on fooling the Scottish Public that this is a positive development for the Scottish Public.
They hate the Scottish Public with a passion and they will do nothing to stop their continual policy of keeping their crooked membership still practising when they should be struck off and keep double billing their clients and ruining clients lives?
This is all recorded by the Law Society of Scotland's Decisions through the SSDT and SLCC?
18:54 If you can be bothered to write all that surely you can write something to the slcc about what they should be doing?
ReplyDeleteThis new direction out of the blue, together with MacAskill's read from Law Society of Scotland script has got the whiff of smelly about it?
ReplyDeleteThere is something highly suspicious with this?
It is almost as though they are hiding more secrets from the Scottish Public and are attempting to misdirect the Scottish Public into this being a positive improvement, whereas it is almost certain that this is a changeing of the Rules (The Act) after the horse-has-bolted-the-stable and they are trying to write new laws to mitigate against laws they have already both broken, as a sop against the Police putting their arms up their backs?
Significant too that the Justice Secretary seems to be playing his full part in this cover-up?
Possibly his last dastardly act against the Scottish Public until he gets the heave-ho?
Once again it seems that the Lord President has the deciding vote over a what taxpayer funded body can or cannot do......and not a democratically elected Parliament.
ReplyDeleteWho elected him?
Unbelievable.
This was obviously a staged event as they could not rush this through quick enough to obey the Law Society of Scotland's edict?
ReplyDeleteDear dear....this corruption includes MSP's now as well?
The Law Society of Scotland really are risking all in their attempt to get themselves out of the shit of their own making?
The Scottish People have learned through bitter experience that the Law Society of Scotland's SSDT & SLCC cannot be trusted.
ReplyDeleteIs this an attempt by a lawyer run club to save itself after the mauling you gave it?
ReplyDeleteIf they cant catch a lawyer in 1 year why prolong the agony and false hope for 3?
The Law Society of Scotland and their SLCC have no incentive whatsoever to change any Rules for the better because it operates in a situation where legislation and the Laws of The Land are ignored and do not apply in practise?
ReplyDeleteWith regards to regulation of Scottish lawyers this overt criminal organisation and it's off-shoot the SLCC abide by the legislation as an exception rather than the norm?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete18:54 If you can be bothered to write all that surely you can write something to the slcc about what they should be doing?
1 November 2014 22:05
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can be bothered to offer my fellow Scottish citizen some sage advice.
The Law Society of Scotland controls the SLCC.
This means that the SLCC has no interest in the rights for victims of crooked Scottish lawyers, so anything written to them is destined for the waste-paper basket.
Look at their statistics for goodness sake.
It is a SHAM organisation which is only interested in promoting the interests of Scottish lawyers to the detriment of their victims.
Everyone in their right mind knows this.
I have spent months dealing with these utterly disgusting people who led us up one wrong road after another about our complaint and totally distorted everything we were trying to complain about and all the evidence we handed in they are rotten to the core the SLCC is rotten to the core totally corrupt and just there to benefit lawyers and protect them from getting their just deserts in court horrible this consultation is just another ploy and wont do anything for anyone ripped off by their lawyer probably it is going to defend lawyers even more than before horrible nasty and corrupt.
ReplyDelete