Mediation hearings hijacked, compensation only a fraction – say clients. THE LATEST annual report of the ‘independent’ Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) - reveals increasing numbers of solicitors are evading full investigations and formal determinations on poor quality or dodgy legal services provided to Scottish consumers in the year 2014-2015.
The figures, based on complaints reported to the client-funded legal regulator from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015, reveal 1009 complaints about solicitors were ‘reported’ to the SLCC in the past year, and the number of complaints accepted for service and conduct rose from 319 to 424, with three cases relating to unnamed members of the Faculty of Advocates.
Nearly 200 cases were resolved or withdrawn before an eligibility decision was taken. The Complaints Commission claim 56 cases were resolved at mediation, a success rate of 76%.
However, the experience of clients reveal mediation is not an even handed or impartial approach.
Clients involved in mediation cases who contacted the media revealed that when they turned up for mediation hearings, the solicitors they had complained against brought additional representatives who were not supposed to be in attendance.
Clients revealed mediation hearings had been effectively hijacked mediation hearings by law firms with what one client described as “bully tactics”.
In another mediation hearing involving a client and a solicitor from a well known law firm, it was alleged the mediator desperately put forward the solicitor’s view there should be no settlement – even before the mediation hearing began.
2014-2015 SLCC Annual report – complaints down, up & pennies to clients. The SLCC’s annual report also reveals that at investigation stage 60 cases were resolved by report, and 21 cases by conciliation, with 30 cases withdrawn. A total of 132 cases - down from 210 the previous year – went to determination, of which 109 were wholly or partly upheld.
The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission claim that a total of £401,340 (up from £365K in 2013-2014) was agreed or awarded in compensation, fee refunds and reductions to Scottish consumers for inadequate professional service by Scottish lawyers during the year.
However, as the SLCC has refused to quantify the scale of financial losses alleged in complaints made about solicitors, it is difficult to estimate what percentage of compensation is actually being handed back to clients wronged by their solicitors.
In one instance reported to the media, it has been revealed a single solicitor is being investigated over complaints relating to a trust fund valued at over £500,000. The complainants have not received any compensation to-date, and the case has been on-going for over a year, with pressure being exerted on the complainants to enter mediation.
Residential property transactions remain the most common sources of client complaints, at 29%, followed by litigation (20%), family law (16%) and executries, wills and trusts (15%).
The most frequent types of complaints concern failures to communicate; failures to advise; delays; failures to provide information; failures to follow instruction and failures to prepare adequately.
Chair Bill Brackenridge commented: “It has been a year of performance in handling complaints and ensuring consumers get redress from their lawyers if they’ve received an inadequate service. The annual report also shows that we’re using complaints data to improve professional standards across the wider regulatory system.”
“A personal highlight was our successful lobbying for the power to convene a statutory consumer panel, which is now informing our plans for the future and the quality of our day to day work."We were also delighted to recruit Neil Stevenson as our new chief executive, charged with leading a longer term plan for the organisation to ensure we deliver value to consumers and to the sector.”
Former Law Society Director of Professional Support - Mr Stevenson - said: “We’re in a great position and now we’re looking ahead to the next four years to make sure that the SLCC continues to make a difference for consumers and the profession. We are looking forward to going out to public consultation in January on an exciting new four year plan. Our plan will consider how consumers select and experience legal services and their needs when things go wrong with a service, rather than just looking at the system from a perspective of regulations and institutions.”
The latest figures announced today, bear little difference from previous years reporting of complaints handling at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.
This year, the SLCC also dropped claims it was partly funded by the public after a statement which appeared in last year’s annual report angered the Law Society of Scotland.
Last year’s annual report under former Chief Executive Matthew Vickers, stated: “We are funded by a levy on the legal profession and hence, indirectly, from fees charged to the public.”
Under the new Chief Executive – Neil Stevenson - former Law Society Director of Representation and Professional Support – the annual report now states: “The SLCC receives no public money. We are funded by a levy on the legal profession, collected from individual practitioners by the relevant professional organisations."
However, Diary of Injustice revealed in 2008 - the SLCC had received around £2 million pounds of taxpayers money from the Scottish Government, which has never been repaid.
Funding for the SLCC is gathered from an annual levy on the legal profession – who in turn recover the levy with hikes in already sky high legal fees and charges to clients.
Neil Stevenson was appointed to the role of Chief Executive after the resignation of Matthew Vickers earlier this year, reported here: GONE MEDIATIN’: Pro-lawyer legal regulator loses another CEO as Matthew Vickers leaves Scottish Legal Complaints Commission for Ombudsman Services role
The Law Society’s decision to retake control of the ‘independent’ SLCC by placing one of their own in the CEO slot came after after the Scots legal profession was left reeling from the effects of the damaging BBC Scotland investigation “Lawyers Behaving Badly” - which blew the mask off lawyers investigating their own colleagues and how the legal profession covers up legal aid fraud.
Since the BBC programme aired in January 2014, the Law Society demanded significant changes to the SLCC after concluding the hapless complaints quango – staffed mostly by former Law Society insiders – failed to stand up for lawyers during the BBC Scotland investigation.
Another attempt by the Law Society to spin out a client satisfaction poll backed up with dodgy statistics came apart when DOI revealed the full extent of how the poll had been rigged - featuring in a media investigation here: OWNED POLL: Law Society ‘scripted’ survey criticised by Scottish Legal Complaints Commission - new data reveals few clients of dodgy lawyers ask legal regulators for help
The pro-lawyer Scottish Legal Complaints Commission was created in 2008 as a result of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007
The legal quango – staffed mainly by former Law Society employees, solicitors and Ministerial appointed board members claiming up to £150K a year in expenses, has racked up staggering costs of well over £20 million to Scottish clients in the past seven years, with little to show for it.
Previous media investigations, reports and coverage of issues relating to the SLCC can be found here: Scottish Legal Complaints Commission - A history of pro-lawyer regulation.
A splendid, clear and concise report on the travesty masquerading as due process which is the Scottish so called 'justice' system - all overseen by the discredited Law Society of Scotland and its notorious insurance provider Marsh.
ReplyDeleteThe appointment of Neil Stevenson - former Law Society Director of Representation and Professional Support - as the new Chief Executive says it all, and after reading this revelatory blog and watching 'Lawyers Behaving Badly' the message is clear - AVOID SCOTTISH LAWYERS!!
I shudder to think how much lawyers have actually stolen from their clients since 2008 and in the past year.
ReplyDeleteA thousand lawyers are able to steal a lot more than a measly £400,000 in a year so the compensation must be well down the % of total losses suffered in individual cases.
The old Law Society bully the client into submission tactics again from this miserable stooge slcc
ReplyDeleteand the rest £401,000 is nothing compared to how much they steal from clients and everyone knows it
ReplyDeleteOne of the most unpleasant and difficult experiences we have ever had dealing with the slcc from the start it was all about rewording our complaint and preventing us from giving evidence about what our lawyer did to the sale of our house because the greedy bastard wanted it for himself and set up someone else to buy it in another name
ReplyDeleteThe famous Scottish legal complaints commission full of lawyers and their friends.Do not expect a fair hearing from this bunch!
ReplyDeleteNo need to ask how the Law Society got away with rigging the slcc - they always argue they pay for it anyway and as we all know he who plays the piper calls the tune!
And the other 1009 will be off the hook just like the rest and everyone except the ripped off clients will be chuffed they got away with it.DISGRACE!
ReplyDeleteThe running costs of the SLCC are around 2.7m a year nearly seven times what they paid out to people whose lives are shattered probably ruined by crooked lawyers.Nothing to brag about and lawyers will just recover it in other ways as you say through higher fees and other fiddles.
ReplyDelete"Residential property transactions remain the most common sources of client complaints, at 29%, followed by litigation (20%), family law (16%) and executries, wills and trusts (15%)."
ReplyDeleteResidential property is obviously high on the must steal list for Scottish lawyers so that is why it is one of the top complaints subjects.
They will have spent more on themselves and this annual report than clients ever see back from their rotten lawyer ripping them off
ReplyDelete@ 4 December 2015 at 14:46
ReplyDeleteIn fairness there are possibly three or four law firms who serve their clients without much ado, hefty charges or complaints, however as you say the message is clear, if consumers want to avoid unnecessary pain, expense and lack of consumer protection, avoid using the legal system if you can ... particularly institutions such as the courts which are riddled with bias, prejudice and vested interests.
For those considering mediation, the same vested interests show up time and again.
@ 4 December 2015 at 17:56
Please send in details of your case and experiences with the SLCC.
@ 5 December 2015 at 00:10
The larger the asset the more tempting the target, and the work put in via regulatory bodies to cover up any dishonesty or theft by solicitors.
To those who wish to send in details of experiences with the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, be assured any material will be treated in the strictest confidence.
Lawyers should never have been allowed to investigate their own and cover up to this extent it is criminal!Just going through your large archive of stories on the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission it should have been shut down years ago and a completely independent body given real powers to deal with rogue solicitors not this fit up where I see from your earlier reports it is run by lawyers families and friends!
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work!
The 1009 lawyers will have already reclaimed £401k many times over for their corrupt brethren
ReplyDeleteI would really hate to approach any lawyer for representation. I know as many others do there is no protection for clients of lawyers.
ReplyDeleteLaw Society and SLCC I will never need to complain about a lawyer because I would never trust one. And remember folks there is no complaints system as you will know if you have ever tried to use it.
ReplyDeleteThe Law Society has a new facade since 2008, the SLCC utterly corrupt.
ReplyDeleteEight months after trying to make a complaint to this slcc they are still trying to talk out our complaint and remove most of the headings of complaints we carefully wrote in and even with the help of a new solicitor who was so disgusted with what our old solicitor did he decided to help and give us some pointers.Our current solicitor agrees with you he says the slcc is unfit for purpose and is a vehicle for the Law Society to retain control over the profession under another guise.
ReplyDeleteSo not worth the £20m and the rest it has cost us because of this Scottish Govt imposed quango.
ReplyDeleteMy sympathies to all those who are dealing with/have dealt with this thinly veiled front for the Law Society of Scotland.
Lawyers cannot be allowed to look after their own any longer!
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteEight months after trying to make a complaint to this slcc they are still trying to talk out our complaint and remove most of the headings of complaints we carefully wrote in and even with the help of a new solicitor who was so disgusted with what our old solicitor did he decided to help and give us some pointers. Our current solicitor agrees with you he says the slcc is unfit for purpose and is a vehicle for the Law Society to retain control over the profession under another guise.
8 December 2015 at 14:26
If they know who your current solicitor is woe betide him but sadly I am proved right once again there is no complaints system. (The Law Society or SLCC same animal) and Mr Gill's colleagues are experts at delay and subterfuge to achieve two goals, that of hiding secret wealth and protecting lawyers who really belong in prison. And that is what self regulation is for, to keep their clients oppressed and their mother lodes and colleagues protected beyond the parameters of justice. Miss Ali called them a law into themselves, and she is right.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Eight months after trying to make a complaint to this slcc they are still trying to talk out our complaint and remove most of the headings of complaints we carefully wrote in and even with the help of a new solicitor who was so disgusted with what our old solicitor did he decided to help and give us some pointers. Our current solicitor agrees with you he says the slcc is unfit for purpose and is a vehicle for the Law Society to retain control over the profession under another guise.
8 December 2015 at 14:26
============================================================================================
I'm sorry to be Jonny Raincloud but your new lawyer is just telling you what you want to hear. I have been where you are and they will be reporting back to the SLCC all what you have said backed up by a full audio recording of your meeting and phone calls.
Simply put they hate our guts, when you phone the SLCC the receptionist who answers the call hates you, the person who deals with your complaint hates you, the person who puts the complaint form into the envelope and sends it hates you, and when you go for the mediation meeting the person who greets you also hates you.
Wise up they are the worst form of scum on the planet.
SLCC another rotten to the core investigator foisted on us by corrupt lawyers and their sympathisers in the Scottish Government
ReplyDeleteI read what you wrote about the slcc mediation.The same happened to us ended in failure and now the complaints investigator wants to tear down most of our complaint and refuses to look at the evidence we sent in.My wife said the whole complaints thing is a sham from start to finish to put anyone off trying to get back the money they lost tell your readers this.
ReplyDelete