header-logo header-logo

Law Society escapes fine despite complaint failures

15 November 2007
Issue: 7297 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

News

The Law Society has escaped being fined over its complaints handling record, despite failing to meet targets set by the Legal Services Complaints Commissioner.

The commissioner, Zahida Manzoor, says she is disappointed the Legal Complaints Service (LCS) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) failed to meet five of the 13 targets she set, particularly as most of those missed related to the quality of complaints handling. However, she decided that a financial penalty was not appropriate.

She says: “The decision was finely balanced but my conclusion was that not levying a penalty was appropriate in the circumstances to reward the effort made and to incentivise sustained improvement.”

Consumers, she says, now receive a faster and a better service in some areas from the LCS and SRA as a result of three years of hard work by her office and closely monitored improvement plans. However, more still needs to be done and she warns the LCS and SRA against future complacency.
“Sustaining improvements in all areas is something I place great importance on, and something I expect an organisation now out of its second improvement plan year to deliver,” she says.

“The consumer and the legal profession should expect the LCS and SRA to not only meet all targets but to show an ambition to excel beyond them. I know targets are not an end in themselves, but as the evidence shows, they can act as a catalyst for improvement and change.

“I am concerned that early indications show that the LCS and SRA are falling behind the agreed 2007–08 targets. The Law Society now needs to deliver on all aspects of its performance.”

Law Society chief executive Desmond Hudson says the LCS’s service compares favourably with other complaints handlers.
“We strongly supported measures in the Legal Services Act to establish a new body for dealing with all consumer complaints about lawyers that will be wholly separate from all the professional bodies,” he says.

Professor Shamit Saggar, chair of the LCS board, says: “We are very proud of the turnaround in our performance which has been driven by a board that has a clear consumer focus. We now have an excellent platform from which to deliver a modern 21st century consumer redress organisation which has the full confidence of both consumers and the profession.”
 

Issue: 7297 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—Jenny Leonard

DWF—Jenny Leonard

Former Metropolitan Police director joins police, care and justice team

Charles Russell Speechlys—Ed Morgan

Charles Russell Speechlys—Ed Morgan

Corporate real estate and funds expertise expands with partner hire

Hill Dickinson—Helen Foley, Charlotte Fallon & Gary Parnell

Hill Dickinson—Helen Foley, Charlotte Fallon & Gary Parnell

Firm grows London business services team with trio of partner hires

NEWS
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Human rights lawyers, social justice champion, co-founder of the law firm Bindmans, and NLJ columnist Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC has died at the age of 92 years
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll