header-logo header-logo

Service please

24 March 2012 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7506 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail
la7575-001-1_4

Should customers be king in the post-LSA legal landscape, asks Jon Robins

Straight-talking legal ombudsman Adam Sampson reopened a can of worms earlier this month by challenging lawyers who insist their “clients” aren’t “customers”. The head of the Office for Legal Complaints is a repeat offender on this point. When he took on the post back in 2009, he talked of a new service “to resolve disputes between lawyers and their customers”.

He was “plainly wrong”, complained Marcel Berlins at the time. The term “customer” applied to someone who bought goods or non-professional services (from say, a plumber) but didn’t apply to seekers of professional services. “I fear it’s an attempt to use a more common term in order to play down the perceived elitism of the legal profession,” Berlins reflected.

Sampson insists his choice of words is “a deliberate symbol of the change which our arrival signaled”. He argues that the word “client” harked back to the traditional relationship between lawyers and those they represent (“one of unequal power and status”); whereas

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
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