header-logo header-logo

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

Service please

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
back-to-top-scroll