The Gazette 1967/71

accept the handling of their affairs without question." A new kind of client consults a solicitor, not in order "to give him instructions." but in order to be told how to deal with a particular siuation; he may not understand the need for many steps and requirements which are commonplace to lawyers, and is "entitled to a proper explanation as to what has to be and has been done, and failing it will blame the lawyer concerned and possibly the whole profession." All lawyers, and particularly solicitors, should there fore accept it as "as positive and normal duty to take adequate steps to ensure that the lay client is kept informed;" what is "adequate" will vary widely from case to case, but, in general, "the client should always be made aware of what is being done and wh" what has to be done and when, and roughly what liability for costs [will] be incurred. . . Persistent or gross failure should merit serious treatment and, at the least, some kind of reprimand." This may be the Law Societv's practice now, but the committee feel "the standard should be raised." What is suggested, it may be objected, will put a greater burden on the practitioner, but "the proper fulfilment of the relationship of lawyer and client demands adequate communication." In practice the extra effort required may well in the long run save the solicitor a great deal of work and expense by obviating complaints, for it was evident to the committee that "a hieh proportion of complaints . . . start in an atmosphere of confusion, misunderstanding and insufficient factual details." This was confirmed by the professional bodies and is inevitable where proper communication is lacking or the problems involved un familiar to the client and in view of the complexity of the law itself. In a lawyer's mind, the presentation of a complaint is a legal process demanding precision, order and some formality; to the layman this is not so. No special pro cess or form is officially required for lodging a complaint, so that a complainant frequently presents his case badly and the effective and expeditious disoosal of it is seriously hampered. The available time of th_e Law Society's staff is so heavily engaged in investigating complaints and enquiries relating to solicitors' conduct that complex cases cannot be properly dealt with and badly presented complaints tend to be rejected too readily. It is essential, the committee believe, to use the voluntary services of members of the profession on a broader basis for the preliminary sifting and untangling of the confused situation from which complaints usually arise : "The profession owe it to the public to be willing to assist in this way and it is a debt which should not be left merely to the few." Hence the new procedure outlined (infra), whose central feature is a preliminary process directed to eliminating wholly unjustified complaints and to the withdrawal of others through a conciliation process, so that only the more substantial complaints are brought before the official bodies or directed into civil actions where appropriate.. The committee recognised that only lawyers could effectively and speedilv undertake the preliminary investigations, but they accepted also the need "to meet the criticism that lawyers are acting as judges in their own cause" and that laymen had therefore to be introduced into the system. A complaint which reached the stage of official examination must be treated as involving a possible injustice and also as having a serious potential effect on the profession's public renute; "every complainant hould feel that he has been justly treated after a fair and unpredjudiced hearing." A "verv common complaint" has been that no solicitor would take up a complainant's case against another solicitor, particularly in the same locality : "If the image of the 40

concern about his ability to pay or the number of un settled debts recorded against him. It is probably too much to expect that a system for the striking out of unmeritorious claims should be adopted immediately. But the new system will contain within it the seeds of growth towards a more elective approach to the use of state machinery for the enforcement of private debts. The new Northern Ireland scheme retains the final sanction of imprisonment for a contemptuous refusal to pay or co-operate with the enforcement office. It is, however, the way in which the system is operated which is of crucial importance in this context, not the legal form under which the ultimate sanction is imposed or threatened. There is a need to lend credibility to the legal obligation to pay, and to remind the debtor that the system means business. But debt is also a social problem. The debtor often needs help in organising his affairs. An enforcement office with general control over all the debtor's legal obligations will clearly be in a better position for this purpose than any judge, registrar or bailiff under the existing fragmented system. —(The New Law Journal, 19 March, 197Q) COMPLAINTS AGAINST LAWYERS The cause and the remedies "-ompted by a suggestion from Mr. Ben Whitaker, M.P., Justice set up a committee, under the chairman ship of Mr. Geoffrey Garrett, to consider "the question whether complaints against members of the legal pro fession should be investigated by or with the assistance of persons other than lawyers." For the purpose of considering that question, the committee also assessed the incidence of complaints, their subject matter and the adequacy of the present machinery for investing them, under the aegis of the Bar Council and the Council of the Law Society. The committee's report, now published,* considers all these matters in great detail, in the light of the evidence it received from various sources The following are its general conclusions. A substantial number of complaints are made each year against members of the legal profession—4,000- 5,000 to the Law Society alone—and "a significant number of complainants are left unsatisfied that their complaints have been fully or properly investigated. "We believe that to a great extent this is due. in the case of solicitors, to the sheer inability of the available staff and resources of the Law Society to deal with the volume of cases received by them." In some areas (e.g. Birmingham) the local law society has instituted a voluntary system which has helped to alleviate the situation. A "very high proportion" of complaints originate in or involve a "failure to communicate." This applies both to complaints about a solicitor's conduct and to complaints that the original complaint has not been properly investigated. Dissatisfaction is a "state of mind" and often "prevents a clear statement of its own cause;" but the committee were compelled to conclude from their enquiries that "most dissatisfied complainants make two main criticisms—first a failure to keep them fully informed of the progress of the investigation and secondly a failure to provide an explanation for the . . . rejection of their complaint." There may be simply insufficient information or the use of unintelligible language; there may be delay or failure to answer enquiries, or lack of understanding or interest- The committee believe that "the profession does not always sufficiently realise that its services are no longer rendered mainlv to those who are accustomed to consult ing [lawyers] on business or family matters" or, on the other hand, to those "who, through ignorance, will