The Gazette 1972

New Conveyancing proposals in England

Sir Peter said he did not agree that the Law Society had made a threat in the case concerned. The firm of solicitors had given their explanation, had said they resented the allegation made against them, and it had been they who had made reference to defamation pro- ceedings. The Law Society had repeated what the Solicitors had said in its correspondence, Sir Peter said. Mr. Stanley Orme (Lab., Salford W., said that many people feared that solicitors were judge and jury in their own case. This was not fair to the vast number of solicitors who behaved absolutely impeccably. He called for a fresh look at the matters since many MPs could give instances of dissatisfaction. Sir Peter concluded: " I cannot agree that the Law Society does not do its duties, as imposed on it, meticu- lously." He said that when there was a complaint, a committee, rightly, discovered what the solicitors answer was. If there was uncertainty they sent it to the pro- fessional purposes committee. The society was con- sidering whether lay membership should be included in that commtttee. Conveyancing order operative in autumn The Lord Chancellor, Lord Hailsham, said later that the conveyancing order would probably become operative " some time in the autumn." Asked if it would bring down the cost of conveyan- cing or merely hold it steady, he said: "One hopes it will bring it down marginally." He added: "The profession, on the whole, fixes its own charges and this has over a period of years, led to a certain amount of friction between my Department and the Law Society." The Law Society accepted with reservations the plan for conveyancing fees. The society would not have chosen to alter the system of scale fees for conveyancing, a spokesman said. It had the advantage of financial certainty, an important matter fo* people buying their home. "Nevertheless, of the various alternative schemes acceptable to the Lord Chancellor, the society prefers the one he has proposed." Solicitors had never sought more than a fair remuneration for their services, and this would be assured by the new scheme. (The Guardian, 2 May, 1972).

Scale charges and minimum charges in house con- veyancing will be abolished under an order which, it is hoped, will be laid " in the near future," the Attomey- General, Sir Peter Rawlinson, announced. " It would mean that all conveyancing charges would be governed by the principle of what is fair and reason- able in the circumstances of the particular case," he said. "If the client is dissatisfied with the proposed charge he would be able to obtain a certificate from the Law Society as to what a fair and reasonable charge would be." Sir Peter said the client could obtain this certificate " without prejudice to his right to have his solicitor's bill taxed by the court." Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Lab., Manchester, Ardwick), said: 14 That statement, so far as it goes, is very welcome to those MPs on our side who have been pressing the Government to take action on this important ingredient in the cost of buying a house." But, he said, those Members would not be satisfied until the Government, having gone thus far, fully imple- mented the report of the Prices and Incomes Board. Sir Peter told him that the abolition announced was " a n important matter, and, I should have thought, would be generally welcome by MPs on both sides." "We hope that these proposals will have the effect all of us want, that the fees and costs involved in the purchase of a house will be proper, fair and reason- able," he added. Complaints of misconduct against solicitors Later, Sir Peter refused to take control of the way in which the Law Society considers complaints of mis- coducts against solicitors. He told Mr. Ivor Stanbrook (G, Orpington), a bar- rister: " I have no reason to suppose that the Law Society does not consider complaints in the right way." Mr. Stanbrook said that a complaint made privately to the Law Society alleging misconduct by a firm of solicitors had recently been rejected with a threat of defamation proceedings if the allegation was not uncon- ditionally withdrawn. Mr. Stanbrook said this seemed to be a standing practice. "How can the public be protected against dishonest solicitors if the Law Society joins in threats? he asked. " Does it not discourage the pursuit of such complaints?"

184