The Gazette 1992

GAZETTE

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

4 and on occasion rang in to c omme nt on ma t t e rs on t he programme. But you do not have to cross the water. The IFA and other farmers' organisations use every area of the media to full advantage to put their case across on an almost daily basis and when they receive adverse criticism on air they are regularly back w i th their reply before the programme is finished. The Law Society could regularly give u p - t o - d a te b r i e f i ngs to journalists on matters affecting solicitors. The more responsible ones then might be better informed and give a more balanced and favourable view of the profession to the public. The Reg i s t r a t i on Fee is n ow £431.00 wh i ch is not far off what the entire fee for the Practising Certificate was three years ago. I am at a loss as to why this figure should be so high. It has risen almost 5 0% in three years. Reading the Annual Report does not give me much in the line of an answer. It seems to me to be far higher than what other professions have to pay. Why are administration costs so high and what is being done to keep them in check? I would be interested to know how the Registration fee compares w i th our colleagues in other juris- dictions. Perhaps an article in the Gazette or a circular could be devoted to this topic wh i ch would also help r e l a t i ons b e t we en solicitors and the Society. In the May 1985 Gazette an article appeared by a midland firm whose solicitors used their own word processors to reduce costs. They had a ratio of one secretary to four fee earners. This seems to me to be what cost cutting is about. The Law Society could do well to follow their approach.

Correspondence

Mr. Noel Ryan, Director General, The Law Society.

maintain this fund, financial ad- visers of every description operate w i t hout any such obligation and sw i n d le t he ir c l i en ts w i t h i nc r eas i ng r egu l a r i t y. In t he meantime, solicitors are lambasted in the media: witness the recent article in The Sunday Independent (I did read your letter in reply). The Law Society seems to place a ve ry l ow p r em i um on Public Relations generally. It is not making the case demonstrating the in- justice of the Compensation Fund as at present constituted. In the area of conveyancing, legislation is ballooning out of control w i th the result that it is farcical now the amount of enquiries a solicitor has t o make in r es i den t i al conveyancing, but all the public perception is of the final fee at the end of a solicitor's bill. I understand an upcoming programme on Look- Here on RTE TV will deal w i th solicitors. This is an opportunity to put s ome of t h e se g l a r i ng misconceptions to right. It seems to me t h a t many inaccurate, misleading and biased remarks affecting solicitors in the media go unchallenged wh i ch should not be the case. Some weeks ago Shane Kenny on the News At One stated that con- veyancing was relatively simple. I rang the Law Society that day and suggested that he be contacted and invited to Blackhall Place where a conveyancing solicitor could give him a full briefing on the subject. In similar instances in future an approach such as this could be adopted and the solicitor could then go back on air w i th the broadcaster concerned and the broadcaster could give an account of what he or she had learned. A leaf could usefully be taken out of Margaret Thatcher's book who, according to a recent article in The Sunday Times, listened every day to the Today programme on Radio

Dear Mr. Ryan

Two years ago, the then president of The Law Society, Mr. Ernest Margetson, wrote in the Gazette that the Society was considering bringing a constitutional action in view of the escalating burden the Comp e n s a t i on Fund was f or solicitors. Since 1988 the fee for a Practising Certificate has risen from £545 . 00 to £976 . 00, almost double. I have read much in the meantime in the Gazette about many matters, some while interesting have little relevance to me, but little or nothing about the Compensation Fund contribution and I am quite sure nothing about the constitutional action. That I should have to pay so much money to practise as a solicitor makes me angry and annoyed (and I am sure I am not alone): angry that I am getting so little for my money; annoyed that the Society wh i ch represents solicitors seems to be unwilling or unable to do anything to reduce this burden and, if it is, I do not know what is being done as I am not being kept informed. There is some merit in taking an action and failing but there is no merit in being subjected to the ever increasing tyranny of the Compensation Fund contribu- tion and doing nothing. The Law Society seems quite content to make greater demands on solicitors each year for the fees for the Practising Certificate. The Society does not even give details to solicitors of how the figures for t he Practising Ce r t i f i ca te are arrived at.

Yours faithfully,

Michael Moore Michael Moore & Co., Solicitors

While solicitors are required to 4 0