Rate your solicitor

Welcome to the newly established Solicitor’s Regulation Authority, the new “arms-length” body now in charge of standards and conduct in the profession. Antony Townsend, the authority’s chief executive said “This is all about bringing in a new culture. It is about professional regulation in the public interest, and not just professional regulation for the profession.” Lesser complaints, e.g. shoddy work and poor service will be handled by a sister body, the Legal Complaints Service. Plans for a website are currently under consideration, which would include details of reprimands and disciplinary action.

Ruthie gives the new body a cautious welcome. The Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS) had become discredited and was seen as ineffectual. The New Labour project has spawned many new and worthy sounding bodies, which have been underfunded and staffed by incompetents. Ruthie desperately hopes that the new regulatory system provides the service it promises as it is clearly in the interests of the wider profession and the public that standards are upheld and the rogues are weeded out.

The Irish are way ahead with a website giving star ratings for solicitors. Some might argue it’s more accurate than the Legal 500, but Ruthie worries that such a site tends to attract disgruntled clients with an axe to grind, whereas the genuinely satisfied won’t bother to log on. Some of the comments are quite amusing including one which signed off “I told you I would get you back”. Surely only a matter of time before an England and Wales version is created. Any canny solicitor, will of course, ensure that friends and family rate them before the general public gets a chance…

Related Post

RSS feed | Trackback URI

Comments »

No comments yet.

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.