Warning: Solicitors' Indemnity Insurance

knightstyle

All solicitors I have dealt with with one exception have been useless! Currently I am waiting for a letter confirming my settlement on a case, the solicitor acting for me told me in November 09 that everything had been agreed and a letter would be sent to me with details of the settlement "very soon"
Still waiting, have decided not to chase anymore and see just how long it takes!

Nukumai

Darksun wrote: »

Because who would dare say anything bad about Carter ****

Quite. I take that it you also read Private Eye. The affairs of Carter F*** (as they are fondly referred to in that august publication) always seem to merit a centimetre or two of column space.

Equaliser123

It does sound like they are being promoted on here....

Ultimately with law firms, they are only as good as the individual solicitors who provide the advice.

Unfortunately, even at Law School, there were clearly people on the path to being a solicitor who were not up to the grade. I tend to advocate the larger firms who tend to employ the better lawyers and actually specialise in particular areas of law.

jimbms

Solicitors are a very talented group, they are one of the few people who can enter a revolving door behind you and come out in front.

Nukumai

jimbms wrote: »

Solicitors are a very talented group, they are one of the few people who can enter a revolving door behind you and come out in front.

Yes. And, to be fair, it's only 98% of lawyers that give the rest a bad name

Equaliser123

Nukumai wrote: »

Yes. And, to be fair, it's only 98% of lawyers that give the rest a bad name

Hilarious.

I think you could say the same about car mechanics, plumbers, electricians, GPs....

Crabman

Equaliser123 wrote: »

It does sound like they are being promoted on here....

Ultimately with law firms, they are only as good as the individual solicitors who provide the advice.

Unfortunately, even at Law School, there were clearly people on the path to being a solicitor who were not up to the grade. I tend to advocate the larger firms who tend to employ the better lawyers and actually specialise in particular areas of law.

As mentioned they were the only firm whose solicitor grasped the issues at hand and were able to give the spot-on advice that so many others were not. I therefore do not accept that there is any promotion here.

I would list the 15 or so law firms who I found to be useless but that would not be appropriate. As you say, it may be considered 'narrow evidence' for an outside observer, but an individual only approaches each law firm once. They have one chance to get it right and when they make their decision they do so for and on behalf of the firm itself.

In any case your responses do not appear to explain the comments from the Law Society's President who gave the impression that claiming from a solicitor in the event of a will-writing mistake is a simple & easy process.

For example (as if Chris' post isn't enough) I know someone whose husband died, the will turned out to have been written incorrectly (by a firm of solicitors). When she complained, they gave her the cold shoulder. This went on for a while.

She mentioned it to me in conversation and I suggested a good local firm who examined the paperwork & sent one stiff letter to the original will-writing firm. Within days all costs were covered including the competent firm's reasonable legal costs.

The question must be asked - why didn't the original solicitors acknowledge their error when challenged by the client? Why did they wait for another solicitor to get involved, why did they wait for costs to go through the roof instead of putting things right for the client and why did they intentionally cause so much heartache for someone whose husband had passed away after over 50 years of marriage?

Here's a possible reason - a percentage of clients who receive that sort of treatment will simply go off in a huff without further action. Only a minority will go to a competent solicitor for advice against the first solicitor. This behaviour isn't limited to solicitors - several retailers take a similar attitude with customer service.

Equaliser123

Wish I knew how to do that multiple quoting thingy but:

Crabman wrote: »

As mentioned they were the only firm whose solicitor grasped the issues at hand and were able to give the spot-on advice that so many others were not. I therefore do not accept that there is any promotion here.

My issue comes in that there is no details of what the matter was, what the questions were or what the outcome was. Hence, I find it a bit odd to mention one firm.

I would list the 15 or so law firms who I found to be useless but that would not be appropriate. As you say, it may be considered 'narrow evidence' for an outside observer, but an individual only approaches each law firm once. They have one chance to get it right and when they make their decision they do so for and on behalf of the firm itself.

See above. However, if only 1 out of 16 got it right, I do wonder whether it was a fair assessment, whether the query was misleading or whether the 'client' was speaking to a suitably qualified person.

Frankly, if 1 in 16 doctors said one thing and the other 15 said something else, I would be asking for a second opinion!

In any case your responses do not appear to explain the comments from the Law Society's President who gave the impression that claiming from a solicitor in the event of a will-writing mistake is a simple & easy process.

Why would I explain his response? Don't know the man, didn't hear what he said and certainly don't unequivocally endorse what he or the Solicitors Regulatory Authority says.

For example (as if Chris' post isn't enough) I know someone whose husband died, the will turned out to have been written incorrectly (by a firm of solicitors). When she complained, they gave her the cold shoulder. This went on for a while.

She mentioned it to me in conversation and I suggested a good local firm who examined the paperwork & sent one stiff letter to the original will-writing firm. Within days all costs were covered including the competent firm's reasonable legal costs.

Again, insufficient detail to comment. However, if they did not engage their correct complaints handling procedure then the complainant could - and should - complain to the SRA.

The question must be asked - why didn't the original solicitors acknowledge their error when challenged by the client? Why did they wait for another solicitor to get involved, why did they wait for costs to go through the roof instead of putting things right for the client and why did they intentionally cause so much heartache for someone whose husband had passed away after over 50 years of marriage?

Here's a possible reason - a percentage of clients who receive that sort of treatment will simply go off in a huff without further action. Only a minority will go to a competent solicitor for advice against the first solicitor. This behaviour isn't limited to solicitors - several retailers take a similar attitude with customer service.

Maybe its just human nature.... Same applies in the medical profession, surveyors and just about any other service or goods provider you can think of.

Crabman

Equaliser123 wrote: »

However, if only 1 out of 16 got it right, I do wonder whether it was a fair assessment, whether the query was misleading or whether the 'client' was speaking to a suitably qualified person.

Frankly, if 1 in 16 doctors said one thing and the other 15 said something else, I would be asking for a second opinion!

I think the positive outcome vindicates the comment about the other 15 or so being a little short of the mark. I realise, however, that evidence has not been provided (and will not be forthcoming on a public forum) and empathise with your sentiments.

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Again, insufficient detail to comment. However, if they did not engage their correct complaints handling procedure then the complainant could - and should - complain to the SRA.

The LCS were unwilling to look into the issue as it was 'out of time'. I'm not aware of the reason for this but my priority was getting her to see a good solicitor.

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Maybe its just human nature.... Same applies in the medical profession, surveyors and just about any other service or goods provider you can think of.

The same does not happen in the medical profession. If an error is made, it is documented and the patient is informed. Some patients will consequently return in due course with a clinical negligence solicitor on a CFA!

The solicitor profession is different and from the anecdotal evidence (in this thread, for example), they appear to do all they can to get rid of a client when things don't go according to plan and loss/damages are incurred.

I contend that this is not the behaviour a client should expect from a solicitor. Whilst comments about 98% giving the rest a bad name fly around, we should remember that solicitors are well-respected members of society and as such should act in accordance with expectations.

P.S: No easy way to multi-quote paragraphs within a post, just have to copy and paste the remarks into individual quote tags.

Equaliser123

Crabman wrote: »

The same does not happen in the medical profession. If an error is made, it is documented and the patient is informed. Some patients will consequently return in due course with a clinical negligence solicitor on a CFA!

The solicitor profession is different and from the anecdotal evidence (in this thread, for example), they appear to do all they can to get rid of a client when things don't go according to plan and loss/damages are incurred.

I contend that this is not the behaviour a client should expect from a solicitor. Whilst comments about 98% giving the rest a bad name fly around, we should remember that solicitors are well-respected members of society and as such should act in accordance with expectations.

P.S: No easy way to multi-quote paragraphs within a post, just have to copy and paste the remarks into individual quote tags.

I have to disagree with you about the medical profession. In my experience they close ranks - and perhaps understandably.

Recent experience of this has been shown by some friends of ours who lost their baby in childbirth due to awful mistakes. Sadly notes have been evidently doctored (no pun intended) and evidence "mislaid".

I do agree with some of your comments about solicitors. A small number (sadly those that tend to deal with the public) give those who have worked flipping hard to get to where they are and give 110% to clients a really bad name.