Evidence submitted by the Law Society
LAW SOCIETY
HANDLING OF
CONSUMER COMPLAINTS
This note outlines the current situation with the
Law Society's complaints handling function.
OVERVIEW
There is real evidence—now stretching back
for almost a year—to indicate that the Law Society is well
on the road to ensuring that consumer complaints are dealt with
in a reasonable time. The recent establishment of a new Consumer
Complaints Service—to focus exclusively on the handling
of consumer complaints—will help to build on this improvement.
Although the Law Society's speed of complaints handling
compares well with comparable bodies such as the Financial Ombudsman
Service, and the Law Society of Scotland, there is still some
way to go before it can be regarded "best in class".
Further work is also needed to ensure that complaints are dealt
with at a consistently high quality standard.
BACKGROUND
The Society has had a complaints handling jurisdiction
since 1986.
Even in the early years, considerable dissatisfaction
with the system was expressed by successive Legal Services Ombudsmen
and by consumer groups, mainly because of the difficulty the Law
Society had in dealing with cases within a reasonable time.
In 1999, the Society instructed external consultants
to examine the position and they recommended a substantial increase
in headcount. Council accepted these recommendations and agreed
substantial additional funding. The problems with the system reached
a peak in 1999, when the then Director authorised the sending
of an acknowledgement letter to complainants which indicated that
it might well be a year before their complaints were dealt with.
As a result of the continuing difficulties, the then
Lord Chancellor provided reserve powers in the Access to Justice
Act 1999 to enable him to appoint a Legal Services Complaints
Commissioner if a professional body was not dealing with complaints
efficiently and effectively.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
Over recent years, the Law Society expenditure on
complaints handling has increased substantially. The complaints
handling function cost £4.2 million in 1999, and £12.9
milion in 2003, an increase of 207%. The speed of dealing with
complaints rapidly improved from the nadir reached in 1999, but
despite the increased resources and evidence of some improvement,
the Society was not able to make sufficient progress so as to
meet the targets which had been agreed with the then Lord Chancellor's
Department.
In early 2003, it again became apparent that despite
the substantial increased investment, the Society was receiving
more complaints each month than it was resolving. This inevitably
led to a substantial increase in the number of cases in the system
and to an increase in the average time taken to deal with complaints.
Consequently, the Society commissioned a root and
branch review of the complaints handling process, to be carried
out by external consultants. Following the consultants' report,
the Society launched a recovery plan for the complaints handling
function, which was put in place in June 2003.
Since then, there has been a very considerable improvement
in the position. The table at Annex A sets out the monthly figures
for receipts and disposal for the last eighteen months. It shows
that the number of receipts exceeded closures for eight of the
nine months up to June 2003. Since then the number of disposals
has exceeded receipts in seven months out of nine. The overall
number of cases in progress has fallen from 8,773 in June 2003,
to 7,455 at present. Over the first quarter of this year, the
number of cases closed was 40% higher than in the corresponding
quarter of last year. Thus there are real signs of sustained improvement.
In June 2003, the Society closed 1,370 cases, 50%
of which were dealt with within three months. In March 2004, the
Society closed 1,720 cases and 55% of them were less than 3 months
old.
In the first quarter of 2003, the average rate of
cases referred to the Legal Services Ombudsman by dissatisfied
complainants was 8%. In the first quarter of 2004, the average
was 6%. So although the Society is receiving and dealing with
an increased number of cases, the level of dissatisfaction is
decreasing somewhat.
One continuing obstacle is that the Society's powers
to charge solicitors whose work gives rise to a complaint are
limited. The Financial Ombudsman Service can—and does—charge
all firms in respect of which complaints are made. The Law Society
can only charge when a complaint is upheld. This provides inadequate
pressure on solicitors to sort out complaints in-house. The Society
has asked the Government to provide the necessary legislative
powers as soon as possible.
The Society has also made some important organisational
changes. The Society has established a separate Consumer Complaints
Directorate to focus more clearly on those cases where a client
of a solicitor is seeking redress. Issues of professional misconduct
raised by non-clients—where disciplinary action may be needed—are
now dealt with separately, in the Compliance Directorate, although
there are of course arrangements for the transfer of information
between the two. This change—which was recommended by the
Independent Commissioner examining the Society's complaints arrangements,
Sir Stephen Lander—came into effect on 19 April this year.
CONCLUSION
The Society recognises that it still has some way
to go before its performance in handling consumer complaints fully
meet public needs. Since there have been false dawns before, we
would certainly not want to assume that the implementation of
the recovery plan following the consultants' report last summer
has solved all the problems.
But it is nevertheless clear that a significant improvement
in the Society's complaints handling performance has been achieved
over the last nine months. The Society's performance now stands
comparison with similar complaints handling bodies. We believe
that provides a sound foundation from which to deliver further
improvements.
Annex A
COMBINED CONDUCT
AND SERVICE
COMPLAINTS BY
MONTH
Month
| Receipts | Closures
| Caseload Movement |
October 2002 | 1,213
| 1,204 | 9 |
| November 2002 | 1,278 | 1,299
| -21 |
| December 2002 | 1,201 | 882
| 319 |
| January 2003 | 1,638 | 1,198
| 440 |
| February 2003 | 1,399 | 1,134
| 265 |
| March 2003 | 1,472 | 1,188
| 284 |
| April 2003 | 1,180 | 924
| 256 |
| May 2003 | 1,463 | 1,130
| 333 |
| June 2003 | 1,410 | 1,370
| 40 |
| July 2003 | 1,523 | 1,672
| -149 |
| August 2003 | 1,276 | 1,254
| 22 |
| September 2003 | 1,431 |
1,532 | -101 |
| October 2003 | 1,475 | 1,718
| -243 |
| November 2003 | 1,313 | 1,663
| -350 |
| December 2003 | 1,269 | 1,374
| -105 |
| January 2004 | 1,364 | 1,565
| -201 |
| February 2004 | 1,527 | 1,756
| -229 |
| March 2004 | 1,758 | 1,720
| 38 |
| |
| |
|
