Complaints on solicitors

Press, 7 November 1978, Page 7

Complaints on solicitors

PA Auckland In his first year as lay observer for the Auckland District Law Society, Mr Norman King has had 23 complainants refer matters to him. These covered a broad range of issues, Mr King said. Five complaints were concerned directly with the cost of fees. The basis of these was that the fees were charged for work allegedly done by the solicitor without instruction from the client, or that the solicitor ellegedly had not taken the action for which he had charged. On three occasions Mr King considered that concessions should be made, and this .was, agreed to by the solicitors concerned. Another source of com-

plaint was delay in the handling of legal matters. Mr King said he believed it was important that clients be kept informed of actions taken and advised exactly why any untoward delay was occurring. In other cases the allegation was that the solicitor had been negligent or had committed misconduct. Mr King recommended to the Law Society that several improvements be made. These referred to the accounting procedure adopted by a solicitor, an aspect .of the society’s procedure for handling complaints; the jurisdiction of the society in respect of barristers; and the reminding of members of their responsibility in advising clients of the right to legal aid.

In one matter, Mr King asked the society to consider disciplinary action against one of its members, who. had failed to act in a matter which had been the subject of previous disciplinary proceedings. Mr King said he believed the need for a lay observer in Auckland had been established and that correspondence from other areas suggested to him that the service should be extended.

He said it was important that complainants have an independent authority to approach if they were dissatisfied with the decision of the Law Society. Mr King suggested that the cost of maintaining a national lay observer should be supported by public funds, as is the case in England.