Solicitor Rating And Comment

[EdgeofDarkness]

I've had the misfortune to be a 'client' (a beneficiary, with no power to dismiss the solicitor, who was executor) of a solicitor. After 7 years of errors, delays and high rates of charging, the estate has finally been settled. I won limited damages from a complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. I see that a number of websites (both in UK and Eire) have been shut down by solicitors restricting freedom of speech. I have found only rateyoursolicitor and solicitor.info. Are there other mainstream websites for feedback on solicitors ?

[buildersmate]

I don't think a useful centralised feedback site exists.

In my opinion the Law Society is more interesting in protecting its own than protecting clients and, for what its worth, the BMA seems to work in exactly the same way for doctors.

That said, there are hundreds of very competant individuals and practices and even the very limited competition that exists plus stories about bad practices has had some impact in rooting out useless individuals from the old school.

I should just glow in the knowledge that you 'won' the day and got a little back.

[tonywiltshire]

With an estimated 125,000 practising solicitors in England and Wales, it is inevitable there will be a few bad eggs but the vast majority are hardworking, in a highly regulated and competitive profession. To have reached the Ombudsman you first probably complained to the senior partner of the firm involved, The law society and the Solicitors regulation authority, all of whom should have taken your complaint seriously and hopefully the solicitor involved now feels thoroughly ashamed of themselves and is considering their position.

[EdgeofDarkness]

Thanks Mate.
I know there are still some scrupulous solicitors. It was one of those that my father went to see in 1980 when he drew up his will. Problem is that a lot can change during the years between the will being drawn up and executed. In this case the good small firm got taken over by an ambitious chain. What I really want to achieve in publishing my story is to warn other people - a) about how things can change, b) not to trust solicitors with the job of executor. Usually there is a family member, or close friend who is more reliable.

[237SJ]

If you are in London (long shot, I know) you can rate companies on qype.co.uk

[tonywiltshire]

Your warning is apt, I think many people appoint a professional as executor to try to make life easier for the beneficiaries; it should be an unbreakable rule to never appoint any professional person or firm who prepares a will and then demands to be an executor.

[Peter Pedant]

and on a point of order, buildersmate

it is not the BMA that ever deals with doctors and naughtiness

it is the GMC


who coincidentally have had four decisions reversed by the High Court in the last few weeks whch isnt really what a so called pro-doctors organisation should be scoring

[buildersmate]

I stand corrected, Peter, sorry about that, I meant the GMC.

[Nini74]

just to correct you on one point - you mention that websites have been shut down by solicitors restricting freedom of speech. Firstly, the solicitors did not shut down these sites. the sites i think you are referring to are, as far as i have been told by fellow solicitors, those who would await complaints from members of the public, without checking whether the complaint was founded or not, and then contact the solicitor in question asking them to pay a fee for their name to be withheld from the site. in other words, a simple means of making money and exploiting solicitors who clearly would not want their name published on such a site with no right to comment or prove wrong the allegations made against them.

[EdgeofDarkness]

Nini, I don't accept your offered correction, at least not in the way you present it. The Law Society spent £150,000 closing one particular website, and have hounded the person who ran the site. As far as I can see, that man's intention was simply to allow free speech concerning bad solicitors. Undoubtedly some of the contributors to the site abused the privilege (and you are correct that at least one solicitor paid to have a comment removed - although a plaintiff might regard such a payment as a 'settlement'), but abuse of free speech by a few can never be justification for attempting to remove that freedom from everyone. Happily, I see that, in the aftermath of the Law Society case, similar websites are now proliferating, many of them hosted offshore.