Can a solicitor ignore a request for legal assistance and a complaint?

[Michael Browne]

From your point of view, why engage a firm that you are already dissatisfied with?

 

From their pov, why take on more work from a client with an on-going complaint against them?

[BazzaS]

Agreed but it seems to could be a breach of the SRA code (which is my original enquiry) and I could request compensation by way of the Legal Ombudsman.

 

Compensation for what damage?

They don’t have to take you on as a client, so there is no recoverable loss created.

 

Might it be “penalising someone for making a complaint”? Possibly.

Even so, if the relationship was sufficiently soured, they can decline, and it isn’t unreasonable.

 

From your point of view, why engage a firm that you are already dissatisfied with?

 

From their pov, why take on more work from a client with an on-going complaint against them?

 

Absolutely.

 

The OP appears “to have their cake and eat it too”.

Not only do they want the cake, and to eat it, but they want the firm to arrange funding for the cake’s purchase.........

 

Little surprise they have made a commercial decision to refuse to accept instruction.

 

I approached them with a new matter. They just ignored me and the complaint that followed (regarding the new/second matter).

 

It may be they are trying to protect their position in that they feel I may have a professional negligence claim against them. They asked me if I was accusing them of being negligent but I did not answer. I believe I am not compelled to, especially in circumstances where the complaints procedure had not been exhausted.

 

I doubt you have a valid complaint about the new matter if they never agreed to act on it.

 

You are correct that you didn’t have to answer their question, but not replying may have given them further cause to feel the relationship had broken down sufficiently that they don’t want to act for you in future.

[totally_pennyless]

From your point of view, why engage a firm that you are already dissatisfied with?

 

From their pov, why take on more work from a client with an on-going complaint against them?

 

I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt. I have a right to express concerns by way of a complaints procedure. Indeed, the firm made some concessions.

 

If someone raises a complaint against a firm who is engaged in a CFA with them, would it be right that the firm terminates the agreement regardless of the nature of the complaint? That appears to be the logic exercised here.

 

Compensation for what damage?

They don’t have to take you on as a client, so there is no recoverable loss created.

 

Might it be “penalising someone for making a complaint”? Possibly.

Even so, if the relationship was sufficiently soured, they can decline, and it isn’t unreasonable.

 

Are you serious?

 

Absolutely.

 

The OP appears “to have their cake and eat it too”.

Not only do they want the cake, and to eat it, but they want the firm to arrange funding for the cake’s purchase.........

 

Little surprise they have made a commercial decision to refuse to accept instruction.

 

Sorry, I don't agree.

 

I doubt you have a valid complaint about the new matter if they never agreed to act on it.

 

You are correct that you didn’t have to answer their question, but not replying may have given them further cause to feel the relationship had broken down sufficiently that they don’t want to act for you in future.

 

That does seem to be speculative. At the very least, they could have given me their reasons for not acting for me as a matter of courtesy.

 

Anyway, the SRA and the Legal Ombudsman are looking into my concerns regarding the handling of the first matter (so if action is taken on his SRA registration issues surrounding the second matter may be irrelevant). Now that it is also clear that the firm in question are not being in any way communicative or engaging I may now get legal opinions on negligence and victimisation claims.

[SuperVillain]

It may be they are trying to protect their position in that they feel I may have a professional negligence claim against them. They asked me if I was accusing them of being negligent but I did not answer. I believe I am not compelled to, especially in circumstances where the complaints procedure had not been exhausted.

 

They're almost certainly asking you so they can update their professional indemnity insurers. In all likelihood they have reported your complaint to their PII as a 'circumstance' that may lead to a claim being made.

 

With regards to your first issue - the Claim where you have raised a complaint, these are the outcomes and indicative behaviours outlined in the code of conduct:

 

O(1.11) clients' complaints are dealt with promptly, fairly, openly and effectively;

 

Complaints handling

 

IB(1.22) having a written complaints procedure which:

(a) is brought to clients' attention at the outset of the matter;

(b) is easy for clients to use and understand, allowing for complaints to be made by any reasonable means;

© is responsive to the needs of individual clients, especially those who are vulnerable;

(d) enables complaints to be dealt with promptly and fairly, with decisions based on a sufficient investigation of the circumstances;

(e) provides for appropriate remedies; and

(f) does not involve any charges to clients for handling their complaints;

 

IB(1.23) providing the client with a copy of the firm's complaints procedure on request;

 

IB(1.24) in the event that a client makes a complaint, providing them with all necessary information concerning the handling of the complaint.

 

Now it may be possible that they are still investigating, but from what you have said there could be a breach of Outcome 1.11 and falling short of the indicative behaviours. They should be communicating with you. Have the 8 weeks set out by the LO passed re the first complaint?

 

 

My post at #32 was directed at your second issue - i.e. the newer instruction - I think my comment still stands.

[totally_pennyless]

Yes, that is correct. I've have recently reported these issues to the SRA.

 

8 weeks has recently passed regarding the first complaint(s) - I sent LeO a complaint a few days ago.

How long between you requesting they act, and you chasing them to see if they accepted your instructions?

Less than 8 weeks now in terms of the second matter.

 

Also it isn't clear what detriment you have suffered by them not acting for you. Are you out of time to bring your Claim?

 

I think if there was no breach of the SRA then it seems I may have been victimised, in particular the firm is refusing to act for me in regards to any matter regardless of merit because I raised a complaint. It certainly injured my feelings in that they could not be bothered to send me a brief e-mail explaining their position.

 

I won't be pursuing the second matter. It was a victimisation claim but it has problems with causation. I needed an expert opinion though and I can't run these claims by myself due to health problems and a lack of knowledge of the CPR.

[BazzaS]

Compensation for what damage?

They don’t have to take you on as a client, so there is no recoverable loss created.

 

Might it be “penalising someone for making a complaint”? Possibly.

Even so, if the relationship was sufficiently soured, they can decline, and it isn’t unreasonable.

 

 

Are you serious?

 

Absolutely.

What damage have you suffered that they are responsible for AND that they owe you a duty for?

 

I get that you feel wronged.

I don’t believe that translates into an actionable claim though.

 

That does seem to be speculative. At the very least, they could have given me their reasons for not acting for me as a matter of courtesy.

 

They might have found you so argumentative (based purely on your responses here!) that they decided “do not engage in ‘interaction tennis’” was more courteous in the long run ....

[totally_pennyless]

Well, there is the poor service which I am pursuing via LeO and there is a potential negligence and victimisation claim.

 

Presumably you feel that that merits them not responding to complaints as they should too?

 

Sorry, don't mean to come across as grumpy but have suffered a lot of injustice in recent times and it seems to be never-ending...

 

I think most people would agree, the legal system, as it stands, does not favour the poor and the poorly.

[BazzaS]

Presumably you feel that that merits them not responding to complaints as they should too?

 

It depends.

If the complaint is about the matter they were acting for you in, then they are bound by the SRA’s and LO’s requirements.

 

If the complaint was the one about them not taking you on a client for the new matter, then yes : they may have decided a “battle of the letters” wasn’t in anyone’s best interest.

 

In short they have to interact with you over the matter they agreed to act for you on, or explain at least once that they aren’t going to reply further as they have already dealt with the matter.

For the “new” matter they should decline to act for you AND inform you of that unless they have decided to do so is counterproductive; where they just make an entry in their file explaining that.

 

You may have “protected” characteristics. That doesn’t mean that was the reason they decided they didn’t want to interact further with you though ......

[totally_pennyless]

In terms of my first round of complaints, there is no question that they had a professional duty to respond in accordance with the SRA code of conduct. I suspect they were advised by their insurers not to respond but that would cause them difficulties with both the SRA and LeO so I am struggling to see their reasoning there.

 

I agree, no person wants to get involved in protracted correspondence but they could have still sent me a brief e-mail explaining the position as a matter of courtesy and then simply not responded to any enquiry etc. that they felt that they have dealt with reasonably.

[Manxman in exile]

Well, there is the poor service which I am pursuing via LeO and there is a potential negligence and victimisation claim.

 

 

What is the potential negligence claim? Does that refer to the first issue that they acted on for you but where you complained and they haven't responded yet; or are you referring to the second issue where they refused to act but didn't tell you? If the latter, I tend to agree with others that they have no obligation to accept your instructions but that they probably ought to have told you this. But not telling you isn't negligence.

[totally_pennyless]

Agreed. I was alluding to the first matter.

 

They really seemed to make a mess of that and the failure to honour their own complaints procedure and the SRA code of conduct is a red flag.

 

I am asking another firm to consider the merits of that.

 

I might make a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the SRA too to see if we can get to the bottom of how they define a "prospective client".

[sgtbush]

A freedom of information request might work but your now using a sledgehammer to crack a nut

But I did put what the sra define clients and potential and former clients

[totally_pennyless]

I might make a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the SRA too to see if we can get to the bottom of how they define a "prospective client".

 

I've just done that. I'll post the response I get.

 

A freedom of information request might work but your now using a sledgehammer to crack a nut

 

Maybe but I'd like some official clarification.

[Guest]

as posted the sra is not subject to the foi act

but, if you really want to go there re

https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/how-we-work/transparency.page

[totally_pennyless]

Interesting.

Let's see how they respond anyway.

They may shed some more light on the matter.

[Guest]

it will be; not subject to foi act, but if you want info see...ie the link i posted

 

that's your 'more light on the matter'.

[totally_pennyless]

Do you mind elaborating a bit?

 

Are you suggesting they will not afford me the clarification I requested?

[Guest]

if you want to try and get certain info from the sra, try the link i posted. not the foi act. the sra is not subject to the foi act.

[sgtbush]

Read the link.

Sra are not bound by the foi act but they preform in the same way. They want to be transparent and will follow the act in the same way as if they were bound by it.

[totally_pennyless]

Yes, I worked that out after you posted the link. I see no reason why they would not answer my enquiry though.

 

Read the link.

Sra are not bound by the foi act but they preform in the same way. They want to be transparent and will follow the act in the same way as if they were bound by it.

 

I should get an informative response then.

[Guest]

re your enquiry request under the foi act?

i just posted what their answer is likely to be!

just do the form in the link!

[totally_pennyless]

My request worked fine.

They will respond fully in 20 working days.

[Guest]

good. they will deal with it as per their Code then. that's what i was getting at

[totally_pennyless]

Indeed.

[Guest]

quite