# Should I complain a solicitor to the Law Society



## JJSefton (19 Mar 2012)

I am wondering if I should complain a solicitor to the Law Society for professional misconduct. The basics of the case are as follows: 

My aunt died intestate in 2007, leaving a house and some cash. Her three brothers and myself - by virtue of my late mother - were the beneficiaries. An uncle of mine was appointed administrator of the estate. He hired a solicitor that he did not know to oversee the estate, and deferred to the solicitor's opinion on all major decisions relating to probate and the sale of my late aunt's house. I objected to many of his decisions, but was effectively sidelined and told my opinion was not welcome. I might also point out that my uncle lived in Dublin, and I - along with all my aunt's assets - was based in Cork.

The granting of administration and sale of the house took over two years to complete. I received a copy of the estate's schedule of assets from the solicitor, along with a copy of the IT38 Inheritance Tax form, in January 2010. I promptly returned this to his office. I heard no more about this for several weeks. Eventually I asked when the proceeds from the estate would be distributed to me, and he said he was waiting for me to return the signed tax form. I told him I had returned it to his office over six weeks earlier. About another week later he told me that the form had been misfiled. I eventually got some of the proceeds, but only after a two month delay following his misfiling of the tax form. I lost a considerable amount of interest on the principle during those two months.

Secondly, my father had paid several of the expenses for my aunt's estate, and was paid for some of his outlays. He died before he was paid the full amount owed. The solicitor claimed that the all outstanding debts to my father had been paid. When I challenged him on that, he became more insistent that all debts had been paid. I then went to great lengths to determine what had been paid, and what hadn't, and I produced receipts and itemized accounts to support my case. Eventually I received the outstanding payment. When I challenged the solicitor to explain his mistake and to reduce his fee as compensation, he claimed he didn't make any mistake. 

Thirdly, my aunt had a credit union account with a balance slightly in excess of €1,000. This was included in the schedule of assets that was submitted to the revenue commisioners. Credit Unions often provide death benefit insurance to the estates of their former customers. I asked the solicitor whether my aunt's estate was entitled to such money. He replied on March 15th, 2010, that the matter was still ongoing. He didn't explain why it should still be on going when he had been dealing with the estate for two and a half years. Thus, I contacted the credit union myself. They claimed that my aunt's estate was entitled to a payment amounting to €1,300, and they also told me that they first received correspondence from the solicitor regarding the death benefit insurance on March 15th, 2010 - the same day he told me the matter was ongoing. More seriously, however, the credit union informed me that my aunt had named me as the nominee on her account, and thus I was entitled to all the proceeds of her account, up to a total of €23k, without a grant of probate. They had told the solicitor this in 2007, yet he had included the account in her estate, when it should all have been paid out to me. I challenged him on the matter and he flippantly replied that I had more information than he did. This of course overlooks the fact that getting such information is precisely what he was being paid for. I was also entitled to a life insurance payout from the credit union, amounting to about €600. I would have received none of these monies if I had not contacted the credit union myself. In addition, the estate would not have received the death benefit insurance of €1,300 if I had not inquired about it to the solicitor in the first place.  Again, when challenged on such matters, the solicitor brusquely dismissed any suggestions of professional misconduct, and told me that my uncle had instructed him not to correspond with my any further. In effect, he should have been sacked for such infractions, and my uncle is probably neglecting his own duty of care to my as a beneficiary by letting the solicitor off the hook, but that is a separate matter. 

These are just the main examples of unprofessional conduct on the part of this solicitor, but there are other examples of negligence and misconduct too. I'd have no hesitation complaining him to the Law Society, expect for the fact that he is a senior member of the society himself, and no doubt he'd be in a position to obstruct any disciplinary action taken against him. Any and all suggestions welcome.


----------



## Bronte (19 Mar 2012)

I think that's a bit outragous to suggest that because the solicitor is a senior member or the Law Society it would mean your complaint would be obstructed.  Maybe I'm naive.  

If you have a valid complaint than make the complaint and it does seem that some things were not done correctly.   Your uncle as was his right chose the solicitor and is not complaining about the work?  The interest on the monies have to be accounted for by the solicitor.  I'm sure that's a legal requirement, but the monies may have been in a client account that does not bear much if any interest.


----------



## JJSefton (19 Mar 2012)

My uncle is 80 years old, is very naive when dealing with professionals, and seems either unaware or uninterested in the mistakes made. The solicitor overpaid the funeral expenses, when he could have availed of a small discount if he paid the bill in 30 days. I brought this to the attention of my uncle, who seemed very uncomfortable with the prospect of having to criticize a member of the professional classes, and thus did nothing about it. 

Regarding the interest lost, I am referring to the interest that I would have made when I lodged the amount in my own accounts and investment funds. I would have received the cheque two months earlier if the solicitor had not misfiled the tax form. And he won't account for interest accrued to a clients account, because, as a general rule, they usually pocket that and consider it a part of their administrative costs. I asked the solicitor about interest in relation to other estate monies that were lodged in clients accounts, and he failed to give an answer.

Incidentally, its far from outrageous to suggest that the Law Society would obstruct a complain against one of their senior members. I have considerable knowledge of the legal profession, and I know that they will largely do whatever they can to protect their colleagues and pals. Its very difficult to get a solicitor to take an action against another solicitor if they are operating in the same area. They will know each other professionally, probably socially, and in many instances they went to school and college together. They have far more to gain by protecting each other than they do by protecting their clients' rights and interests.


----------



## Jim2007 (19 Mar 2012)

As far as I understand it, you did not hire the solicitor, your uncle did and so the solicitor was acting as his agent.  That being the case then it is up to your uncle to make the complaint not you.  You might be able to make some kind of a case against your uncle, but I don't see you being able to go after the solicitor without dragging your uncle in as well...


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 Mar 2012)

It seems to me that your relationship is with the Executor, who is your uncle. 

You may have to take action against him, if you have lost.

I don't know if you are able to complain the solicitor to the Law Society. 

I don't share your cynicism about them, although I welcome the proposed changes in the regulation of the profession.

Brendan


----------



## NOAH (19 Mar 2012)

I think if you look on here you will see loads of cases similar to your own, until you get all that you are entitled to I would hold off on complaining.   And I share your cynicism.  do a google on rate your solicitor.

and good luck.


----------



## Bronte (20 Mar 2012)

In the interest of good family relations it would be best not to pursue the uncle. You've had the good fortune to inherit a sizeable sum of money and while the loss of 2 months interest is annoying you have been lucky.

You are correct that you cannot get one solicitor to go against another and in 'recent' years because of this I understand the Law Society has had to make a list of solicitors who will take on such cases. 

In any case you can drop off your letter of complaint to the Law Society and see what happens. It would be interesting to know if you have any rights against a solicitor for whom you are not the client.


----------



## T McGibney (20 Mar 2012)

NOAH said:


> do a google on rate your solicitor.



The rateyoursolicitor website has been offline for quite a while now.


----------



## mf1 (20 Mar 2012)

As a practising solicitor and, incidentally, one of those on the Law Society's list of firms willing to take action against other solicitors....................

To OP - what is  your actual "loss"? Is it €100’s or €1000’s? 

Yes, you can make a complaint to the Law Society. As a beneficiary in an estate.

I am interested that  you would prefer to post on an internet forum first - before making your complaint. I would be more interested to hear the result of your complaint rather than the "why bother since they are all the same"  commentary. 

I see also "and told me that my uncle had instructed him not to correspond with me any further." He has no obligation to deal with a beneficiary. Just to do the job right. 


I see also that you "have considerable knowledge of the legal profession, and I know that they will largely do whatever they can to protect their colleagues and pals. They have far more to gain by protecting each other than they do by protecting their clients' rights and interests. "

I really do not understand this approach and the broad sweeping statements being made. I have been asked  on a number of occasions to review potential law suits against colleagues. Believe it or believe it not, 95% of the potential plaintiffs were, in my professional opinion, misguided, and, in some cases, either downright malevolent and nasty or unbalanced. 

I would be the first to admit that we all make mistakes and that there are bad apples in every profession but I think it is a mistake to tar the whole profession with one brush. 

Bronte

"You are correct that you cannot get one solicitor to go against another and in 'recent' years because of this I understand the Law Society has had to make a list of solicitors who will take on such cases"

Not really fair. As a practising solicitor, I won't take an action against a personal friend or someone well known to me - but, if there are real grounds for an action, it is not that hard to  find someone to take the case on. And on the issues of being on  the list of firms willing to take action against other solicitors, one of the biggest aggravations is sifting through a sackful of nonsenical correspondence with a potential new client to try and establish what exactly, if any,  is the grievance!

mf


----------



## NOAH (20 Mar 2012)

usually the nonsensical correspondence is generated by solicitors themselves.


----------



## mf1 (21 Mar 2012)

NOAH said:


> usually the nonsensical correspondence is generated by solicitors themselves.



Not true. And yet another one line, pithy,  dismissal - I call it Tabloid Headline type commentary. 

If you have ever tried to get the "relevant" bits of information from your average Joe Soap (not even one of the cranks) about a set of circumstances you would appreciate what I am saying. 

mf


----------



## Bronte (21 Mar 2012)

mf1 said:


> . And on the issues of being on the list of firms willing to take action against other solicitors, one of the biggest aggravations is sifting through a sackful of nonsenical correspondence with a potential new client to try and establish what exactly, if any, is the grievance!


 
When and why was the list set up?  Personally I think there is something wrong with a profession regulating itself.  

And it's intersting to find out that 95% of people who actually go as far as making a complaint against a solicitor are cranks.  

I see where you are coming from in not taking on a case where you are friendly or know a solicitor but that really means that it limits clients in their options and may be the reason why people seem to have a negative view and people such as the uncle in this case would not take a case.


----------



## T McGibney (21 Mar 2012)

Bronte said:


> Personally I think there is something wrong with a profession regulating itself.



Be careful for what you wish for. The Law Society's regulation of solicitors over the past 10-15 years can hardly be regarded as ideal but it hasn't produced the same disasters as the Financial Regulator's oversight of the financial industry, and on that count we should be thankful for small mercies. Would be golden circle political cronies have regulated the legal industry any better? 



Bronte said:


> I see where you are coming from in not taking on a case where you are  friendly or know a solicitor but that really means that it limits  clients in their options and may be the reason why people seem to have a  negative view and people such as the uncle in this case would not take a  case.



I would count it highly unethical for a solicitor or any other professional to accept an engagement from a client to take an action against someone who is personally friendly or well known to the solicitor or professional. 

Clients are entitled to expect that their solicitor gives them a proper, independent service. How can this be achieved if the plaintiff's solicitor socialises with the defendant, or knows their spouse and family well?


----------



## JJSefton (21 Mar 2012)

to MF1

You say that a solicitor has no duty to deal with a beneficiary, just do the job right. Fair enough. However, he didn't do the job right.  He included money that was legally due to me under Credit Union Act of 1997 in the estate, when it should have been paid to me. He was made aware of this by the credit union in question, but overlooked it. Whether it was 1 cent or 1 million euros is irrelevant. Many other solicitors and legal academics I've spoken to have said that the solicitor failed in his duty of care to me as a beneficiary, and have suggested he should have been fired for such an oversight.

My uncle is not supervising the administration of this estate correctly. He is 80 years old, living in Dublin, although the business is taking place in Cork. The solicitor himself is not dealing with the file any more either. He delegated it to his daughter. In a recent phone call from her, I quizzed her about all the mistakes made and she responded that she was not sufficiently familiar with the file to provide comprehensive answers to my questions. That is unacceptable. This firm is getting paid a fortune to do a routine job, and the mistakes I've outlined here are just the tip of the iceberg. Other family members agree that the job is being poorly done as well, and believe that the uncle is unsuited to do this work because of his age, location, and a bad track record of managing family assets. 

Incidentally, the solicitor in question lied to my face on a number of other matters which I won't get into here, failed to read the deeds to the house he was selling, thus leading to a long delay in its sale when the purchaser discovered that what she thought she was buying was not covered in the deeds, and recommended that my uncle hire a firm of auctioneers who lied by saying they were friends of mine - despite the fact that I'd never met them in my life. These are not the complaints of a crank. My own solicitor looked over the file, and agreed that my grievances were legitimate, and that my uncle should be replaced as administrator. He just advised against taking the matter any further, as the costs would outweigh the potential returns.


----------



## JJSefton (21 Mar 2012)

Bronte said:


> In the interest of good family relations it would be best not to pursue the uncle. You've had the good fortune to inherit a sizeable sum of money and while the loss of 2 months interest is annoying you have been lucky.


 
Incidentally, Bronte, inheriting a sum of money is not 'good fortune' when I  received it only because one of my closest family members died. I'd much rather have my aunt and godmother alive and well.


----------



## mf1 (21 Mar 2012)

"Yes, you can make a complaint to the Law Society. As a beneficiary in an estate."

You have your answer. 

mf


----------



## Bronte (22 Mar 2012)

JJSefton said:


> Incidentally, Bronte, inheriting a sum of money is not 'good fortune' when I received it only because one of my closest family members died.


 
I should have said financial good fortune, my apologies.  This is a money website and I responded accordingly. 

As you've taken so much legal advice from other solicitors and legal experts and family members and your own solicitor, who incidentally advised you not to proceed, I suggest you complain forthwith to the law society.


----------



## Bronte (22 Mar 2012)

T McGibney said:


> . The Law Society's regulation of solicitors over the past 10-15 years can hardly be regarded as ideal but it hasn't produced the same disasters as the Financial Regulator's oversight of the financial industry,


 
So your argument is that the financial regulator has been a total disaster and therefore we should accept less than best from the legal profession?  Anyway this will be all sorted out as the law society ignored the competition authority and are now being forced, ironically enough due to the financial regulators failures, to be forced into a reform they don't want. But that's for another thread.


----------



## T McGibney (22 Mar 2012)

Bronte said:


> So your argument is that the financial regulator has been a total disaster and therefore we should accept less than best from the legal profession?



Where did I say that? 

The case against self-regulation of the professions always rested on the assumption that the State would be a more effective regulator than the professional governing bodies. I put it to you that this assumption is now in shreds, given the general failures of the State to properly regulate parallel sectors under its remit.


----------



## Vanilla (22 Mar 2012)

JJSefton said:


> Many other solicitors and legal academics I've spoken to have said that the solicitor failed in his duty of care to me as a beneficiary, and have suggested he should have been fired for such an oversight.
> My own solicitor looked over the file, and agreed that my grievances were legitimate, and that my uncle should be replaced as administrator. He just advised against taking the matter any further, as the costs would outweigh the potential returns.




Getting back to the OP:
You have your own solicitor and have spoken to many other solicitors and legal academics. Why on earth are you posting on AAM? To get MORE opinions? When will it be enough?

If you want to make a complaint, just do it. If you want to elicit people to agree with you, keep trying, but harder.


----------

