Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Lawyers accused of giving the wrong advice

Patricia Wynn Davies,Legal Affairs Editor
Wednesday 01 October 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Solicitors gave advice which was inadequate, incomplete or wrong in the latest independent Consumers' Association investigation for its Which? magazine. But the survey was swiftly ridiculed by the Law Society, the solicitors' professional body, for being "unrealistic" and based on fictional and untypical legal problems.

In the study, the second conducted for Which? in the last two years, researchers posed as ordinary customers and took one of four different consumer problems to a total of 79 solicitors. Today's issue of the magazine claims that most of them gave incomplete advice which would have meant their "clients" might not have pursued all avenues for potential claims and been unlikely to recover all their losses.

Helen Parker, the editor of Which?, said: "The Law Societies of England and Wales and Scotland need to take an active role in monitoring and improving the standard of advice provided by solicitors. Failing this, the Government should look at other ways of regulating the profession."

The Law Society said it questioned the value of yet another small-scale "mystery shopper" survey, covering such a narrow area of law and using such a research method. Citing one of the four hypothetical problems, a spokesman said: "Clients do not generally come to solicitors with elaborate stories about not having adequate insurance to cover the cost of the damage from an exploding five-year-old washing machine. People see a solicitor because their marriage has broken down, or they have been injured in an accident, or they are buying a house, or they have been charged with a criminal offence."

In what Which? highlights as one of the worst cases, a researcher telephoned a solicitor to book an appointment and was offered poor advice by a person who appeared to be the firm's telephonist. When the researcher called back to confirm the advice, a switchboard operator also offered advice, and also got it wrong. The Law Society described the example as "bizarre", questioning whether a real-life caller would have treated a conversation with the operator in the same way as one with a qualified solicitor.

Philip Sycamore, the society's president, said: "Which? magazine fails to mentionthat they had to apologise publicly to a firm they named in the survey two years ago because they made serious allegations against a firm which proved to be entirely wrong."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in