SLCC: Who should pay the cost of increasing complaints?

As part of its annual budget consultation, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) - Scotland’s independent body for complaints about lawyers - has called on members of the public, and legal professionals, to join the discussion about who should pay for the increasing cost of complaints about lawyers.

It is also consulting on how that funding should be arranged, following the Law Society of Scotland’s authorisation as an ‘Approved Regulator’ of new business models allowing non-solicitor ownership.

Increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the complaints procedure will be a key focus of the SLCC’s proposed work plan for 2018-19, following a 14 per cent rise in complaints against lawyers over the past two years.

The SLCC said that rising complaints, coupled with the end to a long-standing subsidy of costs from the commission’s reserves, has led to a 5.2 per cent increase in the SLCC’s proposed budget.

In real terms this means that solicitors in private practice will pay an extra £30 next year (an 8.5 per cent increase). For in-house lawyers this amounts to an extra £9 per year; for members of the Faculty of Advocates the rise is £14.

The increase in funding will be used to recruit new case workers to handle the increase in complaints.

Neil Stevenson, CEO said: “Complaints remain a tiny proportion of all legal work. However, as numbers increase, and those entering the later, more costly, stages of our process also rise our costs increase. We know that the vast majority of complaints come from a small number of practice areas. Last year the Law Society of Scotland questioned the proportionality of the levy on certain groups within the profession, such as in-house lawyers, in the society’s public response to our consultation.

“In recognition of that, part of this year’s consultation opens up the question of how the levy might be divided among different groups of legal practitioners. We are open to the views of the profession, and those of the wider public, about where we should be moving to: a levy that falls more on those areas that generate most complaints and costs or, conversely, a single rate for all lawyers.”

He added: “This year also sees the first year a levy will be due from a legal services ‘Approved Regulator’ who will in turn be licensing ’alternative business structures‘ with non-lawyer ownership. The 2010 legislation enabling this anticipates that this funding will come from the new legal services market. We see it as critical that the current levy for individual lawyers does not subsidise this new market. However, we must also consult ‘Approved Regulators’ and take their views into account.

“We recognise that as we were able to reduce the levy in previous years, through drawing on our limited reserves, an increase this year will not be welcome. It was always our position that using reserves to subsidise the levy could not continue indefinitely. However, we have continued working to try to tackle the common causes of complaints through information to lawyers and consumers.”