Comments: 1. For the reasons set forth in the Panel’s final decision. The defence of my position has cost me in financial terms £4,500 and considerable further wasted time and attention.


2. I do not believe that fair and proportionate weight was given to my initial responses to the complaint, lengthening and complicating the entire process at considerable personal cost.


IPS general comments/learning points on questions 20 to 23 are summarised at end of this section. Some of the issues raised have been commented upon elsewhere in this report.


21. Overall, how satisfied were you with how we handled your complaint?


2013


Very dissatisfied Fairly dissatisfied Acceptable


Fairly satisfied Very satisfied


0


1 (17%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 3 (50%)


2012 1 (8%)


2 (17%) 2 (17%) 4 (33%) 3 (25%)


0 0


1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (66%)


Comments: 1. I believe CILEx should give very serious consideration to the role of the regulators of legal executive/solicitor members as the notion of ‘repeat punishment’ is clearly discouraging.


IPS comments/learning points on questions 20 to 23 are summarised at end of this section.


22. If you could suggest one improvement to the way we handle complaints what would that be? 1. To take account of the common sense position of members being regulated elsewhere, where appropriate.


2. No suggestions. 3. No further comments. 4. No. 5. It felt that the process was in the customers favour initially and was unnerving to receive such a complaint. There was such a long time between the initial letter and subsequent follow up letter that I either assumed the complaint had gone away or that more investigation work was being undertaken. Either way, it would have been good to be informed as to the delay much sooner.


IPS general comments/learning points on questions 20 to 23 summarised at end of this section. Some of the issues have been commented upon elsewhere in this report.


2011


Specific comments: 1. CILEx members who are also a member of another regulatory body or employed in an organisation regulated by another approved regulator are fully aware that they are not only bound by the other regulators codes of practice but that of CILEx as well. It would not be appropriate for IPS to cease investigating a member simply because another regulator has investigated and/or made a finding against them.


23. Are there any further comments which you wish to make? 1. No.


2. No further comments. 3. It was unfortunate that a complaint was brought against me by a third party whose purpose was to cause me further harassment as he had done for the past 2 years, he continued to harass me during complaint and the whole procedure cause me some distress.


4. I shall be resigning my position with CILEx after 39 years of membership as a consequence of what I believe was a wholly unmeritorious pursuit against me.


IPS general comments/learning points on responses to questions 20 to 23: Although fewer customer service questionnaires were returned the number of positive responses made has increased. Only two members made comments which were limited to specific elements of the misconduct investigation. One member was unhappy with the decision to continue to investigate rather than the investigating procedure or mechanical process itself. One member felt the complainant used the complaints process as a further means to harass them.


IPS’ aim is to carry out an impartial and objective investigation. The process allows for independent correspondence between IPS and members and between IPS and complainants. This is intended to protect members from direct harassment. However we have an obligation to share information received from each party with the other. This is necessary to provide members with the opportunity to respond to allegations made against them. It is unfortunate that this can allow for indirect harassment. The Fitness to Practise Procedures Manual that was introduced in August 2012 appears to have had the desired effect of filling in information gaps for members. Going forward, if members continue to make use of this tool they should develop a greater understanding of complaints procedures and outcomes.


It has been recognised through the practical application of the Manual and development work taking place on the Manual and new IDAR, that letters to members can provide clearer explanation for decisions. IPS is therefore reviewing and amending its letters accordingly. IPS will also endeavour to improve communications between members and IPS, where members require additional clarification during misconduct investigation


Professional standards for specialist lawyers


31


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38