Law Society’s Gazette, May 1982

Letters to the editor

(There is a) widely held view that all solicitors, regardless of specialisation or geographical location, are ‘on the gravy train’. This view has been deliberately and successfully peddled for a number of years by certain sections of the media (principally by those on the ‘conveyancing monopoly’ bandwagon) and is now firmly entrenched in the public’s mind.

There can, for example, be few of us who have not at some social gathering or other been on the receiving end of disobliging comments about solicitors’ allegedly excessive charges - in this writer’s experience, usually made by public-sector employees on extremely comfortable salaries.

In an age of competing claims on scarce public funds, it is also a view which suits politicians well, as there is thus no pressure on government to give the profession a better deal. On the contrary, any measure which could be represented as favouring lawyers at the expense of more deserving sections of the community could be expected to provoke a public outcry. It is thus to be avoided and our moans will continue to fall on deliberately deaf ears until we manage to achieve a massive shift in the public’s perception of our profession.

What then is the solution? Our countrymen are basically fair-minded, and if each one of us was prepared to campaign actively on behalf of our profession, we might be pleasantly surprised at the results achieved. On the other hand, what is quite certain is that we are, mainly as a result of public ignorance, an unloved profession with many influential enemies. We can, therefore, expect no help from others if we will not help ourselves.R D Hicks, Lostwithiel, Cornwall

Give us the biscuit

We are told - by relatives, friends and even fellow solicitors - that our charges are too high. It is bad enough being the butt of after-dinner speakers: ‘Why is a solicitor like a rhinoceros?’ or more indelicately, ‘What is it that a swan does gracefully, a duck with difficulty and a solicitor finds impossible to achieve?’ [Answers at end of piece.]

The accountancy profession, or more accurately, the auditors, put us into wolves’ clothing in most companies’ accounts. There is always an item ‘legal and other professional fees’, followed by a four- or five-figure item.

When I started examining this item subjectively, my attitude to it was that it was a reasonable amount and I enjoyed the secure feeling that this steady income was flowing into my firm’s own more modest profit-and-loss account. (Upon examining) the item more closely, the secure feeling was replaced by one of outraged indignation. In most cases, ‘the other professional fees’ were greatly in excess of any legal fees, and in others there were no legal fees at all.

What prompted me to write all this was a new manifestation of the same technique, coupled with a brutal demotion of the lawyer. On page 12 of the Inland Revenue report for the year to 31 March 1981, there appear the collection costs and, at the foot of the table, sandwiched between ‘Travelling and Removal’ and ‘Computers’, appears ‘Legal, cleaning and miscellaneous’. MDTL

[Solicitors and rhinos are thick-skinned, short-sighted and always ready to charge. The second joke refers to sticking one’s bill up one’s rear fundament.]