Scottish Legal Complaints Commission Reviews 

The SLCC does not appear to have any power to compel solicitors to create a fair outcome. Time consuming and complicated process. Compensation is laughable.

Their reply says it all - just a copy and paste from every other reply.

Seems to me that ombudsmen on any subject don't understand the complainer as I've never had satisfaction.

So far SLCC have been very helpful and do listen to your concerns. Although I have not recieved the final response yet I think it is being handled very well.

Given that lawyers often work with vulnerable individuals, it is essential that more robust oversight and safeguards be put in place. Without these measures, those who exploit their positions of trust may continue to do so unchecked, ultimately undermining public confidence in the legal system. Please drug test those who use legal aide

Well we won compensation for our complaint on appeal but some things do leave a rather poor impression. Our solicitor charged us for work not done had to admit as much however when we complained to them they then "lost" our customer file. This made our case so much more difficult the shocking thing to me is that the SLCC did not criticise or penalise the, highly suspicious, loss of that customer file in any way. Almost seems to me that every solicitor complained against should "lose" customer files without fear of criticism. I'm trying to get the SLCC to change that policy via a complaint there should be a standard penalty. Also the arbitration process does not supply evidence to the investigation process so be aware that if arbitration fails you MUST start from scratch again with your case, we learned the hard way and had to appeal the first judgement. You really need legal help to frame the wording of your complaint sadly no local solicitor wanted to touch our case due to their relationship with the solicitor complained against. The level of proof, balance of probability, beyond all reasonable doubt is never really clear. Finally after months of investigation you are given a week to accept the results but you can appeal for more time if you have a good reason. The solicitor complained against seemed to get much more generous timescales to respond, institutional bias? Non solicitors have busy lives as well.

Awful work avoidance and no wonder we are in the state we are in as a society . Promoting negligence, mediocrity and morally bankrupt. Lawyers protecting lawyers with no recourse pathetic organisation

I concur with other comments. The SLCC is biased in favour of the firms they are supposed to regulate and enforce against. The timescale of the investigation was unacceptably long. The investigator included evidence from the law firm but deliberately excluded my evidence which was contradictory and conclusive. I was awarded £500 but of course the law firm never paid it. The public deserve the protection of an independent regulator but the SLCC is institutionally incapable of carrying out that role because of their allegiance to commercial law firms.

PS. As you can see from the comments below, the SLCC say publicly on this thread: "Our goal is to ensure a fair and impartial process for all our service users. We take all concerns seriously and are committed to improving our service user experience." in reality though, when I complained the SLCC ignored my concerns and doubled down. They continued to exclude my evidence of unethical conduct by their law firm colleagues. They take no responsibility for the firm failing to pay the fine due and instead say it is now my responsibility to chase this charlatan law firm to pay up. It is a scandal that the SLCC is allowed to operate in this way to soak up much resource to run what amounts to a sham process.

Awful organisation, meant to punish complaints, not remedy them. It took over a year, SLCC totally ignored the main thrust and significance of my complaint (that the firm I was complaining about is crooked, not just negligent and incompetent) and, despite finding in my favour on 4 out of 5 counts, gave the firm a tiny tap on the wrist. Then the determination committee reduced that. It's sick. I would have gone to court about it, but the court said I would need a solicitor. Catch 22.

THIS ORGANISATION IS UNFIT FOR PURPOSE AND DOES NOT DO WHAT IT CLAIMES TO BE SET UP TO DO. I FELT MANAGED AND STABBED IN THE BACK BY STAFF WHO WERE DERETRMINED TO SHUT DOWN THE COMPLAINT FROM THE OUTSET AND WHO ARE BIASED IN FAVOUR OF SOLICITORS, I WOULD NOT USE AGAIN AND WOULD ADVISE OTHERS NOT TO WASTE THEIR TIME HERE AND ALL TAXPAYER FUNDING SHOULD BE RMOVED FROM THIS ORGANISATION WHICH IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE DUE TO VESTED INTERESTS IN FAVOUR OF SOLICITORS AGAISNT COMPLAINERS

This "commission" clearly exists to protect lawyers and lawyers firms. There are ridiculously long delays in a complaints eligibility even being assessed, let alone the actual complaint being investigated. Mediation was offered after 7 months of assessing my complaint. This almost forces complainers to take the mediation due to the lack of progress. The outcome of mediation is also "confidential" which is utterly ridiculous!! It allows companies to face zero accountability or recourse!!
Don't accept mediation then there is another "substantial period of time" before the complaint is investigated.

THIS IS PEOPLES LIVES THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THIS!!

The man I spoke to explained to me why S L C C cannot take my case. He used arguments that are hard to argue with. Advice to all of you: Do not trust! Record and talk only in front of witnesses! I have a wonderful family lawyer full of passion and dedication. The man I filed a complaint against is the opposite of the values that a lawyer should represent.

Everything has to be done on line what if you cannot get on line or wish to speak to someone. On-line is so impersonal so I did not pursue the complaint.

Very poor and not inclusive for people with disabilities. I find it is not as independent as going through the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

Our case investigator Scott Stephen was polite and respectful and explained everything to us articulately. We had 2 cases one of which they couldn’t do anything with, the reason for this was explained to us thoroughly to enable us to understand the reasoning.

The SLCC updated me throughout the complaints process and explained how it worked in depth. It was a slow process but I wish more people would take up complaints against legal firms as too many are put off and think legal firms are untouchable. Trust me, it is worthwhile to stick with it and follow through. Do not let legal firms off with it if you feel they have let you down. The SLCC are independent and it costs you nothing other than your time to follow through with a complaint. A lesson to law firms - if you had only written a genuine letter of apology my complaint would never have gone to the SLCC!!

Very reliable, got in touch with me promptly every time they had something to report. Positive outcome, first class service

I bought a new build home on the site of an old hotel on an existing road. The missives were vague so I asked for clarification. The sellers(builders) solicitor provided search documents which showed the existing road to the front was adopted. ( I understood that the development road would be subject to application for adoption by builder) Last year builder went bust. I found out that the existing road was not adopted despite being represented as such and specifically checked and included as a clause in contract. To get road ( that I believed already adopted) adopted I would have to pay council my share of cost (£2000) As the solicitor had provided incorrect information regarding road status and I was to be out of pocket because if this I raised complaint in November and heard yesterday that my claim was “totally without merit” as “the builder had told the solicitor it was adopted and they had no reason to think otherwise!!” I wouldn’t trust a builders word but had put faith in legal profession and professional search company documentation provided. Surely the firm had a duty to check -and despite fobbing off with claim ‘their client said’ they HAD Commissioned a search AND IT WAS INCORRECT! There was no consideration or reference to the (incorrect) searches THE SOLICITOR commissioned- so it seems to be accepted by SLCC that solicitors are now no more than scribes for sellers and there are no consequences for providing incorrect information to encourage unsuspecting buyers into a contract! I am beyond appalled. I feel there was no attempt to understand my issue and I was given no opportunity to discuss and clarify. The solicitors version was taken at face value. A complete farce.

Initial impression was good but appeared overwhelmed by the solicitor we were complaining about ( Cochran Dickie) and did not challenge any of their misinformation and unethical conduct. Lack of capacity to appeal their judgement is unfair and disappointing

This is a corrupt organization, seems like all levels of gov't are. They ignore criminal offences committed, and as a previous posted commented they are just a "Front" for "Fake Justice" and accountability. They say you can appeal a decision, but then you have to fight the SLCC lawyers in court, to the detriment of your own expense! WTF? The system is total RIGGED to protect the lawyers and legal system!!! They do not care about the law or enforcing what is right and just, they are just there for a pay cheque to propagate corruption at the highest level!!!

Toothless organisation created by Scottish legal profession that only favours the law firms. Overpromises and underdelivers on the website. Pointless going to them.
No protection for the Public!