Proceeding contribution from Lord Neill of Bladen (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 February 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].
Legal Services Bill [HL]
My problem with what the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, has just said is that we then introduce a stark differentiation between the two schemes. The FOS scheme goes up to £100,000 and it is quite admittedly an alternative and parallel system to that of the courts. Why has it been put in place? It is because of the horrific nature of the costs in civil litigation. If you lose an action that lasts for two or three days and you have to pay the costs of both sides, the minimum you are thinking about is £50,000. The costs are enormous. As has been explained in connection with the financial services scheme, the whole point is that it really is a substitute system. For my part, I do not see why there should not be an equivalent in relation to legal complaints.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 689 c1131-2
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Conditions of employment Compensation Accountability Legal profession Public appointments Ombudsman Staff Standards Regulation Legal Services Board Office for Legal Complaints
- Legislation
- Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:09:20 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378922
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378922
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378922