Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) 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]
I am always suspicious when the noble Baroness falls back on the concept of flexibility. It seems to me to be another way of saying that she does not want to agree with the amendment. However, I do understand that the noble Baroness wants flexibility here. I suggest to her that if she accepts my amendment it will, in practice, be a power that will hardly ever be used. If a solicitor knows that he cannot escape an award simply by not paying and hoping the complainant will not enforce compensation, then he will comply because he knows that if the complainant is reluctant to bring proceedings, the OLC will. I see no incompatibility between accepting my amendment on the one hand and the OLC only rarely being involved in proceedings of the sort that the amendment gives it a right to undertake on the other. I hope the noble Baroness will feel, on mature reflection between now and Report, that she is able to accept the measure I propose in full.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 689 c1150-1
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Disclosure of information Consumers Legal profession Misconduct Patents Ombudsman Regulation Trade marks 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 11:09:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378939
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378939
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378939