Solicitors Skills for Initial Interview - Essay Example

199623 Part one You are asked to comment on the conduct of the interviewer in terms of the weakness of the interview Part two Detail how the solicitor should have prepared for and conducted the initial interview of Mr Gordon Part one There are some very serious problems with the way that the interview was conducted. The first problem with the interview is that the solicitor did not introduce himself to the client. The solicitor also addressed the client as Gordon assuming that this was the client’s first name. This raises two separate issues, firstly the solicitor should have enquired whether it was alright to address the client by his first name and secondly the solicitor should have checked the name of the client before the day of the interview so that he knew whether this was a first name or a second name. Under the Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007 Rule 1.05 it states Standard of service – 1.05 9. You must provide a good standard of client care and of work, including the exercise of competence, skill and diligence. Disciplinary action will not always follow where breaches of this duty are minor and isolated. The conduct of the interview would appear to be in breach of this requirement as the solicitor does not deal with all the issues that he ought to have covered in the interview. At one point in the interview the solicitor is asked by the client to explain the time limits that the solicitor mentions. The solicitor in this case makes no effort whatsoever to explain the time limits and in fact seems to totally ignore the request for further information. As this was a specific request by the solicitor he should have explained the time limits straightaway or at least have told the client that he would cover this later. In explaining the time limits the solicitor should have explained that under the Limitation Act 1980 a claim has to be brought within 3 years of the date of the accident. The solicitor also spends time on telling the client about the number of accidents that occur as a result of people using mobile phones whilst driving. This is totally irrelevant in this case and would only be relevant if the solicitor were to be suggesting that the chances of success of the case were remote as very few cases in this area had succeeded. Instead of commenting on the number of accidents that occur in this way the solicitor should have encouraged the client by stating that this will add to the liability of the defendant as he was not fully in control of the vehicle at the time of the accident. The solicitor should have explained that this could be used against the defendant if they try to deny liability as they could use the fact to demonstrate that he was not fully concentrating on the road at the time. It is also a criminal offence to use a mobile phone whilst driving which could mean that the defendant would face criminal charges for being on the phone. This would also strengthen a case against the defendant for compensation. If the police have been involved and are bringing charges against the defendant then the client might be able to claim compensation through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, which would mean that he would not have to bring his own action against the defendant, which could obviously save him money ultimately. Throughout the interview the solicitor continually interrupts the client and does not allow him to finish what he is saying. The solicitor also does not get the full story about how the accident occurred as he is continually interrupting. The solicitor should ask the client to explain in their own words exactly what happened without interrupting them and make notes throughout. After the client has explained the solicitor should then go through the events in detail and write down what has been said and the particulars of the claim that will be submitted to the defendant. Before beginning the interview the solicitor should ascertain the nature of the claim and the injuries complained of by the client. Under Rule 2.02 of the 2007 Code the solicitor must clearly identify the client’s objectives in relation to the work the client wishes the solicitor to undertake. The solicitor has a duty to clearly explain the issues involved and tell the client of the options they have available to them. The solicitor should take this opportunity to explain how the process works and explain the time constraints involved. Under the Civil Procedure Rules there is generally pre action protocol to be adhered to before a claim can be submitted. In the case of personal injury claims this involves writing to the defendant informing of the intention to claim and asking for disclosure of any relevant insurance agent that needs to be informed of the proceedings and on whom the papers can be served. The solicitor should then advise the client that the defendant has 21 days in which to acknowledge the papers and to request advanced disclosure of certain items. From this point on the defendant on the insurance company representing the defendant has 3 months in which to both admit liability and negotiate a settlement or to prepare a defence. If liability is denied then the solicitor will prepare the documents for court and will arrange for expert opinion to be provided in respect of any injuries and the long term effect of any such injuries. The solicitor should advise the client at the interview stage to itemise any losses in terms of loss of earnings due to having to take time off to recover from the injuries, loss of amenity in not being able to carry on activities that the client previously was able to do and loss of any personal items that were damaged in the collision. The solicitor should explain that it may be necessary to seek an expert medical opinion in respect of long term effects and will ask the client to sign a form allowing the solicitor to access the medical records of the client with regard to the accident. The solicitor should ask if any long term problems are being experienced and if there is any need for further treatment such as physiotherapy. This might be funded from the insurance of the defendant if liability is admitted at an early stage. The solicitor should remind the client of the importance of full disclosure as it could harm the claim if the solicitor discovers at a later stage that the client might be in part to blame. This could be the case if the client later discloses that he had a sneezing episode as he emerged from the junction. The defence would use this as a way of reducing the damages payable on the grounds of contributory negligence. At the close of the interview the solicitor and the client should agree the next steps that are to be taken and the solicitor must keep the client informed of progress throughout the claim. There is also a requirement under Rule 2.03 for the solicitor to explain the fees payable for the services that will be provided by the solicitor and discuss the ways in which these costs can be funded. This will involve discussing conditional fee agreements as well as legal expenses insurances that the client might already have available to them through house insurance policies or motor insurance policies. Client’s should be informed of the potential liability for the other party’s costs in the event of the client losing the case at court. Within this framework the solicitor should then discuss After The Event Insurance for those client’s that will be using a Conditional Fee Agreement. Clients should also be informed of their right to complain if they are not satisfied with the service provided by the solicitor (rule 2.05). This information should be provided in writing at the first interview stage. The information should detail to whom the client should complain and the procedure for lodging a complaint. As can be seen from the above there are many areas in which the solicitor has failed to reach the standard required from someone in his position. The above interview is weak as the client has not been given the information he needs to decide what to do next and the solicitor does not have enough information to prepare a case for the client. Part two Prior to the interview the solicitor should have obtained rough details of the claim from the client so that he could prepare for the interview. The solicitor should have put together an information pack for the client that details the general procedure in accident claims and he should have familairised himself with the facts of the case. The solicitor should have prepared an interview plan so that he knew the questions he needed to ask of the client and should also have familairised himself with the kind of questions normally asked by clients so that he could answer the questions posed. The solicitor should have taken charge of the interview immediately and should have apologised for his lateness appropriately. As he was running late it would have been common courtesy to have tried to get a message to his secretary so that she could inform the client as to why the solicitor had been delayed. At the start of the interview he should have introduced himself and explained how his services are regulated by the Law Society. At this point in time he should then have explained the complaints procedure and shown the client the relevant documents in the pre-prepared package in relation to complaints procedures. Following a written plan would have ensured that all areas that needed to be covered had been covered. At the end of the interview the client should have been asked if there was anything on which he required further explanation and then should have been asked whether he wished the solicitor to act on his behalf on the terms and conditions discussed. The solicitor should also be prepared to explain the process to the client so that the client is aware of the timescales involved in bringing the claim. The solicitor should explain that it is often best not to try to rush things to get an early settlement as some conditions can get progressively worse over time. He should explain to the client that once an amount has been agreed and accepted there is no way of getting further compensation should it later materialise that there are long term effects from the accident. A good solicitor will suggest seeking an interim payment if it appears that the proceedings are likely to be protracted. This might occur if the client needs to see a specialist to advise on long term effects. The interview should be structured in a clear format, firstly setting out the legal qualifications of the solicitor and explaining the format of the interview. The solicitor should ensure that all points that require discussion are discussed. In the above case the client should be asked to draw a diagram of the road layout and illustrate the point where the collision occurred. Comment should be made with regard to the use of indicators and also whether the client’s vehicle was stationary at the time of impact or whether he was performing a manoevre. The solicitor should also enquire whether any comments were made by the parties at the time of the collision and any details of witnesses that might be able to assist if needed. Failure of the solicitor to fully inform the client is likely to lead to a claim of professional negligence against the solicitor. Bibliography Carroll, A, Constitutional & administrative Law, Revised Ed,1998, Pitman Publishing Civil Procedure Volume 1, 2002, White Book service, Sweet & Maxwell Civil Procedure Volume 2, 2002, White Book service, Sweet & Maxwell Slapper, G & Kelly, D The English Legal System, 4th Ed, 1999, Cavendish Publishing Ltd Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007 Read More