Zahida "Queen Rat" Manzoor
The Legal Services Ombudsman
Part 1 --- Part 2 --- Part 3 --- Part 4

What do you do when you find that even the Legal Ombudsman resorts to lying in an attempt to stop you complaining? Well I intend telling the whole world.

Lets us look at a few facts that might throw some light on the problem. First I believe it is common knowledge that the Law Society has a financial problem, so probably that is the main reason the public, to quote Peter Herbert, Lawyer and Vice Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority, "are not treated equally". According to an advertisement from the Law society themselves there are upto 25,000 complaints from the public every year, 'The Observer' said the OSS received 14.880 complaints from the public in 2002 against 'Solicitors' and if the average pay out was as little as £500, (one thousands of Kamlesh Bahl estimated pay out), the average cost would be bewteen £7.44m to £12.5m. In addition to this there are a large number of complaints settled locally, so expecting the OSS to carry out an "unbiased investigation" is just a 'Pipe Dream'.

The Law Society say there are 25,000 complaints every year, however according to Solicitor Richard Miller who is a member of that 'Mob' (Law Society) he has stated there are 30,000,000 transactions carried out by lawyers every year. Zahida Manzoor (the Bee's Knees of complaints handling) stated that 30% of clients are dissatisfied and the WHICH? Magazine state it is 40% which equal between 10 and 12 million 'dissatisfied' solicitors clients every year WHOO HEE! - Click Here to read a page from 'Legal Banter'.

Also in the same article of 'The Observer' it appears complaints against solicitors went up by 30% in 2002, it goes on to state the Law Society is recruiting a team of 50 inspectors who this summer (2003) will start visiting firms to "monitor...the worst offenders and help them improve". If how the Law Society 'disciplined' Thos Boyd Whyte of Bexleyheath in Kent then there will only continue to be a 'deterioration' in service to the public. Oh yes the 'Secrete Service' will be at work here for the 'solicitors clients' are not going to be allowed to know if any complaints have been made against their current or prospective solicitors. Well as we know the Law Society make their own 'rules' then apply the one that only suit them at any particular times.

However a bit of information from the ombudsman's office concerning the current amount of 'live complaints' with the 'Office for the Supervision of Solicitors' states: - "At the end of March 2003 it exceeded 8,000, and estimates from her office put the current live figure at nearly 9,000". Further to this the Law Society is considering increasing it's spending on 'complaints handling' from £6.4m in 2000 to a projected £9m for 2003. There are 182 caseworkers at the OSS, an increase of 47 (approx. 30%) in the last 6 months. Maybe the Law Society should look at the 'standards' of their Solicitors.

If you read a article on the Law Society's web pages for a 'Unit Manager' it would be seen there are 100,000+ Solicitors and there are upto 25,000 complaints every year, one dispute every four Solicitors every year, now that has to be a record 'second to none'. Secondly, they have four teams of sixty people investigating these 'disputes', there must be 'one helluva lot' of bad solicitors out there.

Back to Kamlesh Bahl, ex vice-president of the Law Society, who as already cost the Law Society in excess of £2m, was a 'bully' and whose treatment of staff was at times 'demeaning, humiliating' and at times 'offensively aggressive', said the case affected her 'sanity' and she had to see a psychiatrist, maybe she needed that chip on her shoulder seen to. Some people know how to 'milk' the system, but then again being a lawyer and with a doctor as her husband she had access to the best advice. Then again there is always a 'sting in the tail', 'sanity and all', last year she fought her way back on to the society's governing council and was elected over five other candidates in a seat representing 'ethnic minority solicitors'. Maybe its time that devorced 'Fathers' and the 'White English Male' had representatives?

See 'Law Society Article': - "Bahl set to take case to Europe"

Back to the Legal Ombudsman, Zahida Manzoor CBE. In a letter I received from her on the subject of the 'Client Care Agreement' and the fact the Senior Partner at Thos Boyd Whyte, Gordon Luckhurst, did not turn up for an arranged meeting and then twice more refused to see me to discuss my dissatisfaction at the way my case was being conducted she stated this "was dealt with". If you look at my letter of reply you will see she failed to substantiate this claim so obviously she is telling 'porkies'. One other point is she says there is no evidence to support 'collusion' between Thos Boyd Whyte and the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors. If you look at the 'Attendance Note' below, written by my 'young new recruited Assistant Solicitor' (Gordon Luckhurst, Senior Partner's Discriptition in his letter to the OSS) at TBW it clearly shows contact was made with the OSS concerning the complaint I had made, on the OSS's advice, and where a "...Mr Fise recalled the file in relation to the complaint..." and the next day I was sacked.

I have to put my hands-up to the fact that in my complaint to the OSS I made the accusation of 'negligence' by TBW, but thirteen months prior Gordon Luckhurst had on two occasions refused to see me and discuss my grievances. My claim that TBW had been 'negligent' would eventually be proved to be correct by the opinions of a Barrister, The General Council of the Bar and the ex-Ombudsman, Ann Abraham who also used the words in a letter she wrote to me "…their work was so bad…" but what does the OSS and the present Ombudsman do? One invents evidence and the other one denies the existence of evidence.

I don't see how a firm of solicitors, Thos Boyd Whyte of Bexleyheath Kent, whose work was so bad (Ann Abraham's, ex-Legal Ombudsman words) and no disciplinary action was taken against them. Albeit, if it had any future client of theirs or members of the public would not be allowed to know (The Secrete Society sees to that).

This is a copy of an 'ATTENDANCE NOTE' written by a young newly recruited Assistant Solicitor with no litigation skills just assigned to my case on the 7 June 2000 and clearly shows a meeting took place between this Assistant Solicitor, Gorden Luckhurst, Geoff Smith and that my Assistant Solicitor had spoken to a Mr Fise at the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors when my file, that was still waiting to be allotted to a Caseworker, was "recalled" by Mr Fise to assist Thos Boyd Whyte Solicitors in bringing about my sacking as a paying Client.

A look at the rule regarding the 'Requesting' of information;
"All requests for information in accordance with this Code shall be in writing, addressed to the Chief Executive, and shall be signed by the person making the request".