‘Named and shamed’ barrister hits back at “misleading” ombudsman


Birmingham

Birmingham-based chambers dealing with 300 clients a month

The first lawyer to be ‘named and shamed’ by the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) for a series of complaints has argued that he is only “trying to adapt to new market forces”.

Immigration barrister Tariq Rehman said LeO was “misleading” in failing to comment on the 97% of clients of his chambers who had not complained.

Mr Rehman argued that Kings Court Chambers, based in Birmingham, dealt with around 300 clients per month, and a “large majority” of the 14 complaints upheld by LeO related to administrative errors or late payment of refunds.

He accused LeO of trying to “prevent an attempt by a non-establishment chambers to compete in a new and very different market for legal services”.

LeO said earlier this week that Mr Rehman’s standards of service were “consistently poor, requiring ombudsman intervention time after time”, and that it had named him because he was “a risk to any potential new client”.

However, Mr Rehman said the chambers was “compelled to look at innovative ways in which to operate differently to gain the flexibility that would allow it to service clients in a different environment and to take on larger volumes of work.”

In a statement, Mr Rehman went on: “Kingscourt Chambers used a marketing strategy to attract large volumes of work through the direct access scheme whilst keeping within the regulations which govern chambers or other legal entities of this kind.

“This type of reaction from the Legal Ombudsman is misleading and does not truly reflect the efforts being made by barristers in trying to adapt to the changes.”

The statement went on to complain that he had been “specifically targeted and vilified” by LeO as an Asian ethnic minority lawyer.

“There are many ethnic minority lawyers who will keep silent and not highlight their grievances, for fear of repercussions and deliberate targeting which usually follows to hush them up if they dare speak out against the disproportionate treatment by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Bar Standards Board and the Legal Ombudsman, who are allegedly ‘protecting the public’.

“It would appear that Mr Rehman has been specifically targeted, despite nearly 15 years at the bar and without a single complaint made against him by any client he has represented in the criminal courts.”

The Legal Ombudsman declined to comment.

Tags:




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


Five key issues to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech

As generative AI starts to play a bigger role in our working lives, there are some key issues that your law firm needs to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech.


Bulk litigation – not always working in consumers interests

For consumers to get the benefit, bulk litigation needs to be done well, and we are increasingly concerned that there are significant problems in some areas of this market.


ABSs, cost and audits – fixing regulation after Axiom Ince

A feature of law firm collapses and frauds has sometimes been the over-concentration of power in outdated and overburdened systems of control.


Loading animation