ࡱ> qspc 7bjbj .Xff//  %%%8],\%N(    ONQNQNQNQNQNQN$PvSzuNuN  NDDD  ONDONDD2IN HsFJ.;NN0NKSDS\NSN DuNuNDNS :  STANDARDS COMMITTEE CHAMBERS COMPLAINTS HANDLING CONSULTATION PAPER SEPTEMBER 2007 Introduction In 2004, the Bar Council asked a working group chaired by Sue Carr QC to undertake a detailed review of how Chambers dealt with complaints that they received from their clients. The Groups terms of reference were to investigate the effectiveness of current complaints handling by Chambers and, if appropriate, to make recommendations to develop the current arrangements. The Working Group commissioned Debora Price, a research consultant, to carry out a detailed and independent review into the way that Chambers handled complaints. Questionnaires were sent to all sets of Chambers and sole practitioners to gather information on complaints handling and the different approaches to it. In summary, the Group found that: Contrary to paragraph 403.2(d)(ii) of the Code of Conduct, more than 20% of Chambers had no written procedures for complaint handling, and half of those were not presently seeking to implement such procedures; Two thirds of Chambers had a policy not to deal directly with lay clients who seek to raise complaints; It was rare that a complainant was informed of Bar Council complaints procedures when making a complaint to Chambers (the survey was undertaken before the Bar Standards Board was established. At the time of the survey, the Bar Council had responsibility for complaints handling); There was scope for increasing the awareness of the benefits of active management of informal and formal complaints. It was noted that a substantial minority of Chambers made use of the information collected during formal complaints to improve practices within, and the service offered by, Chambers; and further, the existence of a formal written complaints procedure was associated with a much shorter average time for resolution of complaints; There was evidence to suggest that consideration should be given to the development of a separate approach to complaint handling by sole practitioners; A significant number of clients were unaware of the fact that they can complain in the first instance directly to their barristers Chambers rather than to the Bar Council; Some sets of Chambers did not have, or chose not to make known to their clients the existence of, a formal complaints procedure. A copy of the Groups full report can be found on the Boards website at  HYPERLINK "http://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk" www.barstandardsboard.org.uk. Based on this research, the Group proposed a package of amendments to the current arrangements. The Group reported its findings at the end of 2005 to the Bar Council who remitted it to the Bar Standards Board to take forward. The Standards Committee of the Board was asked to consider the Groups recommendations and to report to the Board. Based on the Standards Committees deliberations, the Board approved in principle at its meeting in June 2007, recommendations that it considers will improve the effectiveness of Chambers complaints handling. Before implementing these recommendations, the Standards Committee wishes to consult on the practical application of the proposed measures. In this paper, the Committee outlines the measures and invites comments and supporting evidence on whether they will cause any particular administrative problems in their compliance by Chambers. The Board is satisfied that there is strong evidence suggesting that existing arrangements and requirements are inadequate. It considers that, although there have been improvements in complaints handling in recent years, further improvements are needed to ensure that all Chambers and sole practitioners have a complaints procedure which is readily accessible to clients, including lay clients, that the procedure is effective, that barristers and staff are trained in operating it and that lessons are learnt from complaints. It believes that the framework proposed is appropriate for achieving these objectives and that the proposed requirements in the Code of Conduct should be mandatory for Chambers. We wish to consult however about whether: There are better or more efficient ways of achieving these objectives; There is sufficient time for Chambers to implement the proposals; and There are any major obstacles in the way of Chambers implementing them. Responses to this Consultation Paper A list of those to whom this consultation paper is being sent is attached at Annex 1. This list is not meant to be exclusive. Responses are welcomed from anyone who has evidence or views about the questions raised in this paper. The Committee will summarise the responses in publishing its decisions following this review. It will also publish responses on its website. If you do not wish your reply to be published, please make that clear when you reply to us. Responses should arrive no later than 1st December 2007 and should be sent to Toby Frost, Bar Standards Board, 289-293 High Holborn, London WC1V 7HZ ( HYPERLINK "mailto:Tfrost@BarStandardsBoard.org.uk" Tfrost@BarStandardsBoard.org.uk). Code of Conduct requirements It is helpful first to set out the requirements laid down in the Code of Conduct in respect of complaints handling. The Code requires all self-employed barristers to have and to comply with an appropriate written complaints procedure and to make copies of the procedure available to a client on request. There is an obligation upon the Head of Chambers to ensure that members of Chambers deal with complaints in accordance with that procedure. Chambers and individual members of Chambers Where this paper refers to the requirement on Chambers in respect of complaints handling, it does so on the assumption (which is supported from the evidence collected by the Carr Working Group) that Chambers will produce a general complaints handling procedure rather than leaving it for each member of Chambers to develop their own individual procedure in order to ensure compliance with the Code. Sole Practitioners Whilst this paper refers to Chambers complaints handling, the updates in the procedures apply equally to sole practitioners. Responses to the consultation paper questions on whether the proposed new arrangements are practicable for sole practitioners would therefore be welcome. The proposed new guidance (see paragraph 23 below) includes a separate model procedure for sole practitioners. Proposed amendments to the existing arrangements The Board has approved a package of measures to update the current procedures. These changes strengthen the requirements placed on Chambers in dealing with complaints received, clearly define those requirements, provide training to Chambers on how effectively to handle complaints and establish a process to monitor Chambers compliance. The features of this package are: A mandatory complaints protocol with which all Chambers must comply; Amended guidance and advice on complying with the protocol; The promotion of training in complaints handling. Mandatory Complaints Protocol A mandatory complaints protocol will be established, with which all Chambers must comply. This will be enforced by incorporation into the Code of Conduct as an annex (Annexe S). The protocol will set out the mandatory minimum requirements for the complaints handling procedures to be adopted by Chambers. The terms of the protocol are based on best practice principles identified from responses to the research conducted into current arrangements on complaints handling. The new protocol is attached to this paper at Annex 2. The mandatory requirements include: Providing clients with detailed information about the complaints handling procedures adopted by Chambers; Providing complainants with details of who will investigate the complaint and how the procedure will work; A requirement to keep a record of all complaints; The right of the lay client to complain directly to Chambers. The Board believes that introducing such a protocol and requiring Chambers to adopt it within their own procedures will focus Chambers minds on the key aspects of complaints handling, will encourage better communication with complainants and will ensure that better records are retained of complaints received so that trends and training needs are more easily identified. Q1 Will the implementation of the protocol create any insurmountable difficulties in its practical application? Q2 If yes, what amendments should be made to the protocol to address these difficulties? Amendment to the Code An amendment to the Code is required to ensure that Chambers have and use a complaints procedure in line with the obligatory protocol. The amendments (underlined) are as follows. Paragraph 403.2 A self-employed barrister must (d) must deal with all complaints made to him/her promptly, courteously and in a manner which addresses the issues raised; and must have and comply with an effective appropriate written complaints procedure, and make copies of the procedure available to a client on request meet all the requirements set out in Annexe S to the Code: Q3 Do you have any comments on the Code amendment? Amendments to the Guidance and Model Procedures The Standards Committee has decided that the guidance and model procedures on Chambers complaints handling which were first issued in 2001 require updating to reflect the requirements in the mandatory protocol and to provide more precise information as to when Chambers complaints details should be provided to clients and how the complaint should be handled. A copy of the revised guidance is attached to this paper at Annex 3. Q5 Are there any practical difficulties in following the revised guidance? Q6 Are there any amendments to the guidance or model procedures that you believe need to be made? Training on Complaints Handling To complement the mandatory protocol and the guidance, the Board has decided to introduce a training course for Chambers on complaints handling. It is intended that the training course will carry CPD points. The course will not, at this stage, be compulsory but all Chambers will be strongly encouraged to send at least one barrister member of Chambers and one clerk/practice manager on the training. It is essential that Chambers staff and barristers are familiar with the complaints procedure and that all those involved in their operation are adequate to the task. 25. The Board is considering how compliance with the Code of Conduct by Chambers should be monitored. Monitoring will include the requirements for complaints handling by Chambers. The training course will be designed to assist Chambers compliance in this regard. 26. The training will cover: What is a complaint The Code of Conduct requirements The mandatory protocol Best practice principles for dealing with complaints Operating an effective complaints procedure, including timescales, investigation and dealing with lay clients Analysis of the operation of the complaints system - identifying trends and training needs from complaints received Compensation Record keeping Monitoring and auditing by the Bar Standards Board Prevention and risk analysis The Bar Standards Boards complaints procedure Q7 Do you agree with the proposed content of the training? Q8 What should be included or removed? Q9 Should it be compulsory for at least one member of every set of Chambers to have been on the training course? Implementation of the Recommendations 27. Once responses to the consultation paper have been considered and the procedures adapted accordingly, the Board will decide on the new arrangements. 28. It is proposed that the arrangements will come into effect on 1st April 2008, so as to enable a training course to be developed and to allow Chambers time to implement these proposals. The majority of Chambers will already have Chambers complaints procedures to a greater or lesser extent, so any revision to their existing arrangements should not be too onerous. Q10 Is this timescale realistic for Chambers to implement?  Paragraph 403.2(d)(ii)  Paragraph 404.2(g)     <=>?RSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijkl{|}~ A B @ A c d 5 6 7 wxyhOJQJ^JmH sH  hCJhCJOJQJ^JhhOJQJ^JS<=>?RSTUVWXYZ[$a$ $^`a$$a$^[\]^_`abcdefghijkl{|}~ 80^8`0h`h$a$$a$A B @ A c d 6 7 xyAB & F ^ ^` & F  ^h^h & F 0`0@ABXYEF@A&'8:  !jhOJQJU^JhH*OJQJ^Jh>*OJQJ^Jh0JOJQJ^J!jhOJQJU^JjhOJQJU^JhhOJQJ^J?XYEF@A&'$a$$a$ 80^8`0 & F & F 0`0 80^8`0      !"#$a$     !"#$%&'(EFuv34 !_!`!!!"###M########$%%%%%&&&h>*OJQJ^Jh5OJQJ\^J#jh0JCJOJQJU^JhOJQJ^JhL#$%&'(EF34_!`!!!## 80^8`0$h`ha$h^h & F 0`0$a$$a$#M########%%&&G&{&|&&&''Y'Z'['(( 8h^8`h & F & F 0`0 80^8`0 & F &G&{&|&&&'''Y'Z'['((()A)B))))))*h*i*y*z*********+++ +9+B+q+++++, ,!,",R,S,--...P.Q....../h6]h>*OJQJ^Jh67OJQJ]^Jh6>*OJQJ]^Jh5OJQJ\^JhhOJQJ^Jh6OJQJ]^JA(A)B))))))h*i*y*z******+++++ ,!, 80^8`0 & F 80^8`0 & F 0`0 80^8`0 80^8`0!,",R,S,..P.Q......112222:2;2O2p22 & F$a$h^h$a$ 80^8`0 & F 0`0 80^8`0/011122222:2;2O2p2223-333334 4<4=4>4z4{444555<5=5556667H7I7777777777777777777777μjhUhCJOJQJ^J#jh0JCJOJQJU^JhCJOJQJ^JhH*OJQJ^Jh5OJQJ\^JhhOJQJ^J@22-33333 4<4=4>4z4{44455<5=555H7I7777 80^8`0 80^8`0 80^8`0 & F7777777777777 ,1h. A!"#$% DyK www.barstandardsboard.org.ukyK Jhttp://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/DyK  Tfrost@BarStandardsBoard.org.ukyK Nmailto:Tfrost@BarStandardsBoard.org.ukw666666666vvvvvvvvv666666>6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666p62&6FVfv2(&6FVfv&6FVfv&6FVfv&6FVfv&6FVfv&6FVfv8XV~ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@6666_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH :@:  Heading 1$@&5\J@J  Heading 2$@&^`5\N@N  Heading 3$h@&^h5OJQJ\^J^@^  Heading 4$@&^"56OJQJW#붦\]^JT@T  Heading 5$$h@&^ha$5OJQJ\^JL@L  Heading 6$$@&a$5OJQJ\^JDA D Default Paragraph FontViV 0 Table Normal :V 44 la (k ( 0No List 6U@6  Hyperlink >*B*ph@&@@ Footnote ReferenceH*VC@V Body Text Indent h^h5OJQJ\^JbR@"b Body Text Indent 2$80^8`0a$ OJQJ^J4B@24  Body Text6]>@B>  Footnote TextCJaJPK![Content_Types].xmlN0EH-J@%ǎǢ|ș$زULTB l,3;rØJB+$G]7O٭VGRU1a$N% ʣꂣKЛjVkUDRKQj/dR*SxMPsʧJ5$4vq^WCʽ D{>̳`3REB=꽻Ut Qy@֐\.X7<:+& 0h @>nƭBVqu ѡ{5kP?O&Cנ Aw0kPo۵(h[5($=CVs]mY2zw`nKDC]j%KXK 'P@$I=Y%C%gx'$!V(ekڤք'Qt!x7xbJ7 o߼W_y|nʒ;Fido/_1z/L?>o_;9:33`=—S,FĔ觑@)R8elmEv|!ո/,Ә%qh|'1:`ij.̳u'k CZ^WcK0'E8S߱sˮdΙ`K}A"NșM1I/AeހQתGF@A~eh-QR9C 5 ~d"9 0exp<^!͸~J7䒜t L䈝c\)Ic8E&]Sf~@Aw?'r3Ȱ&2@7k}̬naWJ}N1XGVh`L%Z`=`VKb*X=z%"sI<&n| .qc:?7/N<Z*`]u-]e|aѸ¾|mH{m3CԚ .ÕnAr)[;-ݑ$$`:Ʊ>NVl%kv:Ns _OuCX=mO4m's߸d|0n;pt2e}:zOrgI( 'B='8\L`"Ǚ 4F+8JI$rՑVLvVxNN";fVYx-,JfV<+k>hP!aLfh:HHX WQXt,:JU{,Z BpB)sֻڙӇiE4(=U\.O. +x"aMB[F7x"ytѫиK-zz>F>75eo5C9Z%c7ܼ%6M2ˊ 9B" N "1(IzZ~>Yr]H+9pd\4n(Kg\V$=]B,lוDA=eX)Ly5ot e㈮bW3gp : j$/g*QjZTa!e9#i5*j5ö fE`514g{7vnO(^ ,j~V9;kvv"adV݊oTAn7jah+y^@ARhW.GMuO "/e5[s󿬅`Z'WfPt~f}kA'0z|>ܙ|Uw{@՘tAm'`4T֠2j ۣhvWwA9 ZNU+Awvhv36V`^PK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 0_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!g theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] u/.1/X  &/7 #&)[##(!,277!"$%'(*+ /XX8@0(  B S  ?/// - //3333 Kca~PK8WC (%yd-X4frVH7nLIk;,a{Yk:>JXfCPFhOE4QR&#QC.T~^uWY uW%P<i"q6mʴ?unlN q[| ^`o(.^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.)^`o(.^`.h $ $ ^$ `OJQJo(@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L. ^`OJQJo(^`.pp^p`.@ @ ^@ `.^`.^`.^`.^`.PP^P`. ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(o pp^p`OJQJo( @ @ ^@ `OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o PP^P`OJQJo(h88^8`.h^`.h L ^ `L.h  ^ `.hxx^x`.hHLH^H`L.h^`.h^`.hL^`L.^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.808^8`0o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L. ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o pp^p`OJQJo( @ @ ^@ `OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o PP^P`OJQJo(^`o()0^`0o(()pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.6^`OJPJQJ^Jo(- tt^t`OJQJo(o DD^D`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( TT^T`OJQJo(o $$^$`OJQJo(^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.^`.^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L. ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o pp^p`OJQJo( @ @ ^@ `OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o PP^P`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh   ^ `OJQJo(h xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh   ^ `OJQJo(h xx^x`OJQJo(h HH^H`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h ^`OJQJo(h pp^p`OJQJo(oh @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h PP^P`OJQJo(oh   ^ `OJQJo(88^8`.^`. L ^ `L.  ^ `.xx^x`OJPJQJ^Jo(-d0d^d`0o(()^`.^`.L^`L. ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o pp^p`OJQJo( @ @ ^@ `OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o PP^P`OJQJo(4Yk:>P<iXfC#QhOH74Q ca~q6myd-?uC.T q[|k;C (%WuW8W 0                                                      p                                                                                                             D{X             9://@/@UnknownG*Ax Times New Roman5Symbol3. *Cx ArialC.,{ @Calibri Light7.@Calibri?= *Cx Courier New;WingdingsACambria Math"hqygqygn(Vn(V!20m/m/Kq@P  $P9:2!xx STANDARDS COMMITTEEKKramoAndrew Lamberti\               Oh+'0  < H T`hpxSTANDARDS COMMITTEEKKramoNormalAndrew Lamberti2Microsoft Office Word@@s@sn(՜.+,D՜.+,@ hp|  Vm/ STANDARDS COMMITTEE TitleP 8@ _PID_HLINKSA "E'mailto:Tfrost@BarStandardsBoard.org.ukB%http://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/  !"#$%&'()*+,./012346789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_abcdefgijklmnorRoot Entry F IstData -1Table5LTWordDocument.XSummaryInformation(`DocumentSummaryInformation8hCompObjr  F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q