This letter was published in the Straits Times forum page on 24 May 2003, in response to the letter from the President of the Consumer Association of Singapore on ‘How do fee guidelines protect lawyers’ clients?’ (ST, 10 May 2003).

The Law Society appreciates Mr Yeo’s concern that consumers should get the lowest possible price. But it would be foolhardy to think that the same quality of service will be given by any service provider regardless of price. The Law Society can only enforce minimum professional standards after the event, and cannot be by the consumer’s side to ensure that a cut-price deal does not mean cut-price standards.

The other issue of concern raised by Mr Yeo was the Law Society’s rules of conduct for lawyers when they accept referral work from third parties such as banks. Our rules, again contrary to CASE’s perception, work to protect the consumer.

Our referral rules require a lawyer to act as an independent professional adviser, always in his client’s best interest and never in any partial manner towards a bank or other referror of work. A key professional standard is independence and freedom from conflict of interest. The Law Society does not accept that it is in consumers’ interests for this standard to be compromised in a quest for cheaper services.

The Law Society invites CASE to enter into a dialogue with it so that CASE can better understand how consumers’ interests are protected by the legal profession.

Arfat Selvam
President
The Law Society of Singapore