SIF director Elizabeth Mullins has pointed out the main costs benefit of mutuality: there is no need for SIF to make a profit (The Lawyer, 25 August). By the same reasoning, I should take my business away from the qualified surgeon and allow my wife to extract my appendix.
Can we give a decent burial to this company which is hundreds of millions of pounds in the red? If, after years of pouring other people's money down the drain, the directors do not draw appropriate conclusions, are they open to criminal proceedings for wrongful trading? No, because the "benefits" of mutuality mean this unholy shambles is underwritten by us mug punters – solicitors.
We have paid for Law Society ad campaigns designed to convince the public to use solicitors' skills rather than handle legal matters themselves. Meanwhile, the Law Society has decided that insurance is perfectly amenable to amateur dabbling. (I will leave aside the Law Society's apparent view that anyone can write computer software, one of its other failed projects. After all, the losses from that fiasco failed even to reach double figures of millions of pounds.)
Now the president and other Law Society "oligarchs" say we should deal with SIF's mess by telling our clients they will meet the costs. Needless to say, this lame marketing has come to the notice of the press. What a gift to licensed conveyancers!
It is time the Law Society slashed its bloated bureaucracy, got rid of SIF and all other outside activities and stuck to the only business its members can claim to be qualified for – governing and representing the profession.
MA Zuckerman, Benson Mazure & Co