I am a sole practitioner of Asian origin specialising in immigration who has just yesterday had a monitoring visit from the SRA. Prior to the visit I was extremely concerned at the reports I had read and things that had been said. So worried infact that I had looked at the possibility of registering with OISC. I knew my systems were not perfect and as reports such as the one from Lord Ouseley suggested I was being targeted with sinister intent, I had virtually resigned myself to have to look for other options.

However, the visit itself was totally different experience. The Adviser was a breath of fresh air. She competently and concisely identified the areas I need to work on and will confirm this in a report. As long as I attend to the corrective work identified and maintain my systems there will be no issue. I am very confident I can deal with these issues and, frankly speaking, if I cannot then I should not be in practice anyway.

I think some out there need to stop playing the race card to cover their own inadequacies and look instead to get their own houses in order. As a sole practitioner you are isolated. It is difficult to know where to turn to for help so deficiencies in systems and procedure just fester until they manifest themselves by culminating into a serious complaint or claim.

Here, the adviser pinpointed the areas I knew I had to work on but, logistically speaking, did not know how. It was the impetus I needed. I was also informed that I could revert to her for guidance at point in the future if need be.

We have never had this facility before and this service needs to be treated with the respect it deserves. Why would I have been treated in this manner if I was being targeted? The SRA are designing these visits so that they assist in a constructive manner that is to the benefit of all.

SRA institutionally racist?

Rubbish.

Well done to The Lawyer for covering this topic by getting the views of Ethnic Lawyer Society's. Can't say the same for the Law Scoiety Gazette. Can you believe instead of giving these Society's an opportunity to respond, instead they featured the comments of an ex-Law Society President who argued that the SRA can't be accussed of racism! - PLEASE! - maybe they should have interviewed Kamlesh Bahl, the ex who bravely stood up to this sort of behaviour.

BME Solicitors are no longer going to keep quiet about the racism. We are entering a new era. The irony is they pay the Law Society membership fees every year for thier practising certificates and what do they get? the Law Society uses that money to harrass and victimise and bully BME Solicitors to bolster thier statistics. What a sad state the profession is in (the lawless sciety) I should say.

I used to work for the SRA in its former incarnation as the OSS. The management was devious. I am not surprised at all by the conclusion reached vis a via racism. You will no doubt remember that a former Head of the Law society was able to demonstrate that she had be racially discriminated against by the organisation. Not only was it the worst employer i have worked for, but also the most dishonest.

Your approach seems to be "If I see a posting I don't agree with, I'll just undermine the author".

This is a comments column on a website, it's not a court of law / arbitral panel, no meaningful exchange would be possible here unless participants in a forum of this nature are willing to accord some degree of credibility and the benefit of the doubt to fellow posters, instead of automatically parading the usual tiresome laundry list of credibility-type arguments against people whose opinions they disageee with.

Anyway, if that's the way you want to play it:

1. What's your basis for saying that most complaints are against small firms and not City firms? Show us proof.

2. Even if they are, so what? Most potential complainants probably don't complain about City firms because they would be fighting an uphill battle against such large, powerful institutions / they are intimidated into silence.

3. Please show us evidence that "BME lawyers are concentrated in small firms". What, white lawyers don't practise in small firms?

4. Assuming you're right that "BME lawyers are concentrated in small firms", that probably proves that people like junior lawyer are indeed correct - why don't white lawyers practise in small firms? They don't bother, because City firms eagerly employ them. Why are BME lawyers concentrated in small firms? Because City firms won't take them due to their entrenched institutional racist mentality. QED.

What about it? Firstly ,that is only one person's experience, and secondly, is not even an individual we know anything about and thus is not necessarily even credible as an individual.

It hardly undermines the key point here, which is that most complaints aren't against City firm they are against small ones, and that BME lawyers are concentrated in small firms so necessarily are statistically more likely to take a hit.

Herbert Peter: what about what junior lawyer said?

The SRA as an organ of the State is picking on solicitors that deal with sensitive political issues. For many BME lawyers this may be because they deal with immigration cases. I was told by the Solicitors Assistance Scheme - at the behest of the SRA - that they were giving me the "good commercial advice" that provided I gave up my work for people with disabilities, I would be allowed to keep my reputation, what money I had left and even my (sole practitioner) business. But if I did not "then the State will discredit and bankrupt you and there is no escape".

I asked if a righteous solicitor or counsel would represent me pro bono and I was told "no, not one". My crime is exposing that Govt policy is causing the deaths of elderly people from home closures and the suicide of carers not being given enough help.

I conduct a major case next week in the teeth of SRA investigations on complaints by third parties, none of my clients having ever had an adjudicated complaint about my conduct of cases. Who guards the guardians?

People are being a little over-sensitive here.

Like a chippy adolescent Pete Herbert goes for the old cliches about "white, middle class City firms", but the only relevant word there is 'City'.

Though perhaps it is not the only reason, one undeniable reason that BME lawyers are more likely to get in trouble is that more BME lawyers work in small firms, and it is against small firms, not City firms, that the largest number of complaints are made.

Would he or anyone else be pleased if the SRA stopped investigating complaints?

Oh please Mr white lawyer with no cards to play, think yourself lucky ...they won't be coming after you...and if they do it will merely be a token gesture... They were made only to harrass and bully Asian and Black lawyers.

junior lawyer: I know all too well what you mean...unfortunately. Sigh...

Am a so-called ethnic minority in a top 10 city firm. Have I experienced racism? Too many times to talk about. Often it is subtle. It is the look in the eye, a patronising remark, general distrust. It is limiting. It is frustrating. But i could never succeed at proving it. Not when i am up against the establishment - senior lawyers. What should I do ? Report a whole bunch of lawyers at my top law firm to the SRA? What will that lead to? Me being fired probably.

It's hard enough okay for us ethnic minorities in the profession. If you are white and reading this, I will be humbled if you can even begin to understand the challenges ethnic minorities face in the office environment.

‘‘Who said that? Find out what institutional racism means and then comment.''
Well, MX and Onyango for a start.

Ah institutional racism. Well, if you're going to sling mud you might as well go for the whole profession. I admire you for it! Still, it's the twisted logic that baffles me. The SRA investigates more small solicitors firms than big ones and therefore are racist as a higher proportion of BMEs work in one than the other. It's insane.

who said that? find out what institutional racism means and then comment

You're absolutely right. Statements like 'the entire legal profession is racist' are in fact reasonable and well thought out comment and not inflammatory hyperbole at all.

And anyone who says otherwise is a Nazi.

To the chip on shoulder brigade:
1) I presume the report is based on evidence related to the usual tests for discrimination;
2) Clearly the chip-on-shoulder brigade have never done a discrimination case as they appear not to know what the tests are. Of course they could be commenting on what they think the test should be...but I don't want to sterotype the chip-on-shoulder brigade...
3)I do hope the chip-on-shoulder brigade are consistent and apply there enlightened thinking to all forms of discrimination. I like to think of them telling their wives there is no sex discrimination or harassment...or telling a person in a wheelchair that they have equal access because they can now get into the British Museum... just before she emerges from the kitchen.
4) No-one checked any boxes for the Stephen Lawrence Enquiry, you poor schmuck. Very good lawyers (mainly white) heard evidence and made recommendations based on that evidence - and in fact were often shocked when they found out what had been going on. But then evidence never was a strong point for bigots (or idiots), was it?
5) Obviously it is possible to discriminate against white lawyers on grounds of their race. Strangely you don't often hear about cases of it (though I have heard of one) despite all the chip-on-shoulder brigade constantly complaining about how unfair it all is on them...
6) When I was growing up in West london in the 60s and 70s all I heard was chip on shoulder rubbish. You only had to get jumped by a bunch of swearing Nazis calling you dirty p*ki for people to say you had a chip on your shoulder if you said there were a lot racists around. Luckily I hardly ever hear it now as most of the idiots are sensible enough to keep their mouths shut even if they do hold those views.

Of course it is as are the majority of law firms the length and breadth of England.
This must be the only reason why those from BMEs lucky enough to actually be employed by English law firms in the first place will never be allowed to progress their careers as far as their white counterparts.

Many BME Lawyers have been aware for a very long time about racism in the Legal Profession but have kept quiet for fear that it could affect their careers. Bravo to Ouseley's report for speaking up on behalf of the silent thousands, For those who have never experienced institutional racism you can nonchalantly say "race card" or "chip on the shoulder". This only belittles a real problem that should be addressed for the benefit of all in the profession.

Yes, the SRA are definitely racist, as are all the major law firms in London. One has only to look at the low level or non-existence of coloured people in these firms and institutions. In my opinion, the entire UK legal sector is racist. Will people never learn... :(

Once upon a time I seem to remember an institution called the Law Society. Maybe some of your readers will have similar recollections. Not sure if it still active or what it is supposed to do now but its splendid building on Chancery Lane does provide a very competitively priced cup of tea. Maybe, just maybe, the old institution could be given the job of looking after the interests of the members of the profession and protecting them against the SRA and or anyone who is to regulate the SRA . Radical idea but it might catch on.

I have often wondered if there was any support out there for the formation of a Solicitors Defense Union or some such thing owned and operated by solicitors for the benefit and protection of solicitors. Is there ?? If you don’t like the name maybe we could call it the New Law Society . We shall see.

I am white and run a small solicitors practice. I was told that my practice was the subject of a SRA monitoring visit on an entirely random basis.
Later I read that the SRA have targeted small practices. Have I misunderstood the meaning of random?

Are there any comparative statistics between SRA investigations into small BME firms and SRA investigations into small non-BME? If the answer is just that small firms get a higher level of scrutiny (regardless of race) because of a perception that there are greater risks at this end of the market and/or that the stats for SRA investigations track those for complaints from the public, then that doesn't sound terribly racist to me. The size of firm which BME lawyers (or indeed any other lawyers) choose to work is a matter for the lawyers themselves not the SRA.

MX-an evenly balanced view. A chip on both shoulders.
You should apply for a place on the board of the Society of Black Lawyers, they'd love you for that.

Can't possibly be because of tinpot little law firms cocking up can it? Nope - must be racism...

Where have you been, you innocents? The entire, white-dominated English legal establishment is racist - in that sense, it's perfectly representative of white English society, and no amount of regulation will ever change that.

There are just far too many convenient ways for racists to discriminate against minorities while hiding such discrimination behind the veil of some ostensibly legitimate pretext.

Unless there are any claims that the firms were facing trumped up charges, perhaps the thought police should wind their necks in.

"The finding that there are approximately some 1,700 complaints against small firms or sole practitioners is very worrying, because a high proportion of BME solicitors are concentrated in this category," said Weekes.

How is this relevant at all? Are we not investigating these complaints then? I would like the chairman of the Society for White Solicitors to launch an investigation into how much time and money are wasted by racial equality groups trying to justify their own existence.

Here we go again. It's the "racism industry bingo" game............... "Stephen Lawrence" CHECK "Insitutional racism" CHECK "Equality and diversity" CHECK "Stereotype" CHECK "not learnt the lessons"........ BINGO!! Maybe I should set up a "Society of White Lawyers" and see how long I keep my job.