Hi Louis
They used to limit intake but this was decided to be anti-competitive a few years ago.
So now there is a vast oversupply.
You are right about the economy going in cycles, but we will need one gigantic economic boom to employ all the solicitors we have.
It's probably no harm. I suspect that we have too many solicitors and barristers and there needs to be a massive rationalisation of the legal profession.
In trying to recover an €8k debt recently, I had to have a solicitor and a barrister. I have successfully got €150k compensation from the Financial Services Ombudsman without any legal assistance. I have represented myself in front of the Labour Relations Commission. But the system is too complex for chasing a commercial debt. It needs to be simplified and we will need even fewer solicitors.
What I think you're really saying is that the limit for the District Court should be raised. Your claim exceeded €6,300 odd allowed in the District Court and you were required to be represented at Circuit Court level or above, instead of being able to take the case yourself.
It doesn't logically follow that more solicitors is a bad thing.
What an oversupply should do is lower the price of doing the job as competition for business kicks in.
However the baseline costs for doing business as a solicitor are still too high, based on the comments posted above referring to €40,000. That's an astonishing figure, and its either a massive over-charging based on occassional Michael Lynn-type occurrences or there are more solicitors being sued routinely than is being reported in the Press.
Likewise our property registration process should be changed so that people can buy and sell their property without legal assistance, if they want to.
Brendan
As another poster has noted, you personally might be competent to represent yourself in front of a quasi-legal or legal forum. Most people are not.
You have a logical mind, well sorted in terms of logical argument and presentation of facts, honed by years of moderation here. Most people do not.
You may have so much experience in terms of conveyancing that you will not make the kind of errors that even solicitors fall prey to. I am not so self-assured.
I say this as somone who has certified hundreds of apartments over the years, sworn many Declarations of Identity, marked up and signed off on many Title and Registry Maps.
I'm the one who checks that the folio names and numbers cited in the Declarations are correctly called up just before they are signed and sealed.
I am relatively competent at what I do - or, at least, I have yet to have a sworn document returned by any solicitor for correction.
I have often discovered and corrected typos and transpositional errors in citing folios, but I am not competent to perform an in-depth check on old title documents, for example.
I would certainly want at least a year or two working in a solicitor's office before I was let near a detailed search for surviving relatives, for example.
That's just my opinion, but I think you'll find that most qualified professionals will share it, whatever profession they are in.
This kind of attitude is not limited to the professions or professional protectionism.
Anyone who's learnt a skill or a trade knows the pitfalls and mistakes made on the way.
Its the basic dictum of the least skilled tradesman to the most bright-eyed general operative on the building site:
"Stick to what you're good at".
FWIW
ONQ.