Scottish Legal Complaints Commission Reviews 

Plse note terrible people that work at "commission" there only to protect the legal profession n should be renamed THE SCOTTISH LEGAL PROTECTION COMMISION. I had 5 perfectly clear n documented complaints against MacKenzie Law in Inverness. His appalling lies to excuse his failures cost me additional money doubling my costs from £3000 to £6700. I produced concrete evidence of failures much of it in writing. Forever to go through their complaints process to try to get you to arbitration however I was so disgusted with his poor work I didn’t want to go that route. One of the complaints he had claimed was he had won cases which had changed my mind to continue with the process as I decided to stop. Now the totally immoral people at the SLCC tried desperately to stop me on two complaints. I am not wealthy; I had to go route of the Court of Sessions which is a horrendous process n once again deliberately set up to favour the legal profession. I had tried 10 law firms initially to help, Not one would assist, Did I say it was a complainant against one of their immoral colleagues. The SLCC have their own immoral law firm on call, n waited until I had filled in the necessary forms then conceded my complaints should be included. How deluded was I as they had no intention of being impartial, so it didn’t matter to them to include it. Finally, after nearly 2 years it goes to an "Inspector Smith" or should I say laughably “Inspector Clouseau”. His "investigation report" was literally taking the immoral lawyer replies to my complaint with NO actual evidence provided by him just his "Word". One of my major arguments was he claimed that he had called my mobile, I offered to show the SLCC along with my email account, he claimed to have sent me an email which I did not receive. If I had I would have saved £3700 pounds as I would have taken the deal knowing if I didn’t the other side would continue to charge. On taking up this immoral law firm MacKenzie Law, you must fill out a form with your details one of them, which phone was to be used. I clearly indicated my Land Line as it had an answer phone, and my mobile had connection problems at times. I asked a simple question to the SLCC as to why he didn’t use a registered letter which thousands of lawyers up and down the country use, a must for the Court of Sessions you must send by registered mail documents to the other side and provide a receipt proof of sending. However, for the SLCC that didn’t matter as they just took his word without actual evidence of which I had plenty from the immoral lawyer at MacKenzie Law emails by him and my own. Once they denied all of me 5 complaints (not one justified according to them) my last option was to go to jokingly called the Determination Committee. I of course put me rebuttal in to be reviewed by the DC. Shortly afterwards I was advised that ALL 5 of my complaints were denied. Incensed I decided that surely a Judge would reverse this decision. Ah wait the legal Mafia make it purely about the legal process n is clear that it is set up that you really need a lawyer to handle this. Stubborn as I am I went ahead, their immoral solicitors had to come back to me as SLCC had not put forward my rebuttal of the SLCC denial. I thought this was why the SLCC "Inspector Kojak Smith" was so arrogant to put in his letter to me that he was 90% upheld. They claimed it was a mistake, but I truly believe that most people would then give up after the determination had denied the complaints. HOW MANY PEOPLE JUST GAVE UP AFTER SLCC DIDNT ADD IN ANY OF THEIR REBUTTALS N THE COURTS N JUDGES LIKE TYRE DONT GIVE A DAMN. Now at this point I wasn’t ready to give up so started the process n once again went through the horrendous process of leave to appeal. Finally, it goes to an immoral Judge Tyre who agrees with everything the SLCC said as I’ve discovered they are more concerned about their annual general levy fee which of course comes out of their pocket, so they are desperate for the SLCC to recoup any potential legal fees. I always imagined Judges were unbiased obviously not when it comes to their filthy money. One further interesting point of this immoral Judge Tyre claimed that one of my service complaints was time barred. It was in my complaint from the start and the SLCC was under obligation to pass this to the Scottish Legal Society as they deal with lawyers who overstate their abilities and guess what, they did not. The upshot is unless you have a video or pictures the SLCC coverup for immoral lawyers and the Judges support them to try and keep their filthy money in their pockets. Lastly after doing a deep dive in trying to find out how many Pro Se (Self Appearance) have been won in the Court of Session NONE The Judiciary and Legal profession are as corrupt as any Mafia.

Was very happy with full investigation. Especially big thank you to Mr Patrick Howwarth, lovely man ,who was very keen to help us ,and covered every aspect

Nothing much to say that’s not been said, a waste of time and has made my situation worse as the company I have to deal with are worse than before. They obvious didn’t read all my paperwork they were never going to make a difference, honestly I would not bother.

Four years later - Still supporting a fraudulent lawyer. As time goes by one learns more in regard to the practioner involved and the SLCC will not reopen a case where fraud with damming evidence of missing estate funds which go unaccounted , who cares ? It's not their relative that lost £100,000 from a fraudulent lawyer.

SLCC legal practioners breached their professional duties.
A severe failure to comply with ethical standards.
No safeguarding the interest of justice under the legal profession and legal aid Scotland Act 2007
Misconduct- refusal to act upon clear evidence of criminality.
Chose to ignore when presented with clear criminality
Response - (we don't report possible criminal acts to police)
Failure to comply with ethical standards.
Refusal to properly conduct an investigation.
Using the "blended technique " which apparently is against their rules.
Blatant avoidance of responsibility.
And this is the SLCC never mind the practitioner that the complaint was against.
To use the "cut and paste reply " ,shows the system is a failure in many ways. How can this entity survive ? Every review notes the exact same negativity when dealing with them ,clearly this gatekeepers reviews show exactly why the practitioners thumb their nose at the public. Get a small fine and a slap on the hand and this is the second time this fraudulent lawyer has has been caught. It just continues throughout the months and throughout the years and the government allows this operation to continue their success rate.... public 1%, practioners 99% . If you believe they will help you, then more fool you.

The intense burning passionate hatred I have for this commission is too vitriolic to be accepted by trust pilot. So, while I cannot express my real hatred for this hellhole of a place, I would still like to say something so their rating remains, deservedly, very low.

Like the repeated complaints over and over again from almost all reviewers, the commission celebrates the fact they are completely unaccountable. No one who works there is able to hold each other to account. All complaints are done in-house. No doubt these worthless individuals deal with each other's complaints, and favours are held amongst work colleagues and friends.

While I don't want to ask the SLCC for anything, I would NOT appreciate a response. Your responses are not genuine. They are a cut a paste to anything a reviewer says. The responses are only designed to make yourself try to look good but no one believes it. The concern should be when someone makes a complaint, seeking help, and not with an online review. There's an arrogance the responses have in that if one is happy it's assumed I/ we cannot understand or accept a decision.

It's a deeply flawed set up that should be abolished, immediately. The scll is no good to anyone and offers no help to anyone. I'd be surprised if one single member of the public has ever been helped in the scll history. The scll are very abusive to the public, because they cannot hold each other to account, as all complaints are dealt with internally.

The only people it helps is its employees who are grossly overpaid, immoral, unaccountable and lack any kind of decent character, with very little intellect.

Absolute shocking !!

Remember the name folks, Scott Smith
Scott.smith@scottishlegalcomplaints

Dont touch this chap with a bargepole, hes a dangerous individual , be warned

I complained about a corrupt lawyer who works for Morton Fraser Macroberts in Glasgow and Edinburgh, Leon Breakey is his name is, one of the worst individuals i have came across, wanted a massive job at the start from me , and i didnt think nhe was up for it and wow i was so right, after January 2022 he was clueless, he was lost , job was far too big for him, as i was telling him to please hurry up , he didnt like it as i asekd a question, he downed tools in March 2025 as he couldnt cope with an old woman who owes me a debt of 19k , never worked or heard from him for a year and wanted an extra £ 8000 from me, for what ?? doing nothing ?? he is desperate for money it seems as rumours are saying their going to go bust soon, which i am not paying as a lawyer is supposed to interact with their client, ask the client questions on what they should do next, but Breakey never , he ran on and done his own thing, when he wanted too, clicking away his watch and ramping up the account doing nothing too for his client, so i reported him to SLCC and unfortunately for me i got this chap scott smith, bellend of a chap, arrogant and said i cant work or help me as he has an alliance to mr brekey through his celtic connections , my god , what about that folks !!

Wouldnt be surprised if hes dating him in my opinion.

2026 were in and someone who is supposed to be in the middle as an ombudsmen to do their jobs tells me that !! i couldnt believe it!!!

This chap needs to be removed from this job, he is not the person for it and should never be in a position like that either, lacked manners

As you can tell by the reviews its clearly evident that they don't listen to the "Common Man". Wish I had never wasted my time contacting them. Was unhelpful and certainly not on my side and stuck up for a corrupt Legal firm!!

Off point and out of context findings!
Who funds this shambles of a group?
My really sensitive experience from a so called professional solicitor was reported to these incompetents. They then found in favour of a solicitor on grounds of fabricated reasoning that even I never had a clue about! Nothing that I had reported was addressed!?? No meetings nothing. Fabricated reasoning was answered to me to which I have no clue about as was not what I reported to them! It was like this was someone elses case answered to me as mine! I contacted them about this and now advised by Sheena of SLCC that I will have to now proceed to the courts as there is no appeals process! Is this a joke? They have not even addressed my complaint points!?? Absolute shambles of a mediatory group! Very convenient lazy handled incompetent experience by them!

The SLCC ARE NOT the impartial independent organisation that they claim to be.
How can they be , when the SLCC is funded by levies from lawyer's firms.
Is that not a major conflict of interest ?
My experience clearly showed that the whole complaint process is a sham and the organisation is , in my opinion, both protectionist and incompetent .
Not fit for purpose and as one reviewer said
":A complete waste of my time "
I would actually go as far to say the behaviour of the SLCC in dealing with my complaint was downright dishonest as the SLCC , did not rule against a company that STOLE money
from my mother's estate by charging for work either not carried out or charging a second time for work already carried out by my family lawyer ( who worked for MHD Law as a partner before GILSON GRAY bought his practice.)
I doubt if anyone from SLCC will read this review but if by some remote chance someone does...you guys and gals should take a good long hard look at yourselves.
When my lawyer asked for evidence / reasons for the charging he was told that would not be allowed , as that was not part of the process
Transparency ? What a bloody joke.
Maybe someone from SLCC will contact me after my damning review !
I would like them to but I very much doubt that will ever happen
Craig Forster ( severely pissed off ex pat now living in Canada)

The SLCC could not have made this process any more obstructive. It took months for them to respond to tell me that the overcharging for work not done (which formed the bulk of the complaint) would not be looked at and I would need to pay to have this independently reviewed - what would be the point in incurring more expense to myself? I was then asked to supply dates and info which I had provided at the start. By the time they eventually responded, I had forgotten and had to go through all my paperwork and emails again to repeat the details I had already supplied to them. There then followed more requests to confirm the same details yet again (same experience with solicitor). I confirmed the same info on at least 4 occasions (latterly requesting a read receipt before I got a response). When I queried why the complaint was being protracted, I was blamed for causing a delay because the last 3 repetitive emails asking me to confirm the details yet again or my complaint would be closed had gone into my spam folder. I'm not sure how many times I need to confirm that I want to complain - presumably until I give up and go away. I complained approx 8 months ago and it still has not been raised with the solicitor. This obstructive treatment has left me with no confidence that there will be any independent investigation at all. It is very clear to me that solicitors can provide a poor service and charge through the nose for it with no recourse whatsoever. What a farce.

I had a great experience I was happy with outcome And the handling of my case

Very impressed by the outcome I received after the SLCC took on my complaint against my solicitor. They ensured I received compensation for the bad performance of my solicitor.

I had a very swift and very productive experience with the SLCC amd it was Patrick that I dealt with amd my word he was so helpful and extremely professional and did exactly what he had to do with ease. No messing with this man.

I’m very very grateful and I will have to contact him again in due hours over the next week or two.

I found myself in a difficult work situation, I sought legal advice, when I got it, it was confusing, insulting, incorrect, financially costly, reputationally damaging and angry, then he resigned after insulting me some more, so I made a complaint hoping to understand how such awful service could be acceptable and protect others from the same, and I was told my complaint had no merit. no explanation. nothing. just "go away", patronising and insulting. But typical, I shouldn't have expected anything else. Useless getting legal help. They'll just insult you, charge you a ton of cash, then make your situation worse, talk to the people you have difficulty with behind your back, take their side, then swear at you and resign, and all that is completely fine when you complain about it. Pointless, pathetic, and even more damaging. I wish I'd never bothered.

Great help with my complaint about a solicitor in Dunbar . Couldnt be more helpfull. Received a 4 fig settlement due to their incompetance in dealing with a sale .

Poor experience

SLCC just took several months to get back and say they cannot ask practitioner to amend anything even the most obvious mistakes. I recommend approach a court straightforward. This service is a waste of time.

After spending many hours preparing and sending in my case, I was offered mediation. The mediation was going well and the lawyer was clearing up a lot of unanswered questions. Then the mediator interrupted to say that I had to decide how much compensation I wanted and that I was only entitled to emotional compensation. I never found out why she thought this and I was not allowed to finish the mediation. Afterwards I had to wait nearly 6 months only to find out that I was receiving a pittance as compensation. I felt so upset that I couldn't read the information sent me from the Investigator. I accepted the measly compensation but told the Investigator that I did not agree with his decision but didn't want to pursue the complaint any longer. Like the other viewers here I feel that this system is corrupt and something has to be done about it.

It's a sham. There is no mediation and we were very unconvinced that was any ' mediation' in the true sense of the word, from the very start. As others have said, its a device to head off claims against incompetent solicitors. I wish we had read these reviews before engaging genuinely with our legally smart opponents. They shafted us via SLCC. Smiling assasins!
Reject their mediation!!! Get your own brief. This is a shamefully biased set up.