Publications

CAS has responded to the Equality, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee's call for views on the Legal Services Regulation (Scotland) Bill.

In our response:

›     CAS reiterates our view that the Roberton model of a single independent regulator would deliver the greatest improvements for consumers in terms of transparency, accountability, and clarity of process. We underline our disappointment that the Bill has disregarded this model in favour of adding more layers of complexity to the existing landscape.

›     We express our disappointment that the promise of a regulatory regime with consumers at its heart does not seem to be delivered in the substance of the draft Bill – with many opportunities missed to strengthen the consumer interest.

›     We call for a clearer statutory role for consumer representation on the proposed regulatory committees (as distinct from generic lay representation), as well as consumer involvement in setting minimum standards for regulators.

›     We query the rationale for affording a lesser degree of scrutiny and accountability to current category 2 regulators in the draft Bill.

›     We welcome measures aimed at streamlining the complaints process including reducing complaints handling time, extending the remit to non-regulated for-profit providers, and introducing hybrid complaints. However, we caution that the retention of various layers and channels a complaint can take fails to deliver a simpler pathway for consumers, and we express concern about the removal of compensation for conduct complaints, as well as removal of the right to appeal SLSC decisions to an external body.

›     We welcome the expanded remit of the SLSC’s Consumer Panel but caution against the panel being seen as the catch all consumer scrutiny forum without increased resources to enable the panel to discharge these functions.

›     Regarding ministerial oversight, we call for greater consideration of the evidence sources for these interventions to be triggered, and the capacity this may require from the named bodies as well as consumer bodies fielding this data.

›     We call for urgent clarity regarding the definitions of ‘fee, gain and reward’, upon which third sector liability for entity regulation hinges. The variability of definitions of restricted and unrestricted legal services also poses concerns for the advice sector and we call for statutory consultation with these providers in the event of any change being considered.

›     We welcome the intention of the draft Bill to stimulate diversification in the legal services market, but we remain unclear how or whether the current provisions would enable this in practice. It remains difficult to envisage how the provisions around ABS and practicing restrictions might address the significant gaps in provision which CAS has repeatedly highlighted, without corresponding consideration of the pressing issue of legal aid reform.

To read our full response download here.

On 14 March 2023, Citizens Advice Scotland's Strong Communities Team gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament Equality Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee's session on Access to Justice. This supporting evidence was submitted in writing afterwards.

Citizens Advice Scotland has responded to the consultation run by the Scottish Parliament's COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Citizens Advice Scotland has responded to the Scottish Government's Legal Services Regulation Reform in Scotland consultation

Citizens Advice Scotland has responded to the Scottish Civil Justice Council consultation on Rules Covering the Mode of Attendance at Court Hearings

In 2016 Scotland was selected to join the Open Government Partnership (‘OGP’), an international collaboration of over 90 governments across the world committed to three key principles: openness, transparency and public involvement. As part of membership to this partnership programme, the Scottish Government, together with civic society partners, has developed recently been focused on delivering Scotland’s second National Action Plan 2018-20.  A key commitment under this plan has been “to improve access to the accountability of public services”.

Supported by the Scottish Government and in collaboration with key partners to this commitment, CAS has produced a booklet explaining how to raise a concern or complaint about a public service in Scotland. It explains how to use public bodies like:           

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman

The Care Inspectorate

The Scottish Information Commissioner and

Audit Scotland

as well as providing more information on how to make Freedom of Information requests.

This booklet follows on from earlier research that CAS undertook on behalf of partners to the commitment, which sought to explore levels of understanding and awareness of members of the public of accountability of public services (hyperlinked here from CAS website) in Scotland.  The research found low levels of knowledge of regulatory bodies. CAS hopes that by producing this booklet, we can provide clearer information on how the public can engage with public services in Scotland, particularly if they wish to raise a concern or question a decision. We hope that by providing this information we can generate greater awareness of the accountability bodies that operate in Scotland and enable people to engage more confidently with them.

Related work on Scotland's National Open Government  Action Plan 2018-20: Commitment 4 Improving Access to Accountability of Public Services: Peoples & Stakeholder Engagement Final Report and Recommendations July 2020 is also available here: https://www.gov.scot/publications/scotlands-second-national-open-government-action-plan-2018-20-commitment-4-improving-access-accountability-public-services-public-stakeholder-engagement/

Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS) has responded to a consultation by the Scottish Civil Justice Council. The consultation sought views on recent Rule changes which made use of Civil Online Mandatory for Simple Procedure cases.

CAS's work on Access to Justice issues aims to ensure that consumers can access legal services and make effective and informed choices about legal issues. We support the development of new and simplified ways of accessing Court services. However, this must not come at the expense of channel choice. We have concerns that the Rule change may have had the effect of excluding party litigants and unrepresented people from the system. We would therefore support additional efforts to ensure inclusivity for those who are digitally excluded. We also have a number of wider suggestions to make in relation to potential reform of the Rules.  

CAS welcomes the Consumer Green Paper and a stronger push by the UK government for greater simplicity, transparency and fairness for those that purchase and use goods and services.

This briefing focusses on amendments tabled to the Scotland Bill addressing areas where the
Bill does not appear to meet the intent of the Smith Agreement. Citizens Advice
Scotland is concerned that, as currently drafted, there are risks of detriment
to CAB clients, who sought advice on 220,000 new
benefits issues in 2014/15 and who have been subject to recent changes to reserved tribunals which have
had a marked and detrimental effect on consumers in Scotland.