Sir: In his letter (9 October) Keith Richards of the Consumers' Association implies, wrongly, that the Law Society's angry response to the Which? article on the quality of solicitors' advice was simply the knee-jerk reaction of the solicitors' trade union.

The Law Society never disregards rigorous research into the service that solicitors give to their clients. Unfortunately, the Which? research was flawed and its attack on the profession unjustified. The solicitors' profession has as much right to defend itself against unwarranted attack as any other group in society.

Which? has already been forced to apologise to one firm of solicitors named in the report. Many of the other solicitors we have contacted have stated that Which? misrepresented the advice they gave and the context in which it was given. Also, despite what Mr Richards asserts, in one key area the Which? model advice was incorrect.

Sadly, the Which? article has undermined the previously good relationship between the Law Society and the Consumers' Association. Clearly, this is not good for consumers or the profession. A first step to resolving this situation would be for CA to be more frank about the limitations of its research. After all, no organisation is above criticism.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Lockley

Director

Corporate and Regional Affairs

Law Society

London, WC2

9 October