The Law Society has rejected suggestions by the Residential Institutions Redress Board that it has reacted in an "ad-hoc" fashion to the controversy over the double-charging of victims of abuse.
In a strongly-worded letter sent to the board yesterday, the society's director-general, Ken Murphy, said the board's criticism - contained in a rare public statement from the redress body the previous night - was unjustified.
The move comes as the society's complaints committee begins sifting through a rising number of complaints about solicitors over charging practices.
The society, which both regulates and represents solicitors, said the number of complaints had reached 84 by close of business yesterday. These related to 45 firms. However, said Mr Murphy, 19 of the complainants "said they did not know if there had been a deduction but they wanted it investigated nonetheless".
A scheduled meeting of the complaints committee scheduled for today has been postponed as none of the cases are ready for hearing. The society has decided not to announce when future meetings will take place for fear of attracting unfair publicity for solicitors visiting its offices.
In his letter to the redress board, Mr Murphy said: "The society notes the suggestion made in your letter that the society could have been more proactive before now on this matter but it does not consider this implied criticism to be justified on the facts.
"The board's suggestion appears to be based on a mistaken impression that the society, prior to last week, had information from which it could reasonably have been expected to conclude that there was a widespread problem of solicitors double- charging in redress board cases.
The society had no such information."
In a separate development, a lobby group representing survivors of abuse has accused fellow lobbyists of going "completely over the top" in criticising solicitors. Patrick Walsh, of Irish Survivors of Child Abuse,- said: "We victims are beginning to look mean and small. We are looking like moaners. I know of many solicitors who put cash up front for expert medical advice years before they will get that money back from the board," said Mr Walsh, who was particularly critical of the London Irish Survivors Outreach Service (LISOS).
John Twomey, of LISOS, which is representing a British-based women allegedly overcharged, defended his stance, saying "I want an expeditious response in my client's case."
