The Scottish Law Agents Society is proposing -if there is sufficient support- calling on the Law Society debate a motion at a proposed special general meeting calling a halt to the momentum of alternate business structures, and for the work of the solicitor to receive statutory protection.

The move has been backed by the Faculty of Procurators of Dumfriesshire

"Our soundings of the Profession suggested there was little support for ABS and inquiries by us have revealed that the proxies at the AGM in 2008 were mainly from 4 big firms who had about 600 proxies between them," Law Agents Society President Michael Scanlan said.

"We do not wish “to stop the whole reform process”. If solicitors support our Motion we wish to halt ABS and stop loss of independence."

Scanlan also took issue with the stance of the Editor of the Journal of the Law Sociery of Scotland, Peter Nicholson, whom he accused of taking the side of the Law Society in the debate.

"He has also taken sides with LSS which is a grave error for an Editor and I have written to him to this effect,” Scanlan added.

The Law Agents have tabled a motion calling for the work reserved for solicitors under the Solicitors Scotland Act to be "vested in persons so qualified", and for the Legal Services Bill to be amended to enshrine that protection, effectively freezing non-solicitor competitors out of the proposed ABS regime.

"It is essential in the public interest in the retention of an independent legal profession that the ownership of any business authorised to carry out work which is reserved to persons qualified to practise as solicitors in terms of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act, 1980, should be vested in persons so qualified," the motion proposes.

"And call upon the Scottish Parliament to set out and maintain that position in the statutes and regulations of the Scottish Parliament and, in particular, to amend the terms of the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill, presently before Parliament to that effect. 

Scanlan appealled to "all solicitors to get involved, read our website for our Response to the Bill and the January Journal of LSS, and decide for yourselves. If you agree with our Motion please send us your Proxy.”

The Faculty of Procurators of Dumfriesshire have also accused the Law Society of adopting a  "cosy and cooperative" approach towards the Government on the issue, and failing to adequately represent the profession.

"The Law Society is in favour, probably because of the sheer numbers of votes and practising certificate subscriptions the big firms (and those which think they could become big) can muster, and are seeking to persuade the rest of the profession that ABS is a good idea," said Ranald Lindsay, Dean, Faculty of Procurators of Dumfriesshire.

"They are restructuring their organisation and priorities to comply with government pressure and ensure that the Law Society remains the regulator of the solicitor branch of the profession. This has involved several controversial concessions.

"The effect of this debate has been to polarise (and perhaps irreperably split) the profession, and to effect a radical change in the approach of the Law Society, particularly since the days when we argued against the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and had profession wide support for opposition to any form of government interference in the regulation of the profession. The Law Society is now adopting a much cosier and more co-operative approach towards the government and other external bodies than any of us would previously have found comfortable. As a result, the Law Society's priorities have changed so that their main focus is regulation rather than representation, although the Law Society will deny this.

"Various other bodies also feel that the Law Society is not representing the profession in the way that the profession should be represented. I have been contacted by the Scottish Law Agents Society, who are opposing ABS, and they are trying to requisition a Special General Meeting of the Law Society to argue against ABS, Inevitably, they have their work cut out for them in mustering enough votes (either in person or in proxy) to out-gun the block votes that the big firms will muster, and are campaigning for proxies.

"As Dean, I am not going to go into my views any more than I have probably pretty clearly implied in this e-mail. If you really want to know, contact me. But this is an issue of which you need to be aware and it is only right that you have as much information as possible about an issue that will, one way or another affect you and your colleagues to a greater or lesser extent in ways that we probably cannot even imagine."

Lindsay's remarks can be read in full here.