The SLCC, that is financed through a levy on practising attorneys, has proved controversial because its institution in 2008.

This past year, the two SLAS along with the Law Society criticised the SLCC for suggesting a 3.5 percent gain in the levy regardless of the fiscal pressure on attorneys because of Covid-19 pandemic.

“It’d be more economical for your SLCC to cover #3,000 to each complainer initially,” he added.

Mr Stevenson said the SLCC warranted its 3.5 percent levy increase on the grounds of an estimated increase in complaints that proven to become”wildly inaccurate” — and has proposed a 10 percent decrease rather.

He explained:”There simply aren’t enough complaints against attorneys in Scotland to warrant funding another organisation to cope with them. The reduced numbers — that are numbers that we ought to be observing — don’t justify the administrative costs that the SLCC generates.

“With respect to the statistics… that the Law Society appears for have been much more effective than the SLCC in processing complaints”

SLAS implied the Law Society must shed its representative function and keep a”exclusively regulatory purpose” to be able to deal with concerns regarding an institutional associates’ body managing consumer complaints rather.