When Legal Representation Becomes a Liability: Lessons from a Recent Rates Dispute

Whilst insanely proud of and inspired by the high ethical standards generally upheld by my learned colleagues in the profession, a recent matter handled by our consultancy revealed a concerning trend in legal practice: where clients, instead of receiving sound guidance, are left burdened by costs, confusion, and unnecessary confrontation.

Our client was the respondent in an application brought by the City of Cape Town for arrear municipal rates. Although the outstanding amount appeared substantial, the City subsequently extended a generous incentive-based write-off, reducing the payable sum to only a fraction of what was originally owed. This presented a clear and fair opportunity to resolve the matter efficiently, taking into account the surrounding circumstances.

Unfortunately, the client’s then-attorney discouraged settlement, insisting that the matter “be taken as far as it can go.” The client was charged excessive fees, expected to print and chase up documents personally, and ultimately left without proper guidance. When the client indicated a wish to accept the City’s settlement offer, the attorney withdrew, leaving them stranded at a critical stage.

Our consultancy was approached shortly thereafter. We assisted the client in corresponding directly with the City’s legal representatives and, thankfully, the offer of settlement remained open. The City’s attorneys, acting with professionalism and fairness, agreed to finalise the arrangement, and the matter was successfully settled out of court.

This experience carries valuable lessons for both clients and practitioners:

• For clients: Transparency and communication are essential. If legal costs escalate without progress, or if settlement opportunities are dismissed without sound reason, it is appropriate to seek clarity, or a second opinion.

  
  

• For us attorneys: Our ethical duty is to act in our clients’ best interests, not to prolong disputes unnecessarily. The hallmark of sound legal practice is integrity, balance, and practical problem-solving, not perpetual litigation.

In the end, reason and professionalism prevailed. The matter stands as a reminder that true legal service sometimes lies in resolving conflict, not perpetuating it.