Contravening code of practice

My ex''s solicitor is a member of Resolution, but appears to be contravening the organisation''s code of practice. There are several things both in writing and communicated verbally that i am concerned about.

He also does not write his name or place a signature on the bottom of his letters - could anyone advise on whether this is common practice?

I''m struggling to understand whether the solicitor''s actions could end up being an advantage (through incompetence) or disadvantage (through wrecklessness) to me. I don''t want divorce costs to build up unnecessarily -could anyone advise me? Thanks

I had experience of many things during my divorce from my ex''s solicitors claiming I had done some very serious things which I had not, claiming my mothers house was mine when it clearly was not, stating our children had trust funds when my disclosure showed I had opened small savings accounts with me as trustee. I got very very upset about all of the obvious lies. They all made me react and I complained about them several times to the SRA.

Nothing happened and neither was my ex penalised in court-I was because it made me react emotionally and play tit for tat.

It isn''t a big deal that the solicitor hasn''t signed the letter ( their ref is usually displayed). Because the company is a person in law they often put the solicitors company name at the bottom and may sign as the company rather than the individual but either way it isn''t an offence which a governing body would be worried about but more importantly wont adversely effect your ex''s argument.

I have learnt the very hard way that you have to rise above these types of omissions, errors or sometimes deliberate tactics.

Complaining to the SRA is fine but their funding comes from the Legal profession and they are bound by the shackles of the Law Society, although to their credit they are making moves to break free and become more independent.

In my divorce I was required to dispose of my ex-Mrs car (long story) but her solicitor issued me with a letter of authorisation in much the same format as you describe which meant I was unable to sell the car, result she lost money as the deal fell through, and of course her Solicitor didn''t make up the short fall.