The bar does not exist to serve lawyers, it exists to regulate them.
Those are far from being in opposition. A cynic might say the bar exists to serve lawyers as a class by doing the bare minimum to appear to be regulating them.
eg. Places like Prenda Law being able to operate openly for years before being shut down, etc.
The reason they continued their crimes for 3 years was that it's impossible to prevent someone from doing paperwork crimes if they aren't in prison.
Suing a lawyer for malpractice in courts is very tough. There are all sorts of barriers. For example, let's say your lawyer fails to file legal paperwork on-time, and you lose a case. You can sue, but to collect damages:
* You have to show that in the alternative case, you would have won. The lawyer will argue you would have lost in either case.
* The case against your lawyer will likely impact your main case, and not in ways you like.
If your lawyer charges billable hours without actually working -- something which is standard practice among lawyers in my community -- you need to be able to prove that. It's the culture here:
* I've been to lunch with lawyers who bragged they were billing someone else for the time
* Lawyers routinely double-bill if e.g. handling client emails on a cell phone while in court for another client. ). How do you do that?
So it happens all the time, and I've gotten insane bills when nothing was done. You can't prove that in court, though. There's no case. And so on.