Despite the push towards transparency in pricing, John Gould explains why comparing legal services like-for-like isn’t so simple
- The Solicitors Regulation Authority Transparency Rules aim to assist consumers by providing more information on pricing for legal services, but miss the point that even the most basic lawyers’ services are complex, customised and therefore not easily comparable.
- Transparency to show how a firm is better value than the next firm is good for business; nonetheless, mandatory detailed price information doesn’t tell you much about value.
- The main market effect of mandatory information may be to give an advantage to those providers prepared to start with a price and then fit the service they actually offer to the price they have chosen.
Back in December 2016, after a year-long study, the government announced that the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) had concluded that competition in legal services for individual consumers and small businesses was ‘not working well’. In particular, the CMA thought that there was not enough information available to consumers on price, quality
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
