header-logo header-logo

16 June 2011
Issue: 7470 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Criticisms falling on deaf ears?

Legal Services Board claims lawyers fail clients on complaints-handling

Clients who are dissatisfied with their lawyer routinely find it difficult to bring a complaint, are not told that they can complain, or are charged by their lawyer for the privilege, according to research by the Legal Services Board (LSB).

More than half of 1,275 dissatisfied clients taking part had not been told about their service provider’s complaints procedure. Of those who were told, less than half found the procedure easy to understand.

The research, conducted by YouGov in February and March 2011, showed a strong link between knowledge of procedure and likelihood of making a complaint.

Only a third of dissatisfied clients made a complaint, of whom more than three quarters had been told about the complaints procedure. Of the two-thirds who didn’t make a complaint, only 18% had been told about the complaints procedure.

Where clients did raise a complaint, the vast majority (70%) progressed no further than the initial in-house stage of complaints-handling.

All approved regulators are required to ensure legal services providers clearly inform clients of their right to complain and the process for doing so, including giving them information about the legal ombudsman.

Chris Kenny, chief executive of the LSB, said: “Too many consumers give up when they are unhappy with the outcomes of the in-house process—despite having the right to escalate the complaint to the legal ombudsman.

“Improving this situation is an urgent priority for consumer protection, for improving the service itself and for enhancing public confidence in lawyers.

“A particular concern is the number of clients who reported that they have been charged for their complaints. The LSB regards this as totally unacceptable, and expects approved regulators to take firm action in all cases where it is proven.”

Jon Robins, director of Jures, an independent research company and thinktank dedicated to the legal services market, says the research shows that complaints handling remains a major problem for lawyers: “It is a problem that is only going to become more exposed with the scrutiny brought by new competition from the high street brands moving into the services as a result of the Legal Services Act. They know not only how to keep customers happy but also to bring unhappy ones back onside.”

Issue: 7470 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll