There is an ‘urgent need’ for enhanced accountability and responsiveness across the legal services sector when it comes to providing clients with both information about redress and complaint, and handling complaints about services provided.
A survey conducted by the Legal Services Consumer Panel (LSCP) has identified 46% of the Legal Ombudsman’s (LeO) investigations found poor complaints handling processes by firms.
LSCP was created by the Legal Services Act 2007 and provides independent advice to the Legal Services Board about the interests of consumers purchasing legal services. Following the results of its latest tracker, the panel has expressed ‘deep concern’ over the failure of firms to deal with complaints effectively. adding ‘current performance demonstrates a troubling gap between expectation and reality’ which undermines consumers trust and confidence in legal services.
Alluding to the impact of the Axiom Ince scandal on public trust in legal services Tom Hayhoe, Chair of the Legal Services Consumer Panel, said it was important the sector understood the value of complaints intelligence and called on firms to standardise complaints handling so clients receive a ‘fair and consistent’ approach.
“Consumers should not feel disillusioned or ignored when they raise complaints. It is vital that legal service providers develop robust mechanisms for resolving issues fairly, swiftly and transparently. Recent scandals in the legal sector have highlighted how important complaints intelligence can be. This is why we are in full support of the approach proposed by the Legal Ombudsman for standardisation, an approach we have been calling for over many years”.
The results of the latest tracker survey which informed this briefing from LSCP identified only half of consumers of legal services knew how to make a complaint about poor service, and of those only half would complain to the law firm itself, citing concerns about the firm not dealing with the issue properly; the complaint taking too long to resolve; the impact on the final bill; and being able to contact the firm in the first place as barriers to resolution.
Around half of consumers said they found it ‘easy’ to identify whether they would have access to an ombudsman if they were dissatisfied with the provider’s service when they were shopping around but one in five said they did not take any action even though they were dissatisfied with the service they received – a cohort LCSP describe as ‘silent sufferers’ whose lawyers ‘are not aware of their dissatisfaction, meaning their ability to respond positively and improve their service is lost.’
LSCP say there needs to be a ‘feedback culture’ where consumers feel able to complain with fear of retribution, adding
“Underperforming first-tier complaints handling is a lost opportunity for law firms to collect customer feedback and use it to improve their services and better serve the needs of legal services users. There is much room for improvement.”
The LSCPs intervention comes just days after the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) launched its own consultation into proposals which would see firms provide complaints information to clients at the end of each case, as well as any time it is requested or as soon as a grievance is brought up; and a requirement to publish clear, accessible and prominent complaints information on the firm’s website (or on request in the absence of a website).
“When things do go wrong, the way solicitor firms deal with complaints is a key indicator of service quality for consumers and of whether they can have trust and confidence in their provider. Solicitors shouldn’t be afraid of encouraging complaints – they are an opportunity to identify areas for improvement and ways to deliver more effectively for clients. Our research suggests that there’s no negative connotations around firms being so open about their complaints process.”
SRA chief executive Paul Philip, said, adding it was the view of the SRA satisfaction with legal service providers is high with 82% of all first-tier complaints resolved satisfactorily.
LeO has also recently published its own guidance on expectations for service providers when dealing with third-party delays, which stresses the importance of effective communication.
The LeO says almost half of the complaints it receives are about communication and delays, with a ‘common feature’ being whether the delay could have been caused or influenced by a third party. However, it says that when investigating complaints, it will examine ‘whether the service provider could or should have contacted the party who caused the delay to try to progress matters more quickly for the customer’.
The ombudsman is developing a Model Complaints Resolution Procedure (MCRP) in an effort to standardise the management of complaints and establish a more consistent first-tier process. It is understood the MCRP would include a suite of guidance materials to support firms with standardised language, template letters and toolkits.
“The Consumer Panel has advocated for regulators to produce consumer-tested standardised language in a standardised format to communicate complaints procedures to consumers. This would clarify what information must be provided at appropriate times in the customer journey, maximising understanding, so consumers feel empowered to act and express themselves. LeO’s MCRP is a prime opportunity to ensure effective user-tested information is employed across the sector and ultimately, regulators should require their regulated communities to adopt it.”
The briefing note concludes the recommendations of the panel are:
- Standardisation of Complaint Handling Procedures: Legal service providers must adopt standardised protocols for managing complaints, ensuring that every consumer receives a fair and consistent experience.
- Public Accessibility of Complaints Data: The Panel calls for the publication of first-tier complaints data, enabling consumers to make informed choices about legal services providers based on past consumer experiences.
- Collaboration Between Regulators and Service Providers: A concerted effort by the Legal Ombudsman, the Legal Services Board, frontline regulators, the Panel and service providers is essential to create a consumer-focused culture across the legal sector.
