Navigating complaints to the Legal Ombudsman (LeO)
-
Market Insight 22 July 2025 22 July 2025
-
UK & Europe
-
Regulatory movement
Dealing with LeO complaints can be challenging.
Whilst the LeO is tasked with dealing with complaints relating to poor service, often complaints amount to de facto negligence claims. The LeO process can lack the robustness required properly to assess these sorts of matters, and the fact that the LeO is not bound by legal precedent (or even legal principles) can lead to unpalatable outcomes for law firms. Often, firms may want to consider challenging the LeO’s jurisdiction to deal with a particular matter if it is better classed as a negligence claim than a complaint, but this is not always possible.
An adverse decision by the LeO, which will usually be published on its website, can cause reputational damage and can encourage other, similar complaints. As a consequence, these are matters that require careful handling.
One other difficulty can be the limits of insurance cover under the SRA Minimum Terms and Conditions for LeO awards. Whilst the award itself is usually covered, any part of the award which relates to a refund of fees charged by the firm (which is a common element) is not covered.
Despite the LeO changing its rules in 2023, so that the time limit for bringing a claim was reduced to one year from the date of the act/omission being complained about or one year from the date of knowledge of the cause for complaint, complaint numbers are surging.
In its April budget, the LeO has forecast that complaints will exceed 10,000 in 2025/2026. Whilst this might result from improved consumer awareness, the LeO says that consumers are being ‘let down’.
What does the data show?
Last December, the LeO published its 2023/24 data and insight report. This emphasised that the solicitors have improvements to make in their responses to complaints.
The data showed that:
- One third of all complaints made to LeO were in relation to residential conveyancing transactions. Personal injury and wills and probate also feature highly in the LeO’s workload.
- There was evidence of poor service in relation to 75% of complaints deriving from these practice areas. Family law had the lowest level of findings of poor service, but this was still at 58%.
- Overall, poor service was identified in over two thirds of all complaints.
- One in four complaints upheld were in relation to poor communication, and one in six were in relation to delays and failures to progress.
Complaints handling
One of the most concerning features of the LeO’s report was that in-house complaints handling was deemed inadequate in 46% of cases. Plainly, where a complaint has not been handled properly, firms will find themselves at a disadvantage when defending the substance of the complaint itself during the course of the LeO’s investigation.
We understand how hard it is to investigate and review complaints provided by clients. It is important to approach the complaint with the following considerations:
- Can you adopt a clear and concise response without appearing to be defensive or confrontational? It is reasonable to explain events from the lawyer’s perspective, especially where there has been a misunderstanding, but it is important to adopt a conciliatory approach and explain the position without legal jargon.
- Is your complaints policy up to date, and does it explain the stages of your complaints process? It is important that this policy is reviewed regularly and kept up to date with any changes from LeO. The policy should include realistic timelines for a response to a complaint.
- Have you followed your complaints procedure? The LeO says that firms are not following their own policies, and it is vital that this policy includes guidance about when the client should be signposted to LeO.
- Are you able to put things right, and potentially resolve the complaint? Are you able to take steps to action the issues which the client has raised? The most common resolution made by LeO is for the lawyer to refund, reduce or waive costs, with the average refund of £2,505. Sometimes, taking a pragmatic view on fees is worthwhile, in order to avoid an LeO complaint.
- Have you provided an empathetic and sincere response? Whether this is an apology or not, legal providers do need to acknowledge that the typical client does not engage solicitors very often, and it is usually a last resort. Compensation for distress and inconvenience was awarded in 52% of cases, with the average award at £458. A modest payment can, in appropriate cases, be sufficient to resolve matters and preserve client relationships.
Risk management best practice
The best way to avoid complaints altogether is to focus on providing the best possible service and what many in the profession would recognise as “client care”. Firms which implement policies and procedures to ensure that their colleagues know what is expected, but also provide the supervision and support required, are less likely to face complaints.
Whilst it may be the case that complaints are a ‘fact of life’, maintaining robust file management, with written advice and attendance notes, are basic but critical steps to help respond to and, wherever possible, defend them.
Finally, firms should be aware that complaints handling has recently captured the SRA’s attention. The regulator has begun a consultation on a new regime to help firms manage the increase in first-tier complaints. In summary, they are proposing that firms must give clearer information to clients about their right to complain, including right at the end of the retainer.
The SRA’s CEO, Paul Phillip, has commented ‘Solicitors shouldn’t be afraid of encouraging complaints - they are an opportunity to identify areas for improvement’. We anticipate that further regulation of complaints handling is bound to follow and note that the LeO and SRA have also been working closely together to develop a model complaints procedure for all firms, which they are hoping to publish next year.
End