Are solicitors right to worry about publication of complaints?

No comments

Plans by the new Legal Services Ombudsman to publish details of complaints against law firms seem to be ruffling a few feathers in the profession. But while the Law Society has warned against the proposals on the basis that statistics show they would disadvantage certain sections of the profession, consumer groups and indeed the Legal Services Commission are strongly in favour of greater transparency.

In my view, the arguments of consumer groups are almost certain to prevail, and we will see a system introduced in which the ombudsman will publish details of upheld complaints against named law firms on its website. In time, LeO will also have enough statistical data to publish tables showing which sections of the profession have been subject to the greatest number of complaints.

Do lawyers have anything to fear from this? Absolutely not. There is no real likelihood that anything other than upheld complaints will be published. It would be wholly unreasonable to publish unsubstantiated complaints, particularly in a sector where clients often tend to blame firms for things that are not actually their fault.

Many complaints against law firms are unreasonable; clients may have had unrealistic expectations of how long the conveyancing process would take, or disagreed with the advice they were given even though it was accurate; or not been happy with their divorce settlement even though it was actually a fair outcome.

But where complaints are unfounded, the profession should have some confidence that the ombudsman will be able to identify them as such, and they will be dismissed. They will not be appearing on the ombudsman’s website.

If a firm does have a large number of complaints actually upheld against it by the ombudsman, however, then surely potential clients – and, indeed, the Legal Services Commission – have a right to know that. If a pattern emerges in relation to a certain firm, it will be for a reason.

And equally if a firm has no upheld complaints, then that fact will be available too – and it will become a competitive advantage to firms that provide a good service to clients.

Presumably, the firms that are most vulnerable to high levels of complaints will be the ones that are competing primarily on price rather than service. But low-price firms do not necessarily need to generate a lot of upheld complaints.

After all, passengers travelling on a no-frills airline understand that they are not going to receive a British Airways level of customer care. Being realistic about service levels doesn’t mean that clients will automatically be put off choosing the firm, but it will give them no room for legitimate complaint as long as the firm sticks to its end of the bargain.

Competitor firms may initially win more clients by pretending to offer a higher level of service for the same price, but when they fail to deliver on what they promised, this will inevitably result in a high level of complaints. If clients were misled, these complaints will be upheld, and – under the new regime - published. That is not only good news for the consumer, but also for the firms that were more honest with their clients about the service they would receive.