Ombudsman gives lawyers economic incentive to improve complaints handling: increased profits

Print This Post

23 January 2014


Sampson: sound economic analysis of what’s in it for lawyers

The Legal Ombudsman today appealed to solicitors’ bottom line to persuade them to take complaints more seriously, saying that law firms and other providers could increase their profits by up to 3% if they do.

Research LeO commissioned from consultancy firm Economic Insight to build the business case for better complaints handling found that firms do not appreciate the importance customers attach to complaints handling – meaning they only see it as a cost.

While recognising that there is indeed a cost to improving complaints handling, the research said this is more than offset by increased customer retention and acquisition as a result of an enhanced reputation, as well as cost efficiencies and improvements resulting from the data collected from complaints.

“It is well established that reputation or brand value can generate increased profitability for firms across a range of industries,” it said. “Consequently, to the extent that how firms manage customer complaints can impact their reputation, then clearly there is a natural commercial incentive to have complaints handling processes that meet customer needs.”

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

Economic Insight also said that “a robust approach to complaints handling can help reinforce a firm’s internal culture, increasing staff retention rates (and thus reducing costs).”

Both economic theory and evidence backed up the case, researchers said, and financial modelling indicated that “law firms may be able to increase their [net] profitability by around 2%‐3% as a result of having good first-tier complaints handling”.

At the same time, they conceded, “the likelihood of this is unknown”.

Consumers in turn could benefit from better service and lower prices.

The overall net benefit to lawyers and consumers combined could be between £53m and £80m over the next decade, the analysis calculated.

Chief Legal Ombudsman, Adam Sampson, said: “For too long now the discussion around complaints has been that practitioners must do it because the rulebook says so.

“This report isn’t conclusive – but it does give us some sound economic analysis of what’s in it for lawyers when they are thinking about complaints and how they can benefit from taking them seriously; and not just because regulators tell them that they must.”

Tags: ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Know your client checks – A lesson from BHS

Paul-Bennett for Legal Futures

As you will be aware, it is a legal requirement for advisory firms to carry out ‘know your client’ checks. The purpose of doing so is to confirm your client’s identity and to seek to provide protection in respect of anti-money laundering (AML) and terrorist financing laws. The BHS experience before the House of Commons’ work and pensions committee and business, innovation and skills committee shows that firms need to think beyond AML obligations.

September 29th, 2016