Complaints: Most firms would accept expression of dissatisfaction by email as a complaint
Law firms are divided over what should be regarded as a complaint from clients, a survey by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has found.
While an overwhelming majority accept that a “formal written complaint” is a complaint, almost half would not accept complaints made by text or other messaging.
In a thematic review of the handling of first-tier complaints (complaints directly to law firms), the SRA surveyed 750 law firms, particularly those working in areas with high complaint volumes, such as residential conveyancing, personal injury and probate.
Nine out of 10 (92%) said they would identify an expressly stated formal written complaint as a complaint, while three-quarters said they would include other expressions of dissatisfaction in writing, including by email.
A narrow majority (54%) said they would consider an “expression of dissatisfaction” to be a complaint, but only 46% would accept a complaint sent by text or messaging and 45% a verbal expression of dissatisfaction to client-facing staff.
The SRA said: “A small number of survey respondents said that if an expression of dissatisfaction was about customer service, then they would not treat it as a complaint.
“They said that they would only treat expressions of dissatisfaction about legal work as a complaint. However, firms should remember that LeO [the Legal Ombudsman] deals with service-related complaints, therefore it is important that they acknowledge and record all complaints about customer service.
“The way in which a complaint is made or the issue it raises should not determine whether it is recorded and dealt with under a firm’s complaints procedure.
“If it is not clear whether a client is complaining, firms ought to be cautious and record it as a complaint. Or, as some interviewees told us, they would ask the client whether they wanted to make a complaint.”
The SRA also interviewed 25 law firms as part of the review and looked at two complaints files at each.
Only one of them used the full Legal Services Board (LSB) definition of a complaint as ‘an oral or written expression of dissatisfaction, which alleges that the complainant has suffered (or may suffer) financial loss, distress, inconvenience, or other detriment’.
The SRA said that “overall, interviewees felt that there was little to prevent clients from making a complaint”.
Almost all of those surveyed and interviewed said that on average, they sent a final response to complaints within eight weeks, the SRA’s target time, while two-thirds generally responded within four weeks.
However, 40% of interviewees were aware of at least one response to a complaint in the previous 12 months which had exceeded eight weeks.
“Factors which contributed to delayed responses included the complexity of the complaint, staff absence, and where firms needed to liaise with a third party to resolve a complaint.
“Small firms, where one person was responsible for all aspects of complaints handling, were more likely to experience resourcing issues.”
But in 30% of the 50 complaint files the SRA reviewed, the response exceeded eight weeks.
The SRA proposed in a consultation launched in June this year that law firms should tell their clients how to complain at the end, as well as the beginning, of their cases.
In the survey, 95% of law firms said clients were notified in writing at the outset of a matter, while 68% said they would provide clients with the firm’s complaints procedure if a client said they wanted to make a complaint.
Just 12% said they informed clients about how to complain at the end of the matter.
The SRA said interviewees recognised that good complaints handling could create business benefits.
“They recognised that clients who were satisfied with the firm’s handling of the complaint were more likely to re-instruct them in the future or recommend them to others.” A good number of firms monitored complaints at a firm-wide level, using the data to identify trends and help improve the delivery of services.
Examples of poor practice from the review included “assuming fee-earners or other staff will recognise complaints and know what to do, without training, support or guidance” and making it difficult for clients to access the complaints procedure by “including it in small text at the bottom of a webpage that isn’t your homepage or requiring clients to click through several pages to locate it”.
They also included “responding inappropriately to online reviews (for example, sending defensive or dismissive responses).”
Examples of good practice included “offering clients several ways to make a complaint so they can then make it in a way which best suits them”, publicising and providing “clear information” about the complaints procedure so that those who want to complain feel able to and considering whether a client needs “additional help and support” throughout the complaints procedure.
Leave a Comment