Law firms losing work due to follow-up failures

Anwar: Dynamics between lawyer and client are changing

Personal injury (PI) law firms are missing out on significant amounts of business because of the way they handle incoming enquiries from potential clients, according to research released at today’s PI Futures conference.

Following up contacts was the most striking problem: where firms had to call back a mystery shopper, 23% of them did not do so for more than two days – or at all.

By contrast, 35% called back within 15 minutes, what First4Lawyers – the leading marketing collective that commissioned the research – described as “a world-class level of response”.

Mystery shoppers contacted 50 PI firms both by telephone and through their websites, and ranked their experience of the first contact and efforts to convert them into clients.

In the main, the mystery shoppers were happy with their interactions with law firms. Four in five found their overall treatment warm and engaging, and there were virtually no complaints about having to wade through jargon.

But what was lacking was a sense that the firm really wanted the work – asked whether they felt the firm attempted to add value or ‘go further’ for them, only 52% said yes.

There was also evidence that many firms failed to ‘sell’ the value of using them to the caller and usually did not offer either to send further information or arrange to make a follow-up call.

Nonetheless, when asked to rate the likelihood of recommending the firm to others, on a scale of 1-10 (10 being ‘definitely will recommend’), some 62% gave an 8, 9 or 10 (8% scored a perfect 10).

In 84% of web enquiries, the contact led to a telephone conversation, which is vital if solicitors are to convert them into clients.

The white paper outlining the results features case studies of various firms, including south-coast practice Warner Goodman. Solicitor Dan Thompson, business head of its injury team, described incoming enquiries as “the single most important call that comes into the office”.

He added: “If you don’t treat that phone call with the respect it deserves, you might as well burn £5-600.”

Qamar Anwar, First4Lawyers’ managing director, said: “It goes without saying that these are difficult times for PI lawyers. Low-value PI is an unusual market in that there is no real price competition. So, the quality of service, from the moment the phone rings or the email pings, is crucial.

“This is especially important given legal regulators’ efforts to encourage consumers to shop around for a lawyer.

“The dynamics between lawyer and client are changing. Consumers are just one click away from seeing a competitor brand. Firms now need to be doing everything they can stand out from that competition.”

The white paper is available at


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Keeping the conversation going beyond Pride Month

As I reflect on all the celebrations of Pride Month 2024, I ask myself why there remains hesitancy amongst LGBTQ+ staff members about when it comes to being open about their identity in the workplace.

Third-party managed accounts: Your key questions answered

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has given strong indications that it is headed towards greater restrictions on law firms when it comes to handling client money.

Understanding vicarious trauma in the legal workplace

Vicarious trauma can happen to anyone who works with clients who have experienced trauma such as domestic or other violence, child abuse, sexual assault, torture or being a refugee.

Loading animation