Cain: Important learning for providers
A Liverpool law firm ordered to bear the cost of redeeming a client’s mortgage because of mistakes made in a conveyancing matter is among eight named in the Legal Ombudsman’s (LeO) third release of public interest findings.
National giant Irwin Mitchell is also in the latest batch and was told to forgo £32,000 in fees after failing to secure approval from its client’s legal expenses insurer to exceed the limit of his cover.
The first three decisions were put out last July and another 10 in September. LeO selects decisions for publication where there is a clear public interest, “such as where the issues are particularly serious, systemic, or where publication may help prevent similar serious failings in future”.
In 2003, ‘Miss A’ instructed Liverpool firm KMC Legal (the trading name of FW Meggitt & Co) to handle the purchase of a property. The firm had a different group of staff working for the seller.
Shortly after completion, it emerged that there was an existing mortgage registered against the property that had not been redeemed. But the firm did not tell Miss A this for two months.
LeO found that, instead of redeeming the mortgage, the firm returned the money to the seller.
It directed KMC “to take responsibility for, and bear the cost of, redeeming the mortgage on the property, take steps to ensure that the charge was removed from the title, and register the property in Miss A’s name”.
LeO also told the firm to pay her £2,000 to compensate for “the significant emotional distress their poor service had caused her”.
Irwin Mitchell was instructed by the legal expenses insurer to act for three people in a neighbour dispute, ultimately unsuccessfully. Although the limit of their funding was £50,000, Irwin Mitchell’s costs were around £85,000.
LeO found that the firm had failed to secure approval from the insurer to exceed the limit, instructed a barrister knowing that this would push them above it, and did not tell the clients when the limit was exceeded.
It also found “some evidence of duplicated charging which was only identified and rectified following this office’s investigation and also evidence of the firm charging for some aspects of handling Mr A’s complaint”. Irwin Mitchell provided some poor service during the trial as well.
LeO directed the firm to write off the £32,000 of fees payable above the limit and also pay £750 for emotional distress.
Now-defunct Norwich-based Lake Jackson was ordered to write off £40,000 in unbilled fees because of the poor costs information it provided a client pursuing a civil claim.
“The firm did not provide Mr A with clarity around their charging rates until nearly a year after having been instructed and did not provide any further information about likely costs until nearly two years had passed.
“The firm were unable to provide any evidence of having issued any invoices to Mr A despite having done work on Mr A’s case.”
Another now-closed firm, Stocker & Co in Thame, was ordered to pay its client the unspecified deposit payment he had made in a development that went bust because of a variety of failures in its advice, including not activating deposit protection cover at exchange.
Strain Keville – a firm closed in 2023 by the Solicitors Regulation Authority as part of its intervention into the Law Direct group – was ordered to repay a client the £50,000 he had to spend to remove a charge on the property he was selling, after it failed to advise him of its existence when he bought it a decade earlier.
Similarly, Plymouth-based Curtis Law failed to advise its client that a property he bought did not have the required planning permission and building regulations approvals. This cost him £14,000 to remedy when he came to sell it a decade later.
The firm was ordered to repay him this, plus £500 for stress and inconvenience.
Blyth law firm Cuthbertsons was ordered to refund a third of the £16,000 in fees a client had paid – as well as the £9,000 he had to pay a second firm of solicitors – due to shortcomings in its preparation for a hearing on access to his children that led to it being ineffective.
Kent-based The Foster Partnership gave its clients poor advice when purchasing a piece of land at auction.
There were complications relating to an overage provision and a restriction on the title – which the firm had committed to having removed when it was unable to make such a promise – and then did not address HM Land Registry’s requisitions, which resulted in the application being cancelled.
It had to pay the client of £22,500, most of which represented the financial losses suffered by completing before the issue with the overage provisions was resolved.
LeO said the cases revealed “a consistent pattern of providers overlooking or failing to act on critical issues”, as well as communication failings.
Chief ombudsman Phil Cain said: “This third round of public interest decisions shows the very real consequences that can follow when legal services fall below expected standards.
“As an organisation we recognise that a significant majority of service providers deliver good service, but where things go wrong, consumers are often left with significant financial and emotional consequences.
“These decisions highlight important learning for providers and reinforce the need for diligence, clear communication, and proper risk management.”
In separate news, MPs on the justice select committee having backed the appointment of Richard Blakeway as the new chair of the Office for Legal Complaints – the board overseeing LeO – following a scrutiny hearing earlier this month.
Leave a Comment