Angry clients: Conveyancers should keep them informed
The information accessed by home buyers and sellers on the internet may be giving them “incorrect expectations” about the timescales or process involved in conveyancing, the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) has warned.
LeO said that when conveyancers set expectations “clearly at the outset”, many found this reduced “reactive chasing” and repeat explanations, reducing the potential for complaints.
In its latest ‘spotlight’ article [1], LeO described residential conveyancing as its largest area of demand, accounting for 36% of accepted complaints in the last quarter of 2025, up from 30% the previous year.
“Conveyancing transactions are often relatively short when compared to other types of legal work, and can be high pressure and emotive for consumers.
“There is also a range of information available on the internet, which may lead to incorrect expectations in terms of timescales or process. Indeed, there is evidence of a significant mismatch here.”
LeO said one study showed that the average duration for a property purchase in 2024 was 17 weeks, but consumers’ expectations for transaction durations were much shorter, at only eight and a half weeks.
This “misalignment in expectations” could cause “dissatisfaction and, possibly, complaints”.
To prevent them, LeO urged conveyancers to explain “the whole journey up front, including where progress may pause”, which included “flagging early if a transaction is likely to be more complex (e.g. leasehold or new build)”.
LeO went on: “This early stage is crucial. Because of narrow margins and demanding workloads, delivering updates and following up with third parties becomes challenging, which in turn affects service providers.
“One thing some service providers do really well is providing information about what is going to happen, and any differences in the consumer’s individual transaction.
“For example, this could be in the form of a simple process map of key stages with information about what happens at each stage.”
During ‘no news’ periods, complaints could be prevented by explaining “who or what is being waited on, and why”, updating consumers in line with service level agreements and “reasonably chasing third‑party information and telling consumers when you’ve done so”.
LeO said it recognised that providing updates when there was no substantive progress “can feel difficult to prioritise alongside active legal work”, particularly when delays were outside the conveyancer’s control.
“However, insight shows that short, predictable updates – even when there is nothing new to report – can improve consumer satisfaction, prevent escalation and reduce the volume of incoming queries over time.”
Conveyancers should clearly explain “completion and registration timelines”, being “upfront about when consumers should – and shouldn’t – expect updates” and highlighting any factors that may extend registration times.
“This clarity reduces unnecessary follow‑up and helps end the journey on a positive note, enabling client retention and firm growth.”
LeO added: “Complex or fast-moving transactions involving multiple third parties can be challenging.
“Good complaint handling is not about apportioning blame, but about limiting impact, restoring trust, and preventing issues from escalating in ways that are more costly for both consumers and firms.”