Regulators join forces to pilot comparison and review options for firms

Online searches: Push to encourage public to shop around for lawyers

Three regulators are joining forces to pilot ways for law firms to engage better with comparison websites and online review platforms, starting with conveyancing and employment work.

The initiative by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), CILEx Regulation and the Council for Licensed Conveyancers is the latest step in the push to improve the range of information available to the public when choosing a legal services provider.

While there has been progress with requiring firms offering certain common services to provide price and service details, the focus has now shifted to ways of indicating quality.

The full details are set to be announced later this month, with the trio currently recruiting both digital comparison tool (DCT) providers and regulated law firms to join the pilot.

The pilot will initially look at opportunities for firms to seek feedback from their clients and to manage online customer reviews.

In a joint statement, the regulators said: “What do you think makes a good quality legal service? Some people might argue it’s the level of expertise of the person providing the service, or whether the legal work was carried out accurately. Others might say it’s the way it is delivered, in terms of speed or customer service.

“Members of the public are increasingly looking for information that can help them understand the quality of legal services they might receive to help them compare different firms and lawyers.”

The Legal Services Consumer Panel has been tracking the extent to which consumers shop around for legal services for several years, and last year saw the figure creep up to its highest yet, at 30%.

The panel also said last year that independent websites providing impartial information on the quality of legal services providers were needed to guide people.

It said consumers were currently forced to use “unreliable proxies” for quality, such as longevity of service, customer service and website design.

But while the panel’s research has consistently found that few people seeking legal advice used DCTs, a survey by the SRA last year found that 41% of consumers and 55% of SMEs were aware of legal services price comparison sites and 13% and 22% respectively had used them. Some 47% also looked at customer reviews.

Separately, a report published in September by First4Lawyers found that many personal injury law firms failed to understand what potential clients were looking for and were wasting their marketing budgets as a result – even though two-thirds of solicitors polled reckoned their clients shopped around before choosing a lawyer.

The Competition and Markets Authority’s 2016 report on the legal market began the transparency drive and in its progress review published in December said it wanted to see comparison websites become more involved in the legal market.

To join the pilot, email, or

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.


Automated justice: striking the balance in injury claims

No professional sector is immune from automation – even the law. However, the adoption of automated systems to settle routine injury claims raises a number of important ethical questions.

Conveyancers: are you afraid of outsourcing?

For many years, outsourcing has been seen as a bit of a scary prospect within the conveyancing sector. But thanks to the stamp duty holiday, conveyancers are now realising some of the many benefits.

You win some, you lose some – class actions post Google

In November, Google received two court rulings, through which it both closed and opened the door to class actions against it. So what do the decisions mean for future class actions?

Loading animation