Mrs M instructed the service provider to advise on whether they could help her make an appeal against a visa refusal for her and her children.
The service provider’s advice was that they needed specific evidence to support Mrs M’s claim about when she arrived in the UK. The service provider advised that without that evidence any application for an appeal may be unsuccessful. However, Mrs C instructed the service provider to proceed to make the appeal immediately and said she would provide the evidence later.
Mrs M paid the service provided £140 per person for the court fees to lodge the appeal.
Mrs M’s appeals were unsuccessful, and she complained to the service provider asking for a refund of the court fees.
Mrs M complained to the service provider that her appeal was unsuccessful. Her complaints included that:
It was unreasonable for them to charge a fee per person, when the position was the same for all of them; and
The service provider was rude.
She did not receive a response to her complaint, and so she escalated her complaint to the Legal Ombudsman.
The complaint was reviewed on receipt, and the service provider was notified of the complaint. The service provider contacted the Legal Ombudsman and said they did not receive a complaint from Mrs M, and so they did not reply.
Given the specific circumstances of the complaint and as there was no evidence that the complaint had been received by the solicitor’s firm, they were given a chance to provide a response to the complaint.
In response to the Legal Ombudsman’s request for information the service provider was able to evidence that the fees paid were court fees and that there was a fee per person. Mrs M had also not paid the firm any fees, she had only paid third-party fees.
In light of the information received, the complaint was passed to an Ombudsman for dismissal. This was because the evidence showed that the fees were reasonable, and in line with the information provided to Mrs M. It is also the case that complaints about rudeness are subjective and, without evidence, are unlikely to succeed.
Mrs M’s complaint was dismissed under 5.7a) of our Scheme Rules as it did not have any prospects of success.
As the complaint was resolved by the Early Resolution Team, no case fee was payable.
Where a service provider’s costs are in line with their client care letter it is unlikely they will be considered to be unreasonable.
