This firm was found to have provided a reasonable service...
Mr C instructed the firm to complete a property purchase on behalf of his business. However, Mr C was unhappy with the time taken to progress the transaction and expected this to be quick because searches were not required and there was no chain. As Mr C thought the firm caused delays, he ended the retainer and instructed another firm to complete the purchase.
Mr C complained that:
We decided that the firm’s service was reasonable for both complaints.
The firm had emailed a pack to Mr C containing a client care letter at the start of the retainer. This requested that Mr C read the documentation and provide his signature if he accepted their terms. There was evidence to show that he had signed the relevant form, confirming that he had received it.
Within this pack, the firm also provided an accurate estimated timescale for completion. So later, when Mr C advised that he wanted to complete by a certain date, he was already aware that this was not possible. The firm also provided an updated timescale following this, indicating that Mr C was kept informed.
The evidence also showed that while there were some delays during the transaction, they were outside the firm’s control as they were waiting for information from both the property sellers and Mr C.
We found the firm’s service to be reasonable in relation to these complaints, so we did not need to consider the impact of any unreasonable service to decide on an appropriate remedy.
