Miss M instructed the service provider following a boundary dispute with her neighbour.
Miss M was unhappy with the service she received and complained to the service provider. Miss M told the service provider that she was unhappy with their work and was looking for a refund of her fees.
The service provider asked Miss M for clarification of her complaint, but she did not respond. Therefore, the service provider did not issue any additional response to Miss M.
Miss M complained to the service provider about their advice, the time taken to progress her matter and the service provider’s communications. She also complained the service provider did not follow her instructions and did not provide reasonable costs information. Miss M says these issues meant her matter did not progress the way she wanted and caused her upset and distress.
The service provider acknowledged Miss M’s complaint, and asked her for some more information, but she did not provide it. The service provider therefore did not provide a substantive response, so Miss M escalated her complaint to the Legal Ombudsman.
As there was no final response, the complaint was not suitable for early resolution and was passed to an in-depth investigation.
When the complaint was allocated to an investigator, they sought evidence and then prepared their case decision.
The case decision upheld some of Miss M’s complaints but did not uphold the complaints about costs, as the cost information provided by the service provider was reasonable.
The investigator recommended a compensation remedy for the emotional effects of £400, recognising the service provider’s service failings.
Both Miss M and the service provider accepted the case decision, and the complaint was resolved as an agreed outcome.
As the service provider’s complaint handling was unreasonable, and the findings were not in favour of the service provider, a £400 case fee was payable.
