Background 

Ms M instructed her service provider in respect of a personal injury matter, following a car accident.

Ms M was concerned that it took the service provider four and a half years to pursue her claim, especially as it was a straightforward claim and the other side accepted liability. As a result, Ms M complained to the service provider saying she wanted the matter settled, but also that she did not think their 25% success fee was fair, given the time taken. 

Complaints 

Ms M raised two main aspects of complaint: 

  1. Delay and failure to progress; and 
  2. Communication, as she said the service provider had failed to keep her informed. 

The service provider gave a substantive and timely response to Ms M’s complaint, recognising both delay (including a failure to progress) and poor communication. They offered £300 to recognise the impact of their service failing on Ms M. 

The Legal Ombudsman’s view and approach 

We reviewed Ms M’s complaint and took the view that as the offer of £300 was in our category for a significant remedy, it was a reasonable remedy, being in line with what LeO would be likely to direct should all the issues of complaint be upheld. 

Ms M did not agree as she wanted a costs reduction. However, as there was no impact on the value of the service provider’s work, our view was that a payment for the emotional impact of the service failing was a reasonable remedy. 

The complaint was closed under Scheme Rule 5.7(c) as a ‘reasonable offer made’. As the complaint was resolved in early resolution, no case fee was payable. 

LeO Insights 

  • A full and detailed response, addressing all the complaints and clearly identifying service failings, means a complaint is more likely to be suitable for early resolution. 
  • Using LeO’s remedies guidance is more likely to lead to reasonable offers being made at first tier. 
  • Where there is no impact on the value of the service provider’s service, a costs-based remedy is less likely.