Miss T complained to the Legal Ombudsman about a probate matter. The service provider was instructed in March 2022, and made the application for probate, following various necessary work, in December 2022. Miss T then raised her concerns about the progress being made with the service provider in September 2023.
Miss T’s complaint is that this is a straight-forward estate, and she does not understand why it is taking so long to conclude.
The service provider investigated the complaint and provided a detailed reply in line with its complaints process. In particular, the service provider provided a chronology and evidence to show the attempts it had made to get updates on the progress of the application from the Probate Registry. It also provided evidence showing the updates that it had provided to Miss T.
Miss T was unhappy with the service provider’s response and escalated the complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. The case was reviewed and passed to the Early Resolution Team because the service provider had provided evidence showing it was not responsible for the delay in progressing the estate, had appropriately contacted the Probate Registry to seek updates on the matter, and was taking reasonable steps to progress the estate in the interim. The service provider also raised a complaint with the Probate Registry about the delays and kept Miss T informed of the actions it was taking to try to move the administration forward.
Having reviewed the evidence provided, a member of the Early Resolution Team contacted Miss T. They explained that the service provider was not responsible for delays caused by a third party, in this case the Probate Registry, and that it had taken all reasonable steps to progress the matter. As such, Miss T’s complaint lacked any prospect of success. Miss T accepted that view and the complaint was closed by agreement.
As this case was resolved by the Early Resolution Team, a case fee was not payable by the service provider.
