Ombudsman decision data

We publish data about the final decisions made by our ombudsmen.

Our Policy Statement sets out why we publish this information.

This data is updated on a rolling quarterly basis and most of our decisions will be published in the quarter after the decision was made.

Each decision remains published for 12 months from the date of publication.

Included in the table below are details of the ombudsman decisions made between 1 July 2025 – 30 June 2026.

The CSV file for this information can be found here.

How to use this information


General information

The information in the table below shows:

  • Name of the service provider.
  • Total decisions about the service provider in the last 12 months.

Click on the name to find the details of each complaint.



Choosing a service provider

This information can be used to look at the record of service providers. When you look at the information it's useful to ask:

  • Does a complaint mean the firm provides poor service?

No. It's important to check the data and see if we decided whether the service was reasonable or not.

Also take into account that everyone makes mistakes from time to time. When this happens it is important how the service provider responds to the complaint. The data will also show you whether we thought their own (first-tier) complaints handling process was reasonable or not. You should be able to find information about their complaints process on their website.

  • How big is the provider?

If a provider has more than one complaint with us, it could be because they are a big provider and deal with thousands of cases. In this situation it is not unusual for them to have a few complaints listed with us. Always look at the decision we make, not just the number of complaints.

  • What type of work do they do? 

We know that some legal work, such as personal injury, litigation and criminal work, can be more complex for people to understand and the outcomes might not be what people want. This means that complaints could be more likely, but always check what the outcome of the complaint was first.



Downloading data

If this information is used, for example on comparison sites, we encourage you to signpost to the Legal Ombudsman so consumers have the opportunity to find out more about the complaints data.

 


Please click on the green cross in the table below and this will give you more information about the legal service provider and the total decisions made in the last 12 months.

You will find the green cross in front of the name of the legal service provider.

In the table below, the ‘ombudsman remedy required’ field will be 0 if:

  • the ombudsman did not propose a remedy or

  • the remedy proposed by the ombudsman was equal to, or less than, the remedy offered by the firm before we investigated the complaint.

Where data says N/A, this means the ombudsman found the provider’s service to be reasonable.

Filter results by area of law

Number of firms: 116

Number of decisions: 129

Name Number Of Decisions Ombudsman Remedy Required
WSP SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
WOOLLEY & CO LIMITED 1 0
WOLLEN MICHELMORE LLP 1 0
WANSBROUGHS LLP 1 1
WALTERS & BARBARY LLP 1 1
V. E. WHITE & CO. LTD 1 0
TV EDWARDS LLP 1 1
THURSFIELDS LEGAL LIMITED 1 0
THRINGS LLP 1 0
THE WILKES PARTNERSHIP LLP 1 0
THE OWEN KENNY PARTNERSHIP LIMITED 1 1
THE D M PARTNERSHIP 1 0
TALBOTS LAW LTD 1 1
SYDNEY MITCHELL LLP 1 0
STREATHERS SOLICITORS LLP 1 1
STOWE FAMILY LAW LLP 4 1
STEPHENS SCOWN LLP 1 0
STALWART SOLICITORS 1 1
SPENCER WEST LLP 1 1
SOMERFIELD & CO LIMITED 1 0
SKYLARK HILL SOLICITORS LLP 1 1
SINTONS LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP 2 1
SILVERDALE SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 1
SILLS & BETTERIDGE LLP 1 0
SHADDAI & COMPANY (SOLICITORS & ADVOCATES) LIMITED 1 1
RONALDSONS FAMILY LAW LTD 1 1
Professor William Michael Rees 1 1
PREMIER SOLICITORS (BEDFORD) LIMITED 1 1
POOLE ALCOCK LLP 2 1
PINNIGER FINCH & CO 1 1
Perduco Law Ltd 1 1
PENNINGTONS MANCHES COOPER LLP 1 1
PARSONAGE & CO SOLICITORS 1 1
PARKINSON WRIGHT LLP 1 0
PARIS SMITH LLP 1 0
OTTEN PENNA LIMITED 1 1
NELSONS SOLICITORS LIMITED 2 1
Mullis & Peake LLP 1 0
Ms Ceri Ann White of 4 Paper Bldgs 1 0
Ms Beverly Jan Roberts of 5 Pump Court 1 1
Mr Simon William Edward Charles of St Johns Buildings 1 0
Mr Sarbjit Singh Boora of Cornwall Street Barristers 1 0
Mr Dingle Clark of Goldsmith Chambers 1 1
Mr Carl David Fender of Bank House Chambers 1 0
Mr Asim Hussain of The Barrister Group (Manchester) 1 1
MOSS BEACHLEY MULLEM AND COLEMAN LIMITED 1 1
MORGAN WISEMAN SOLICITORS LTD 1 1
MOORE BARLOW LLP 1 0
Miss Sarah Tiffany Munro of St Mary's Family Law Chambers 1 0
Miss Sally Harrison of St Johns Buildings 1 0
Miss Hannah Rose Gomersall of Coram Chambers 1 0
Miss Catherine Eileen Hewitt of Quartz Barristers Chambers 1 0
Miss Archna Dawar 1 0
MILLS & REEVE LLP 1 0
MAKWANA SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
LIVERPOOL LEGAL SERVICES LTD 1 0
KLR SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 1
JONES MYERS LTD 1 1
JMW SOLICITORS LLP 3 0
JACKLYN DAWSON 1 0
J W HUGHES & CO LLP 1 1
ISON HARRISON LIMITED 1 1
INCE GORDON DADDS LLP 1 1
HUMFRYS & SYMONDS LTD 1 1
HOWELLS LEGAL LIMITED 2 2
HATHAWAYS THE LAW FIRM LIMITED 1 1
HARTNELL CHANOT & PARTNERS LIMITED 1 1
Harper Ashby Bowles Limited 1 1
HAROLD G WALKER 1 1
HALLMARK SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
Hallam Limited 1 1
GREGORIAN EMERSON FAMILY LAW SOLICITORS 1 1
GREENS SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
GLAISYERS 1 0
GAVIN EDMONDSON SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 1
GATELEY PLC 1 1
FULLERS FAMILY LAW LIMITED 1 0
FREETHS LLP 1 0
FRASER DAWBARNS LLP 1 0
FisherWright Solicitors Limited 1 1
FBC Manby Bowdler (Midlands) Limited 1 0
FARNFIELDS LLP 1 0
Family Law in Partnership Limited 1 0
Family Defence Law Ltd 1 1
Faith Williams Law Limited 1 0
DUNCAN LEWIS SOLICITORS LTD 1 1
DAWSON CORNWELL 1 1
CYGNET FAMILY LAW LTD 1 1
CUTHBERTSONS 1 1
CRISP & CO 1 1
CO-OPERATIVE LEGAL SERVICES LIMITED 2 1
CLINTONS 1 0
CHILD LAW PARTNERSHIP LIMITED 1 0
Carter Devile 1 1
BUCKLES SOLICITORS LLP 1 1
BROSS BENNETT LLP 1 0
BRIGHOUSES (INCORPORATING BELLIS KENNAN GRIBBLE & CO) 2 1
BRETHERTONS LLP 2 0
BRACHERS LLP 1 1
BPS LAW LLP 1 0

If you cannot see any information relating to a decision you have selected above, the ombudsman decided that no remedy was required in the case