Ombudsman decision data

We publish data about the final decisions made by ombudsman.

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 January 2024 – 31 December 2024.

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: 166

Number of decisions: 183

Name Number Of Decisions Ombudsman Remedy Required
ABERAVON LAWYERS LIMITED 1 0
AFP Bloom LLP 1 0
AGR LAW LTD 1 0
Apple Tree Family Law Ltd 1 0
BEN HOARE BELL LLP 1 0
BIRKETTS LLP 1 0
BPW SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
Branch Austin McCormick LLP 1 0
BRETHERTONS LLP 1 0
BRIDGE MCFARLAND LLP 1 0
BUTCHER AND BARLOW LLP 3 0
CLARK WILLIS SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
CLIFTON LAW LTD 1 0
CONSILIA LEGAL LEEDS LTD 1 0
COODES LLP 1 0
CURZON GREEN SOLICITORS 1 0
D & N SOLICITORS 1 0
DAVIS SIMMONDS & DONAGHEY 1 0
DAWSON CORNWELL 1 0
DELPHINE PHILIP LAW LIMITED 1 0
DIANE GENDERS SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
DR SONIA KHAN SOLICITORS 1 0
EDWARD HANDS & LEWIS LIMITED 1 0
ELAINE PARKES SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
Eldwick Law 1 0
Family Defence Law Ltd 1 0
FAMILY LAW PARTNERS (UK) LIMITED 1 0
FARRER & CO LLP 1 0
FIELD OVERELL LLP 1 0
FREEMAN JOHNSON 1 0
GELDARDS LLP 1 0
GHP LEGAL 1 0
GLANVILLES LLP 1 0
GOODWINS FAMILY LAW SOLICITORS 1 0
GRAHAM WHITE & CO 1 0
GREGG LATCHAMS LIMITED 1 0
HALL BROWN LTD 2 0
HALL SMITH WHITTINGHAM LLP 1 0
HARROGATE FAMILY LAW LIMITED 1 0
HCB SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
HERRINGTON CARMICHAEL LLP 1 0
HORNE ENGALL AND FREEMAN LLP 1 0
HOUGHTON PIGOT & CO 1 0
IRWIN MITCHELL LLP 1 0
J STIFFORD SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
JOHN WELCH & STAMMERS SOLICITORS 1 0
JORDANS SOLICITORS MIDLANDS LIMITED 1 0
Josephine Margaret Sommer 1 0
KEYSTONE LAW LIMITED 1 0
LAWMATIC SOLICITORS 1 0
LOWE`S SOLICITORS 1 0
MAYO WYNNE BAXTER LLP 1 0
MILLS & REEVE LLP 1 0
Miss Catherine Eileen Hewitt of Quartz Barristers Chambers 1 0
MORECROFTS LLP 1 0
Mr Benjamin Arthur Boucher-Giles of Fourteen 1 0
Mr James Thomas Colin Holmes of Garden Court Chambers 1 0
Mr Joseph Christopher Switalski of 29 Bedford Row Chambers 1 0
Mr Nicholas John Elcombe of East Anglian Chambers 1 0
Mr Peter Michael Wilkinson of 3DJB 1 0
Mr Richard Henry Norman of St John's Chambers 1 0
Mr Robert James Trevis of Queen Square Chambers 1 0
Mr Roderick Spinks 1 0
Mrs Kossar Kitching of Trinity Chambers 1 0
Mrs Lisa Jane Tuckwell of Trinity Chambers 1 0
Ms Ella Cantor-Freedman of The Barrister Group (Taunton) 1 0
Ms Esther Cantor 1 0
Ms Hala Mohamed Kamel Mustafa of Coram Chambers 1 0
Ms Sheren Guirguis of Exchange Chambers 1 0
NOCKOLDS SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
PARKVIEW SOLICITORS LTD 1 0
PARSONAGE & CO SOLICITORS 1 0
Peacock & Co Solicitors Limited 1 0
PEPPERELLS LTD 1 0
PETER PETER & WRIGHT 2 0
PICASSO LEGAL LIMITED 1 0
PINNEY TALFOURD LIMITED 1 0
RAMSDENS SOLICITORS LLP 1 0
RAPHAEL LAW LIMITED 1 0
RIDLEY AND HALL LEGAL LIMITED 2 0
ROGER RICHARDS SOLICITORS 1 0
SDG SOLICITORS 1 0
SHAKESPEARE MARTINEAU LLP 1 0
Slater Heelis Limited 1 0
SLATER HEELIS LLP 1 0
STEVENS & BOLTON LLP 2 0
STOWE FAMILY LAW LLP 5 0
SYDNEY MITCHELL LLP 1 0
THE LAW HOUSE LIMITED 1 0
THOMAS BOYD WHYTE 1 0
THORNEYCROFT SOLICITORS LIMITED 1 0
TRACEY MILLER FAMILY LAW LIMITED 1 0
TRETHOWANS LLP 1 0
VANDERPUMP & SYKES LLP 1 0
Watkins & Gunn Limited 1 0
WENDY HOPKINS FAMILY LAW PRACTICE LIMITED 1 0
WILSON BROWNE LLP 1 0
WMC LEGAL LLP 1 0
WRIGHT HASSALL LLP 1 0
ADAMS HARRISON 1 1

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