Every law firm receives complaints. The firms that handle them well build stronger client relationships, learn from service failures, and stay out of trouble with the SRA and the Legal Ombudsman. The firms that handle them poorly face escalation, regulatory investigation, costs awards, and reputational damage.

The difference between those two outcomes is almost entirely a function of the system a firm has in place — and whether fee earners use it. This guide sets out the legal requirements, a practical complaints framework, and the common mistakes that turn manageable issues into serious problems.

The Regulatory Framework

SRA Requirements

The SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors requires firms to have a written complaints policy and procedure. Under paragraph 8.3 of the Code, you must:

Ensure clients are told about their right to complain and the complaints procedure when they first instruct you
Provide clients with information about their right to complain to the Legal Ombudsman and the SRA, and how to access those schemes
Handle complaints promptly, fairly, and effectively

The SRA does not prescribe the content of the complaints procedure, but it must be accessible, must be applied consistently, and must actually work. A procedure that exists on paper but is not followed will not satisfy the SRA if the matter is investigated.

Firms must also comply with the SRA’s Transparency Rules, which require them to publish their complaints procedure on their website. This includes a named complaints handler, the process for raising a complaint, and signposting to the Legal Ombudsman.

Legal Ombudsman Requirements

The Legal Ombudsman is the independent complaints scheme for legal services in England and Wales. Before a client can take a complaint to the Legal Ombudsman, they must first allow the firm the opportunity to resolve the complaint internally. The firm has eight weeks from the date of the complaint to provide a final written response.

If the firm does not provide a final response within eight weeks — or if the client is dissatisfied with the response — the client can refer the matter to the Legal Ombudsman. The Legal Ombudsman can order the firm to:

Apologise
Explain what happened
Take any action in the interest of the complainant
Pay the complainant up to £50,000 in compensation (as of 2024)
Limit or refund fees

The Legal Ombudsman publishes its ombudsman decisions online. In 2023/24, the most common issues were:

Costs: 25% of complaints
Delay or failure to progress: 21%
Failure to advise: 18%
Failure to follow instructions: 12%
Poor communication: 11%

Notably, the vast majority of these issues could have been avoided or resolved at the internal complaints stage if they had been handled promptly and genuinely.

Building a Complaints Procedure That Works

The Written Procedure

Every firm must have a written complaints procedure. It should be:

Short and readable. A 20-page policy document that nobody reads is less useful than a single clear page that fee earners actually follow. The procedure should state the complaints handler’s name and contact details, the steps in the process, and the timescales at each stage.

Stage-based with clear timescales.

A practical two-stage structure:

Stage 1 — Acknowledgement: The complaint is acknowledged in writing within three working days. The acknowledgement confirms who will handle the complaint and the expected timescale for a full response.

Stage 2 — Investigation and response: The complaint is investigated and a full written response is provided within 28 days. If a full response cannot be provided within 28 days (for example, because investigation requires obtaining information from a third party), the client is told when to expect a response.

Final response letter: The final response must address every element of the complaint specifically, state whether the firm upholds or rejects the complaint (and why), set out any remedy offered, and signpost the client to the Legal Ombudsman if they remain dissatisfied.

Naming a Complaints Handler

The SRA’s Transparency Rules require you to name the person responsible for handling complaints. For smaller firms, this is typically a partner. For larger firms, a complaints partner or head of client relations.

The complaints handler should not be the fee earner who is the subject of the complaint. However, they should be senior enough to make decisions about the firm’s response — including decisions about fee reductions or compensation.

Recording and Monitoring Complaints

Every complaint must be recorded in a complaints register. The register should capture:

Date received
Name of complainant
Nature of the complaint
Fee earner(s) concerned
Stage reached
Outcome
Date closed
Any remedy awarded

Review the register quarterly at partner level. Look for patterns: fee earners who attract repeated complaints, practice areas with higher complaint volumes, recurring themes (costs, delays, communication). The register is not just a compliance document — it is a service improvement tool.

Handling Complaints Effectively in Practice

The First 24 Hours

How a complaint is received in the first 24 hours often determines whether it escalates or resolves. Fee earners who receive a complaint should:

Not respond immediately in their own name — acknowledge receipt and refer to the complaints procedure
Not be defensive — the instinctive response to criticism is self-justification; this almost always makes things worse
Not discuss the complaint with the client informally before the formal process has begun — informal conversations are hard to manage and may commit the firm to positions it later regrets

The acknowledgement letter or email should be sent by the complaints handler, not the fee earner concerned. It should confirm receipt, confirm the process, and express genuine concern: “I am sorry to hear that you have concerns about the service you have received. I want to assure you that we take all client feedback seriously and I will investigate this matter thoroughly.”

This is not an admission of liability. It is good client service.

Investigating the Complaint

A thorough investigation means:

Reading the full file
Speaking with the fee earner concerned
Identifying what actually happened versus what the client believes happened
Identifying whether the firm made any errors, and if so, what the impact was
Considering what remedy, if any, is appropriate

Complaints investigations are often complicated by the fact that the fee earner concerned feels accused and defensive. The complaints handler’s job is to approach the investigation neutrally — neither automatically taking the client’s side nor defending the firm reflexively.

Where there is a genuine discrepancy between the file and the client’s account, the investigation should seek to establish the facts as clearly as possible. Where the file shows that the client was given clear, written advice that they chose not to follow, that is relevant context. Where the file shows that the client was not kept informed or that an estimate was significantly exceeded without warning, that is relevant too.

Crafting the Final Response

The final response letter is the most important document in the complaints process. A well-crafted final response resolves the majority of complaints without escalation to the Legal Ombudsman. A poor response causes escalation that could have been avoided.

The final response should:

Be personal and specific. Address the specific issues raised, not a generalised version of them. If the client complained that their fee earner did not return calls for two weeks, address that specifically — not “we are committed to excellent client communication.”

Acknowledge what went wrong. If the firm made an error, acknowledge it clearly. Clients who receive a genuine acknowledgement of what went wrong are far more likely to be satisfied than clients who receive a response that feels defensive. Do not confuse acknowledging an error with an admission of legal liability — they are different things.

Explain what will be done differently. Even if the firm does not uphold the complaint, explaining the steps taken to prevent a recurrence signals that the feedback has been taken seriously.

Set out any remedy clearly. If you are offering a fee reduction, a partial refund, or compensation, state the amount and the basis. Vague remedies (“we will offer a goodwill gesture”) are less satisfying than specific ones.

Sign off with the complaints handler’s name and direct contact details. The client should know who to contact if they have further questions.

When to Consider Early Settlement

For complaints involving relatively modest amounts — say, disputed fees under £1,000 — the cost of investigating and responding to a complaint may exceed the value of the disputed amount. In these cases, a pragmatic early settlement (a partial fee reduction accompanied by a genuine explanation) may be better than a full investigation and formal response.

This should not become a pattern of capitulating to any complaint, which creates perverse incentives. But a sensible assessment of the cost of dispute versus the cost of resolution is commercially rational.

Using Complaints Data to Improve Service

The complaints register is a service improvement tool, not just a compliance record. Use it:

In supervision and appraisal conversations with fee earners who attract repeated complaints
To identify training needs (recurring complaints about costs communication suggest a training need; recurring complaints about delays suggest a workflow problem)
To set service improvement targets and measure progress

Firms that treat every complaint as a learning opportunity, rather than an unwelcome obligation, consistently improve their service quality over time. The Legal Ombudsman’s data shows that firms with strong internal complaint resolution processes have significantly lower escalation rates — which means fewer investigations, lower costs, and less reputational risk.

Obiter helps firms address one of the most common complaint triggers: poor communication and slow response times. When client emails are read, processed, and responded to promptly — with fee earner approval before anything is sent — clients feel heard and informed, and the “I couldn’t get a response” complaints that dominate Legal Ombudsman data simply happen less often.

Handling Client Complaints: A Practical Framework for Law Firms